Government debt. In June Fortune reported that “chronic deficits are putting the country on a path to fiscal collapse.” The United States Government debt exceeds $12 trillion, or almost $40,000 per U.S. citizen. By 2019 it will exceed $17 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Just the interest on the national debt gobbles up more than 40 cents of every dollar you pay in income tax, reports the Wall Street Journal.

We`ll be poorer. To pay off the debt and interest, politicians will probably raise your taxes, encourage inflation, or both. Those tax dollars could have been used to innovate and create new jobs. They won`t exist. In addition to be being a hidden tax, inflation drives up interest rates, and hence the cost of financing new business ventures with loans.

Last week 11 Senators co-sponsored a “Bipartisan Fiscal Task Force” to “address the nation’s long-term budget crisis.” But earlier this week nine of these Senators (including Michael Bennet and Mark Udall) voted for a pork-laden $1.1 trillion spending bill. Hold on to your wallet — politicians cannot resist buying political favors with your tax dollars.

As economist Frederic Bastiat observed long ago: “Everybody wishes to live at the expense of the state, but they forget that the state lives at the expense of everybody.”

*          *          *

Thanks to Russ Roberts at Cafe Hayek for the linking to the Bastiat quote.

On a related topic, Paul Hsieh of Freedom and Individual Rights in Medicine had a “to the point” published in Sunday’s Denver Post in response to the Democrats’ proposed debt-limit hike:

Congress’ plan to cut the deficit by raising the debt limit now, then reducing spending later, is like trying to lose weight by eating a box of chocolate chip cookies now, then promising to exercise next week.

So if you have an opinion that you can express in 40 words or fewer, send it to the Post!

Beware Mark Udall’s health care policy. He evaded a simple question in the Camera’s Candidate Profile: “Should the federal government follow the lead of Massachusetts and have a mandatory health care plan?”  His website clarifies: “I believe a requirement for health insurance coverage … will increase the distribution of health care costs over the entire population.”

He’s right, but this is wrong for consumers.  Mandatory insurance forces you to pay for other people’s health care at the expense of your own. When politicians force you to buy insurance, they decide what policy is acceptable, not you. They pander to special interests by mandating that your insurance include expensive benefits you may not want.

Consider Massachusetts.  The Boston Globe reports that residents whose insurance does not meet regulations “could face a hefty tax penalty.” Too bad for those who like their current policy.

Would Udall want this, or Massachusetts’ other problems?  Massachusetts authorities will “probably cut payments to doctors and hospitals” and “reduce choices for patients,” reports the Globe.  It also reports that “the wait to see primary care doctors in Massachusetts has grown to as long as 100 days.”

Udall also supports expanding SCHIP, government-controlled insurance for kids. For every ten kids in SCHIP, six drop private insurance. That’s unfair competition. Worse yet, SCHIP is a “low-wage trap” that punishes recipients for increasing their income.

But for politicians, SCHIP expansion can help create a generation who votes for politician-controlled medicine from cradle to grave. Just get them addicted as children.