Blog

America’s $30 Trillion Publicly Held Debt Is 42 Times Larger Than It Was in 1980

In 1980, America’s publicly held debt reached more than $712 billion (about $2.8 trillion in 2025 dollars), or roughly 25 percent of annual U.S. gross domestic product (GDP). Today, that figure is a little over $30 trillion, or around 100 percent of GDP. And as the federal debt grew 42 times larger over that span, the economy grew only tenfold. You can’t expand the numerator four times faster than the denominator for 45 years without courting economic danger.

That’s where we find ourselves. The U.S. is at peace, and despite President Donald Trump’s claims, there’s no national emergency. And yet we’ve only seen debt as a higher share of GDP during the years of 1945, 1946, 2020, and 2021. Then, Republicans and Democrats knew to scale back. Now, debt explodes during emergencies and continues to grow in peacetime.

In 1946, after World War II, debt-to-GDP was 106 percent. It declined to just 25 percent by 1980, not only because of inflation and economic growth but because of real fiscal discipline. With budgets nearly balanced, the fruits of a booming private sector could actually reduce the burden. Beginning in the Reagan era, discipline gave way to a new normal of chronic budget deficits.

Three forces made the shift possible.

First, and the main cause of the mess we are in, is that the entitlement state became enormous yet untouchable. The Social Security reforms of 1983 are a rare example of bipartisan structural reform of a major entitlement program in U.S. history. Since then, despite economic and societal changes, the program has never been reformed. Never mind that it faces insolvency and the potential for automatic benefit cuts of more than 20 percent in 2033. The same is true of our other major debt driver: Medicare. And Medicaid is growing far beyond its original intent.

Democrats, occasionally helped by Republicans, have worked to expand welfare programs meant for lower-income people to those in higher and higher income brackets. The most recent and extreme example is the COVID-19–era expansion of the Obamacare tax credit to wealthier taxpayers, a significant share of whom enjoy early retirement. The fight over its continuation is what the government shutdown is about.

Second, Republicans discovered that promising tax cuts without offsetting spending cuts was politically painless so long as one claims that they “pay for themselves.” There is one rare and recent exception: this year’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which included $1.5 trillion in spending reductions over 10 years to offset some of the tax cuts. It’s not enough, but it’s something. Meanwhile, the Democrats love to claim that debt wouldn’t be a problem if the rich paid their “fair share.” They already do pay an enormous amount in taxes. But the numbers still don’t add up.

Finally, the Federal Reserve, starting under then-Chairman Alan Greenspan in 1987, learned how to anesthetize the political pain of budget deficits by keeping interest rates artificially low and monetizing debt. Politicians concluded that they could borrow endlessly without suffering political consequences. The problem is that this only works insofar as investors don’t worry that they will be paid back with inflated dollars.

That illusion has vanished. Interest costs have surged from $372 billion annually just a few years ago to nearly $1 trillion today, surpassing what we spend on defense or Medicaid. Within a decade, yearly interest payments are projected to nearly double, reaching $1.8 trillion. Even without new programs, the built-in deficit would keep rising and outpace economic growth. And Washington keeps adding more deficit spending.

Keep reading

The War on (Some) Drugs: Why Are We Still Talking About This?

Prohibition is an awful flop.
We like it.
It can’t stop what it’s meant to stop.
We like it.
It’s left a trail of graft and slime,
It don’t prohibit worth a dime,
It’s filled our land with vice and crime,
Nevertheless, we’re for it.

— “Prohibition” by Franklin P. Adams, 1931.

William Stewart Halsted is known as the “father of modern surgery.” He was one of the four founders of Johns Hopkins Hospital in 1886, and he is credited with surgical innovations including promoting antiseptic practices and the discovery that cocaine, when injected into the skin, could be used as a local anesthetic. He was also a drug addict.

Halsted’s drug use began with cocaine, and after a few failed attempts at kicking the habit, he switched to morphine. He spent more than 40 years addicted to the drug, all while maintaining one of the most distinguished careers in the history of surgery. According to Sir William Osler, one of the co-founders of Johns Hopkins, Halsted could not get through the day without a minimum of 180 milligrams of morphine. “On this,” said Osler, “he could do his work comfortably, and maintain his physical vigor.”

