Renown economist, Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff, has stated (9/26/2006),

“Yes I think [the U.S. is bankrupt] because if you look at our long term fiscal obligations and compare them with our tax receipts that are projected to come in, you end up finding the difference in present value is equal to $63 trillion. This is according to an update of a U.S Treasury study. So it is not an academic study but rather a government study.

“To come with $63 trillion in present value, you would have to have an immediate and permanent roughly 70 percent hike in federal corporate and personal income taxes. Alternatively you could immediately double the payroll tax. So we are talking about gargantuan adjustments here, huge problems that we are facing, and a lot of this has to do with the fact that the society is aging. We are currently facing 33 million people over 65. But when the Boomers retire there will be about 77 million people over 65. And we are currently handing out per old person roughly $30,000 on average in Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid benefits. But when the Boomers retire we are going to be paying them a lot higher level of benefits because these benefit levels continue to grow much more rapidly than wages per worker. So think about 77 million Baby Boomers getting roughly $40,000 per head, and you see the magnitude of the problem. We are talking trillions of dollars. $44,000 times 77 million is a very big number. It is in the trillions, A couple trillion dollars a year in obligations. So I do not think it is an exaggeration to say the country is bankrupt.”

Kotlikoff sees passing Huck’s FairTax as a vehicle to derail economic meltdown: http://snipr.com/meltdowninprogress

And he’s not alone: http://snipurl.com/econsopenletter

Here’s my logic…

First, there are no really jaw-dropping candidates. Guliani and Romney are both too liberal and too northeastern to suit the rank-and-file. McCain has made too many enemies across the spectrum. Thompson never closed the deal. Huckabee is like Bush…socially conservative, but fiscally liberal. The rest never got any traction.

Huckabee appears to be in the lead in Iowa. Don’t rely on this, Romney’s superior organization will aid him – but I can see Huckabee winning Iowa.

New Hampshire, on the other hand, probably goes to Romney. He’s right next door, and the voters there don’t like southern accents.

Which brings us to South Carolina. Guliani has been strong there.

The result is that the first three caucuses/primaries could go three different ways…and that brings us to Super Tuesday. And people will have to vote their conscience.

The result…very interesting. A brokered convention is VERY possible. With the potential for an off-the-wall candidate.

Jindal for President, anybody?

But it’s still leaving a very bad taste in my mouth.

I discount Tancredo (single issue) and Ron Paul. I discount Giuliani as without broad conservative support. The rest are decent candidates and I believe both McCain and Romney can beat any Dem. Both would do well in debates with Clinton or Obama and both are clean and smart.

The ones who have picked their candidate and all the others are anathema. It’s the worst on Free Republic.. it’s like watching little kids squable over who has the best toy. it’s embarassing

All this tells us a whole lot about them NOT about the republican field. We have a great field. The “unexcited” have their issues which can never be satisfied. Imagine if Newt were running regarding his two wives…sheesh.

Power, power, power. And frankly, I think they have jumped the shark.