Musk's Department of Government Efficiency Can—and Should—Tackle Medicare and Social Security
Doing nothing will lead to Medicare benefits being cut by 11 percent and Social Security Benefits being cut by 23 percent in less than a decade.
Doing nothing will lead to Medicare benefits being cut by 11 percent and Social Security Benefits being cut by 23 percent in less than a decade.
These policies may sound good on paper—but they would be disastrous in reality.
Opening night of the Republican National Convention programmed a central issue with a Trumpian twist: "Make America Wealthy Again."
Although former President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda would make some positive changes, it's simply not enough.
The U.S. has successfully navigated past debt challenges, notably in the 1990s. Policymakers can fix this if they find the will to do so.
The candidate who grasps the gravity of this situation and proposes concrete steps to address it will demonstrate the leadership our nation now desperately needs. The stakes couldn't be higher.
The candidate makes the case against the two-party system.
Reasonable options include gradually raising the minimum retirement age, adjusting benefits to reflect longer life expectancies, and implementing fair means-testing to ensure benefits flow where they're actually needed.
Why aren't politicians on both sides more worried than they seem to be?
Neither presidential candidate is willing to back the reforms necessary to close the gap between revenue and benefits.
The government needs to cut back on spending—and on the promises to special interests that fuel the spending.
The reality raises questions about the kind of future we want to leave for the next generation.
The Copenhagen Consensus has long championed a cost-benefit approach for addressing the world's most critical environmental problems.
In the last 50 years, when the budget process has been in place, Congress has managed only four times to pass a budget on time.
Those sounding the loudest alarms about possible shutdowns are largely silent when Congress ignores its own budgetary rules. All that seems to matter is that government is metaphorically funded.
Since Congress won't cut spending, an independent commission may be the only way to rein in the debt.
The lack of oversight and the general absence of a long-term vision is creating inefficiency, waste, and red ink as far as the eye can see.
Many politicians offer a simplified view of the world—one in which government interventions are all benefits and no costs. That couldn't be further from the truth.
Even taking all the money from every billionaire wouldn't cover our coming bankruptcy.
In 10 years, the programs' funds will be insolvent. Over the next 30 years, they will run a $116 trillion shortfall.
The higher taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs could slow growth. Less opportunity means more tribalism and division.
As legislators refuse to act, benefits will be cut without any possibility of sheltering those seniors who are poor.
While some Republicans may have had misguided motivations, a few disrupted McCarthy's campaign in order to enact fiscal restraint. Their colleagues were fine with business as usual.
Top-notch health care, delivered fast and for low cost, really isn’t on the government's menu.
A better prescription would be to get government entirely out of health care.
How to reform social security so that it won't bankrupt us.
Medicare as we know it is unsustainable if we leave it alone.
The doc fix deal is a bet, but not a very good one.
Our sad, failed history of technocratic cost controls.
That would result in less spending and we can't have that
If you want to understand the fiscal cliff, you need to first understand the doc fix.
How the Independent Payment Advisory Board gives sweeping powers to an unelected and unconstitutional board of bureaucrats.
Somebody has to tackle that beast, eventually
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10