Letter to the Editor: No money for their socialist proposals

To the Editor:

Both of the major party presidential candidates are proposing major additional spending plans. Hillary wants to buy college students’ votes with free tuition, the middle class votes with lower age eligibility for Medicare, and numerous other vote-buying giveaways. Trump wants to increase defense spending and build his huge wall on the country’s southern border.

The cold hard fact of the matter is that the money isn’t there for any of that. Right now, entitlement spending comprises about 70 percent of all national government spending. The next-biggest category is defense, which gets another 15 percent of the spending. The third-biggest category – and the biggest single line item – is interest on the national debt at 6 percent of all spending. That leaves about 9 percent of all spending to cover the rest of the government’s departments and projects.

Twenty years ago, entitlements were 43 percent of all spending. In that 20-year period, politicians’ vote-buying programs have nearly doubled as a percentage of spending. It’s been noted that the big problem with socialism – and that’s what entitlement spending is – is that you soon run out of other people’s money.

In point of fact, the United States government is bankrupt and has been bankrupt for at least 20 years. Its funded and unfunded current and future liabilities far exceed the value of its assets and any reasonable estimate of its current and future income. That’s a fair definition of bankruptcy.

Those who have sold or who plan to sell their votes for some promise of government benefits are going to be sadly disappointed, because neither Hillary nor the Donald can follow through on their promises. The money just isn’t there.

Of course, if Hillary – who is economically illiterate – is elected and cranks up the Treasury’s printing presses to pay for her spending programs, inflation will go through the roof and the economy will collapse, followed by the government – just as Germany’s did in 1923 (and for the same reason: social spending). The Donald isn’t too bright, but I don’t think he’s stupid enough to do that. Hillary is.

Bob Ackley, Emerson