Halsted’s story illustrates the reality that—while perhaps not desirable—it is possible to both be addicted to narcotics and still function very well in society. Imagine if America had been in the throes of the War on (Some) Drugs in the 19th century, and instead of doing groundbreaking work as a surgeon and helping to build one of the country’s most prestigious hospitals, Halsted had been thrown into a prison cell. Who would have benefited from that outcome?

More to the point: How many Halsteds are rotting away in prison today, and what gifts are we all missing out on as a result?

In Halsted’s day, drug addiction looked very different from what it looks like today. Federal control of narcotics only came about in 1914, with the passage of the Harrison Narcotics Act.

Before that, anyone could walk into a drug store and purchase medicines—and even soft drinks—that contained opium or cocaine. And some did become addicted.

But, as Mike Gray writes in Drug Crazy:

“It was not until the late 1800s that the public began to realize that some of their favorite medicines could be highly addictive. … At that time, the highest credible estimates put the number of U.S. addicts at about three people in a thousand. Others thought it was half that.” (Note: Some estimates put the number as high as one in two hundred.)

“All the leading authorities now agree,” he writes, “that addiction peaked around 1900, followed by a steady drop. The reason was simple common sense coupled with growing awareness.”

Keep reading

The Left’s Secret Repeal of No Taxes on Tips

What began as a campaign promise in Nevada became law this summer with the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act: “No taxes on tips” is now nationwide. But even as pundits debate its merits, progressive cities are quietly undoing the tax cut—and few are noticing.

Progressive cities such as Washington, D.C., and Chicago have recently eliminated the tipped-wage credit, which lets employers pay tipped employees below minimum wage as long as tips filled the gap. Now, New York City is the next battleground in a push to mandate a one-size-fits-all minimum wage.

The campaign against the tipped-wage credit began before then-candidate Donald Trump floated “no taxes on tips,” but few have considered how these ideas play out together. To see the consequences, look at what happened when D.C. scrapped the tipped-wage credit.

After D.C. repealed the credit—causing such a backlash that the city council has already voted to partially reverse the decision—servers reported tips falling from roughly 23 percent to 25 percent to 18 percent to 20 percent. Research from the Census Bureau shows that for every $1 increase in the mandated minimum wage for tipped workers, tips drop by about the same amount. 

Prior to the repeal, the minimum wage for D.C. servers was $5.35 an hour; the rate was scheduled to increase to $16.10 by 2027—a $10.75 jump. The back-of-the-envelope math shows the potential tax implications.

On an average night, a D.C. server at a quality establishment might turn over four to five tables during the two-hour dinner rush, and the total gross sales from those tables may be modestly estimated at $500. If that server was tipped at 23 percent prior to D.C.’s elimination of the tipped-wage credit, they would have made $115 in tips, vs. an estimated $95 after the repeal—a $20 expected decline in tips. But that is before the “no taxes on tips” landscape.

At first glance, higher base pay seems to offset smaller tips ($16.10 per hour over that two-hour period versus $5.35 per hour would work out to $21.50 total in extra wages). But those new wages are taxable. For a server in the 12 percent tax bracket—typical for D.C.—a $21.50 raise nets only about $19 after taxes, less than the $20 in tax-free tips they lost. The gap widens the more tips a worker earns. 

If every extra dollar in required wages replaces a dollar in lost tips, as Census Bureau data suggest, then repealing the tipped-wage credit effectively swaps tax-free income for taxable income. The same could soon hit gig workers and hotel staff.

Eliminating the tipped-wage credit now shifts earnings from tax-free to taxed—a de facto tax increase on these workers that could also lead to lower take-home pay in many scenarios.

Keep reading

Astronomers Say They Just Detected Radio Signals Coming from This Comet

Evidently, it’s a big week for news involving comets, as a team of astronomers now reports the detection of an intriguing series of radio signals emanating from one of the speeding objects (no, not that comet) currently making its way through our solar system.

The surprising news comes to us courtesy of a research team led by the Shanghai Astronomical Observatory of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and was reportedly made possible with the Tianma Radio Telescope.

