Margaret Thatcher once said that the problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.  And considering that liberalism is essentially socialism, the same principle applies.  And with that said, America is fast running out of other people's money.

There was a great op-ed in the Washington Examiner last week which suggested that our national debt, the result of borrowing other people's money over the years, would be the end of liberalism as there would no longer be enough money to pay for it.  To which one could conclude that, if there's anything silver lining to the explosive growth of government, entitlement programs, etc. - to say nothing of what Obama and current members of Congress have in mind - it's that they'll just bankrupt us quicker and bring a more speedy end to liberalism.

From the article:

With its most vigorous advocate in memory presiding in the White House
and commanding Democratic majorities in Congress, it's difficult to
believe that the end of liberalism may be within sight. We base this
suggestion not on a hunch or on wishful thinking, but on mathematics.
The Petersen-Pew Commission on Budget Reform has produced a new report
warning that "[o]ver the past year alone, the public debt of the United
States rose sharply from 41 to 53 percent of gross domestic product
(GDP). Under reasonable assumptions, the debt is projected to grow
steadily, reaching 85 percent of GDP by 2018, 100 percent by 2022, and
200 percent in 2038."

For those that don't know, the GDP is the sum of ALL goods and services produced in America in a single year.  Meaning all the wealth produced and thus available to be taxed.

It goes on...

Long before the debt reaches such stratospheric levels, the commission
warns, "Fears of inflation and a prospective decline in the value of
the dollar would cause investors to demand higher interest rates and
shift out of U.S. Treasury securities. The excessive debt would also
affect citizens in their everyday lives by harming the American
standard of living through slower economic growth and dampening wages,
and shrinking the government's ability to reduce taxes, invest, or
provide a safety net."

In other words, basic math decrees that we'll run out of money because we'll no longer be able to borrow other people's money.  And that "safety net" they mention at the end of that paragraph equates with government entitlement programs.  Meaning, at some point, we'll have to choose to pay for the police department or government health care; the fire department or free school lunches...etc., etc..

So how soon might that happen?  Well, just look at how fast federal spending growing?  An article from Human Events this week puts it in perspective:

To get a handle on how out of control federal spending has become,
consider this: It surged to $30,000 per household in 2009. That’s up
from $21,000 (adjusted for inflation) in the 1980s and ‘90s. Yet rather
than cut back, Congress plans to spend even more.

Lawmakers want
an additional 11% domestic discretionary spending hike in 2010, as well
as an expensive new healthcare entitlement. In the absence of spending
restraint, closing these budget deficits would require permanent tax
increases exceeding $8,000 per household.

How's that for home economics?

And what does our national debt look like as a result?  The Heritage Foundation has a nice graph that gives you a good idea of how it's grown over time...and where it's headed.

Just last week, the nation reached it's maximum statutory debt limit of 12.1 trillion dollars.  Which means members of Congress have to vote to raise the limit.  Democrats moved to raise it by an astonishing 1.8 trillion...so as to avoid having to vote on the issue again before re-election time next year (as anything less would be exceeded by that time).  Which has a lot to do with the fact that (even the White House admits) the federal deficit alone this year will be about 1.5 trillion dollars.

But some fiscal conservatives balked and withheld their support, so it looks like the limit will only go up by about 300 billion or so...which means they'll have to vote again in January or February.  Conservatives hope to use their leverage to force the creation of a commission that would examine entitlement spending and force some cuts, (much like the old "base closure and realignment" commissions).  We'll see.

The point is that the money has to come from somewhere, and our debt (and the amount of our budget that goes just to pay interest on that debt each year) will soon preclude us from borrowing more.  And that's going to force some serious choices.  And some interesting politics.