Subject: RE: Responses/Questions to Mr. Reischauer et. al.
>From: ridgeway
>>>>Thanks for posting into the debate another reference to a very good article by Sowell. Mr. Sowell is correct in his descriptions of the operational meaning of the concepts currently used by bureacrats and politicians when they speak --- they are using "Unified" budget lingo. This lingo does in fact only count debt held by the public (not the federal government debts to itself) as the "National Debt". It's the same game as saying we have a "Budget Surplus"--- true when viewed from a "unified" point of view, but false when you recognize that the the SS trust fund surplus has to be used to mask a deficit in the other section of the total government budget.
Nice try ridgeway. But no go. There is no 'Unified Debt', like there is a 'Unified Budget'. There is no lingo like that. You, like Sowell, are obviously confused about the Debt, the budget, and how the Trust Fund works. Feel free to point out any legitimate source or website that does not show the National Debt at approximately $5.6 Trillion. You won't find such. The trust fund borrowing is included in the National Debt, and always has been, and indicates how the Trust Fund is storing the value of excess SS contributions till needed. I don't think I'll buy any snake oil reform from you or Sowell.
