Thrawn: Yes, our debt is large, but that doesn't mean we aren't paying it down.
No, it does not. But we wouldn't know it either way - especially when we are talking about so small numbers of repayment compared to huge and nebulous values of liabilities.
It's just it is impossible to know wheather your country is reducing liabilities or accumulating them. And even it is reducing them, whether that comes from the reduction in your assets (capital decumulation) or from current income. Just as it is impossible to know the value of a country's liabilities.
Outside of a market price system there is no economic calculation possible. Even private companies dealing with asset valuation - insurance, investment, etc. know very well that the present discounted value of the future assets or liabilities depends on the outside factors like actuarial changes and interest rate.
The governments just take those numbers out of their collective asses.
Torque: Miko, wasn't the majority of that Implicit debt a result of predicted healthcare costs for the baby boomers?
Mostly Social Security and Healthcare, yes. Those are the ones that economists can estimate even if the politicians wouldn't. Besides those reflected in the chart, there are many more - like FDIC insurance and Pension Benefit Guarantee.
When the american car manufacturers go bust, who will pick the tab on their underfunded pensions?
lazs2: I don't think the founders really meant for non property owners to vote.
I believe it was not as much real property (land and buildings) as wealth. After all a piece of property and a large bank account or shares in a company are easily convertible and impair on the owner the same degree of future-orientedness.
Anyway, it's not as much who is allowed to vote as what is subject to vote. If the redistributive taxation and regulation was recognised unconstitutional as it should be, there would not be a problem with the voting itself.
miko
