Do quote Megan McArdle a lot? It's because I usually injure my neck nodding to everything she writes:
But there is one thing of which I am nearly perfectly certain: If we pass this thing, no American politician, left or right, is going to cut any of these programs, or raise the broad-based taxes necessary to pay for them, without any compensating goodies to offer the public . . . until the crisis is almost upon us. I can think of no situation, other than impending crisis, in which such a thing has been done--and usually, as with Social Security, they have done just little enough to kick the problem down the road. The idea that you pass a program of dubious sustainability because you can always make it sustainable later, seems borderline insane. I can't think of a single major entitlement that has become more sustainable over time. Why is this one supposed to be different?This country's inability to address runaway entitlement spending has left us with nearly $108 trillion in unfunded liabilities. These are promises the government cannot possibly meet but there is no political will to tell Americans they can't have their ice cream. Now we're about to dramatically expand the role of government at the very moment in time when we should be shrinking it.