By J. D. Heyes, NewsTarget
(NationalSentinel) Democratic voters who watched their prospective 2020 presidential candidates over two nights last week were likely enthused by all the free stuff that was being promised.
Even to people who arenâ€™t American citizens.
In addition to pledging free healthcare for illegal aliens, virtually all 20-odd candidates mentioned new â€˜freebieâ€™ programs they would try to enact if they manage to knock off POTUS Donald Trump next year.
No more college debt.
A â€œGreen New Deal.â€
In the past these candidates have also talked about subsidized housing for all, a â€˜basic income,â€™ a much bigger minimum wage â€” all things that are either going to run businesses and corporations into so much debt they have to close or will bankrupt our country.
The Green New Deal, which envisions replacing all combustion engines with battery or solar power â€” including planes, trains, and automobiles â€” as well as calling for a complete energy remodel of every single building in the country, all within a decade, would alone add tens of trillions of dollars in costs to businesses and to the economy and the government.
Medicare for all would cost at least $32 trillion over 10 years, according to one study.
College debt would cost taxpayers/our government nearly $1.5 trillion (as most loans are government guaranteed).
As we noted last week:
In all, in a single debate appearance and using just a scratch pad, I figure these 2020 Democrats have proposed upwards of $70 to $100Â trillionÂ in new spending over, say, a decade. And no one on the NBC â€˜newsâ€™ panelÂ bothered to askÂ a single candidate how they would pay for all of this new spending.
Itâ€™s the same old song-and-dance from Democrats (and far too many Republicans): Spend, spend, spend now andâ€¦pay later. At some point. Maybe.
Following the tax cuts implemented by the GOP Congress and President Trump, the U.S. governmentÂ still managedÂ aÂ recordÂ tax collection â€” thanks, in large part, to the fact that Trumpâ€™s economy was/remains red-hot and more Americans were back at work.
But spending hasnâ€™t abated. At all. In fact, deficit spending has gotten worse under the Trump administration than it was under Obamaâ€™s eight-year reign of economic terror. So thatâ€™s saying something.
And itâ€™s not as if no one in Congress knows this. Budget hawk Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and David Purdue (R-Ga.) recently voiced their concerns that Congressâ€™ spendthrift habits (not its revenue stream) are blasting the debt to new records daily. Worse, few in the Legislative Branch seem to care. (Related:Â How the federal debt went from $1 trillion to $18 trillion in 33 years.)
â€œThe national debt topped $22 trillion this year. Weâ€™re heading for an absolute catastrophe if we donâ€™t address the real causes of future increases to our national debt, which areÂ Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the debt itself,â€Â said Perdue in a statement,Â The Epoch TimesÂ reported.
The Georgia Republican, who used to be a Fortune 500 exec, was citing the latest economic forecast from the Congressional Budget Office, which isnâ€™t always correct except when it comes to predictingÂ moreÂ debt â€” and what will happen (collapse!) if the debt continues to rise.
The CBO said, â€œlarge budget deficits over the next 30 years are projected to drive federal debt held by the public to unprecedented levelsâ€”from 78 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2019 to 144 percent by 2049.â€
The last time our debt-to-GDP ratio reached that level was when it grew to 75-plus percent during the waning years of World War II, as America cranked out the war machine needed to win.
For his part, Paul said on the Senate floor that â€œwe should not borrow the money, pull out the credit card yet again, every time a crisis occurs.Â
â€œCongress has an obligation to find lower priorities to cut to pay for higher priorities. I thought thatâ€™s what legislating was about,â€ he added.
The Epoch Times added that theÂ CBO’s report warned that its projections show:
- The Social Security and Medicare trust funds will run out of funds within 20 years if nothing is done to change the entitlement programsâ€™ revenue sources.
- Absent major policy changes now, interest payments on the national debt will increase so much in two decades that sufficient funding will be threatened for national defense, veterans care, and other national priorities.
- If Congress and the president do not enact spending cuts in 2020 or raise individual income taxes in 2026 when certain features of the 2017 tax reform expire, the public share of the national debt could reach 219 percent by 2049.
- If Social Security benefits were limited to amounts payable strictly from the programâ€™s trust fund, debt in 2049 would still reach 106 percent of GDP, still significantly higher than the current level.
Both Perdue and CBO warned that failure to get control of the debt will sooner or later make it impossible to avoid spiraling interest rates, sharply increased taxes and huge benefit cuts in entitlements, especially Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
His pleas are falling on deaf ears.
As for POTUS Trump, is this spiraling debtÂ his fault? Maybe partially. After all, he signs the budget deals into law.
However, during his 2016 campaign, Trump vowed toÂ eliminateÂ the then-$19 trillion national debt in two terms.
Also, Russ Vought, acting director of the Office of Management and Budget, was recently â€˜grilledâ€™ by a Democrat-run House Budget Committee in March about the deficit. Talk about an exercise in hypocrisy, it also highlighted why this administration â€” and past Republican administrations that have also attempted to curb the budget â€” canâ€™t get it done: Democrats politicize the issue to death.
In that March hearing, the chairman of the panel, Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.),Â openedÂ the hearing by killing any hope of bipartisan budget cutting when he accused Trump of the same thing DemocratsÂ alwaysÂ accuse Republicans of doing: Starving kids, taking healthcare away, depriving Americans of this or that.
The president actually proposed $2.7 trillion inÂ cutsÂ to the federal budget across a variety of line items; Yarmuth called them â€œextreme to a level that is malicious a level that is intended to do harm.â€
Instead, Democrats on the panel went on to attack Vought over the Trump/GOP tax cuts in 2017, which Vought admitted would initially add to the deficit but would later trim it with increased revenues from economic growth.
Yarmuth said itâ€™s â€œa harsh budget that abandoned working Americans and families.â€
And there we have it: Democrats never, ever want to a) let Americans keep more of what they earn or at least decide, on a local/state level, how much taxation they want; and b) reduce federal spending for anything except defense.
As Democrats in Congress have reminded the president in recent weeks over his desire to reprogram funds for border wall construction, the Legislative Branch is in charge of the nation’s purse strings.
But lawmakers can’t be bothered to rein in their spending because spending buys votes — meaning this out-of-control debt spiral will likely only end one way: With a collapse.
- Follow Jon Dougherty onÂ Parler
Subscribe to ourÂ YouTube channel
Subscribe to ourÂ Brighteon channel
Sign up for ourÂ daily headlines newsletter