the burden per worker stands to grow enormously in the coming years

And the odds are you voted for the very people who did this to you.

I've written here previously speculating on whether the accumulated student-loan debt will be repudiated as the Boomers die off and the Milennials become the largest demographics segment of the voter base. More recently, after doing more math, I'm realizing that the student-loan debt, along with a whole bunch of other debt, will be repudiated -- for the simple reason that it will be impossible to pay it all off. This article (I know, it's Wikipedia, but I'm in a hurry and the sources appear sound) estimates the total net worth of the U.S. private sector as being on the order of $100 trillion. Adding up estimates of the unfunded obligations of Social Security, Medicare, Treasury bills/bonds outstanding, student loan debt, and state government pension unfunded obligations, you come up with about that same number -- $100T. That means that every penny of net worth, every bank account, every home, every car, every asset, even the loose change in your pocket, would have to be confiscated just to pay off those obligations. And that's by no means a complete list.

As a Gen-X'er I've already resigned myself to getting nothing frmo Social Security and Medicare, and done my retirement plan accordingly. The problem all of us X'ers are facing now is that the government is destroying our savings with its attempts to stay ahead of the debt by inflating the currency. That means we no longer have a dog in the debt fight -- repudiating the debt can't hurt us any worse than we arlready are hurt, so we don't care one way or the other. Actually, I kind of wish the big collapse would go ahead and happen now. If it resulted in putting the economy and the currency back on a better footing, I still have some years left to build my savings back up before I get too old to work. If it happens 15 years from now, I'm screwed.

I'll also throw this in: Transfer payments are soon going to preclude the government from being able to do the things that governments are supposed to do, like law enforcement and defense. The basis for funding the DoD is changing this year. In the past it's always been that you submit what you think you need while Congress comes up with benchmarks for what they think it ought to cost, and then there's negotiation and it meets somewhere in the middle. Not anymore. Now it's "This is all you're getting, because we need the rest to pay for entitlements. What you need doesn't matter." It's made a mockery out of the force-review process because it no longer has any influence on the budget process.

"the burden per worker stands to grow enormously in the coming years"

I wouldn't worry too much about it.

If I owe you twenty thousand dollars I'm screwed.

If I owe you twenty trillion dollars YOU are screwed.

I find it interesting that the media never seem to interview those who are truly thrifty - namely, those who make every effort to avoid buying those luxuries, big or small, that often didn't exist 40 years ago. I suspect people like that are managing pretty well - especially if they ONLY had as many kids as they could afford and taught their kids to be frugal and supportive of their parents and relatives too.

"I find it interesting that the media never seem to interview those who are truly thrifty - namely, those who make every effort to avoid buying those luxuries, big or small, that often didn't exist 40 years ago. I suspect people like that are managing pretty well - especially if they ONLY had as many kids as they could afford and taught their kids to be frugal and supportive of their parents and relatives too."

Actually, no. They tended to be savers rather than stock investors and they are getting nothing on their savings. In the Obama economy the thrifty are enemies of the people, at least they're being treated that way.

Yeah, that's the problem. There is currently nothing availabe to small investors that isn't high risk (e.g., the current stock market bubble) and pays a rate of return that exceeds inflation. Plus a lot of those people tied up substantial portions of their savings in their personal residences, and we all know what's happened to real estate.

Cousin Dave, you might try Lending Club. I earned about 7.8% on it last year and look to do about the same this year.

Actually, no. They tended to be savers rather than stock investors and they are getting nothing on their savings. In the Obama economy the thrifty are enemies of the people, at least they're being treated that way.

Posted by: Another Robert at April 11, 2014 9:51 AM
______________________________

If they want to risk playing the stock market, they will. If they don't WANT - or need - extra money, I don't blame them for not taking chances with what they have.

But the point is, most of us feel, deep down, that being thrifty as a rule is somehow self-degrading instead of being disciplined and mature.

As Laura, the youngest daughter of Amy Dacyczyn, aka the Frugal Zealot, said in an interview last year:

"I have a very different mindset towards money because of having been raised in a very frugal household. As I entered adulthood, went to college, and eventually got married I learned a lot about how other people (average people I suppose) spend their money. I witnessed a great deal of carelessness and wastefulness with money that I was not accustomed to seeing in a frugal home. However, the most surprising thing I observed in others was that they simply could not comprehend why they had very little money, why they had trouble making ends meet, and the cause and effect relationship of their careless spending. What was so apparent to me, someone who had been raised in a very frugal home, seemed very hard for others to grasp."

You can read all the interviews with the three daughters here:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/lenona$20daughters$20dacyczyn/misc.consumers.frugal-living/bkLq9D8mAFc/pKXZD3yoL4MJ

And regarding how the thrifty are treated as "the enemy" in the U.S., it seems to me that's been going on since the end of the Depression or so - but the breakdown started earlier, maybe with Henry Ford, as historian David Tucker says in his book.

Rampell is so gorgous that I'm often suspicious of her youthful success.

That must be a punishing burden to her.

I've written here previously speculating on whether the accumulated student-loan debt will be repudiated as the Boomers die off and the Milennials become the largest demographics segment of the voter base. More recently, after doing more math, I'm realizing that the student-loan debt, along with a whole bunch of other debt, will be repudiated -- for the simple reason that it will be impossible to pay it all off.

Per the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, there is $1.2 tn of student loan debt outstanding. I believe there are 38 million working college graduates at this time. That would be an outstanding balance of ~$32,000 per working college graduate.

Per the Federal Reserve, debt service and financial obligation ratios are not severe (and simple household debt service as a share of personal income is nearing a 35 year low).

Per the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, there is $1.2 tn of student loan debt outstanding.

And there is a popular Facebook link going around that the President wants that debt "forgiven" - in quotes because it can't be, really.

Debt "forgiven" weakens the dollar, at everyone's expense.