??
Our nation should be concerned with the rising debt in this country and its affects as a whole. As of Oct. 15, 2010, the U.S. national debt is $13,600,000,000,000. Debt per citizen is $48,785, and debt per taxpayer is $120,100.
These numbers continuously change and are approximate due to the constant rising of each. Due to the out of control spending by the federal government, each U.S. citizen is liable for $48,785. Even if the spending spree ends now, which is highly unlikely, the damage is done.
If a man is about to lose his house, does he go off and buy a boat or car? That would be financial suicide because he will not be able to sustain himself under free market principles. Why is it sustainable for the government to do the same? Since when has it become economically sound to pay off one’s debt by acquiring more?
Every child born into this generation will be born owing his/her country for something in which he/she has had no means of controlling. How is this in the best interest of our nation?
When one generation accumulates debt it is incapable of paying off in its own existence, that debt is passed to the next generation.
The coming generations should be born with the same rights granted by the Constitution — the rights that some think so little of today — not debt. “A man’s property is the fruit of his industry, and if it may be taken from him under any pretense whatever, at the will of another, he cannot be said to be free, for he labors like a bond slave, not for himself, but for another,” said Samuel Adams.
Is this not what the government is doing by, under the pretense of caring for the U.S., depriving the unborn of their natural rights of “equal opportunity,” and confining them to “equal outcome?” How is one supposed to have “equal opportunity” when born already in debt?
By what means does the government propose paying off this debt? The government does not produce money or anything of economic value. They rely on the private sector for its funds by taxation. The saying “Made in America” is no longer a factor, because we no longer have anything worth exporting to pay off the debt.
Whatever they spend, we pick up the tab with further taxation. If the amount they spend exceeds the amount at hand then they burden us with more taxes to pay it off and distribute the funds how they please.
Now here are two scenarios. Man A has gone to the racetrack and gambled his money on the race. This man ends up losing the bet and is in a bad predicament because he may lose his house. In order to pay off this debt, he has to burden someone else by taking that which is not his. Man A goes to a house without the owner’s consent and takes that which he has not earned. Then man A goes off and distributes the funds he took how he pleases. In this case, this is illegal, and man A would be considered a thief.
Now, Man B, on the other hand, is not just a man, he is a group of men called “The Federal Government.” This group B has no income that it can call its own, although it’s very generous by wanting to be the caretaker of everyone. So in order to do this B has to have money. So, where does he get it?
He starts writing bad checks (stimulus packages) and starts giving money to all sorts of people. Now, isn’t that just nice of him? Soon he comes to a problem. “How can I pay for this money that I created out of thin air? How about this, I’ll go to multiple people and take a little that each have earned (taxes), surely, a few dollars here and there won’t be missed.” Now that B has some money, he distributes it how he pleases. Spending money he doesn’t have, and taking money he did not earn. Would this scenario not be the legalized version of the first?
Josh Morrison is a sophomore majoring in civil engineering.