During multi-band radio observations of comet 12P/Pons-Brooks, the team detected an interesting series of radio signals coming from the returning comet, which is also one of the brightest comets astronomers have ever seen.

At a glance, this all sounds pretty tantalizing… but what does the detection of radio signals from a comet in our solar system actually mean?

A Returning Comet Stops In

First discovered in 1812, 12P/Pons-Brooks possesses an orbital period of around 71 years, meaning that this is actually the fourth time astronomers have had an opportunity to watch it during its journeys through the solar system.

During their recent observations of the Halley-type comet, the Chinese team says they measured the rate at which water was being produced by 12P/Pons-Brooks, which revealed the most distant known detection of ammonia molecules known to astronomers from such observations.

Since comets are known to contain a variety of icy components—many of which are as old as the solar system itself—they are ideal for observations by astronomers, particularly when these materials begin to bake off as the speeding objects make their way toward the Sun.

In the case of comets like 12P/Pons-Brooks, the presence of volatile ices shows that they haven’t been subjected to large amounts of thermal evolution since they were born in our solar system eons ago. Because of this, the study of the ices they carry and their composition offers a way for astronomers to look back in time at the chemical and thermal conditions that were present in our planetary neighborhood around 4.6 billion years ago.

Keep reading

US Bombs Somalia for Three Consecutive Days

The US has launched three more airstrikes in Somalia over three consecutive days, according to press releases from US Africa Command, as the Trump administration continues to bomb the country at a record pace.

AFRICOM said that it launched an airstrike on October 26 that targeted al-Shabaab about 25 miles north of the southern port city of Kismayo. That same day, the US-backed Somali government said a “precision airstrike” killed an al-Shabaab leader, though the town it said he was targeted in, Bu’ale, is more than 100 miles north of Kismayo, so it’s unclear if it was the same strike.

AFRICOM offered no other details about the strike as it stopped sharing casualty estimates and assessments on potential civilian harm earlier this year. “Specific details about units and assets will not be released to ensure continued operations security,” the command said.

The command also announced two separate strikes in Somalia’s northeastern Puntland region, launched on October 27 and October 28. AFRICOM said both strikes targeted the ISIS affiliate in the region and were launched about 53 miles southeast of the Gulf of Aden port city of Bosasso, and shared no other details.

Puntland is not under the control of the US-backed federal government, so the US backs local forces in the region. AFRICOM previously announced airstrikes in Puntland on October 24 and October 26 as Puntland’s security forces said they were intensifying operations against ISIS fighters hiding in caves in the Cal-Miskaad mountains.

Puntland officials claim that the ISIS militants are largely defeated, something they’ve been saying for months. But local sources told Garowe Online that the militants are still entrenched in the area and have resorted to guerrilla tactics and are constantly moving between caves and valleys.

The US has dramatically increased its airstrikes in Somalia this year, and the latest three strikes bring the total number of US bombings in the country this year to 89. The Trump administration has shattered the previous annual record for US airstrikes in Somalia, which President Trump set at 63 back in 2019. For context, President Biden launched a total of 51 airstrikes in Somalia throughout his four years in office, and President Obama launched 48 over eight years.

Keep reading

3 Reasons Why Zohran Mamdani’s City-Run Grocery Stores Will Fail

New York City Mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani says City Hall needs to get into the grocery business because New Yorkers are being “priced out” of private supermarkets. If elected, Mamdani says he’ll spend $60 million on opening one government-run grocery store in each of the five boroughs that would deliver healthier produce at lower prices. Here’s why that’s a terrible idea.

1. Mamdani-Marts Can’t Compete With Discount Grocery Chains

Mamdani says that New Yorkers should think of city-run grocery stores as a “public option” that would deliver cheaper food by saving on rent and taxes. And they wouldn’t need to make a profit.

Except profit margins for grocery stores are typically below 2 percent, and private grocers keep costs down by utilizing complex supply chains and economies of scale that Mamdani’s stores won’t have access to.

“The grocery business is really tough,” says Scott Lincicome, who is the vice president of general economics at the Cato Institute. Private grocery stores provide “a vast variety of fresh frozen produce and other goods that everybody wants all the time, which is actually really difficult to do, particularly at reasonably low prices.” In Kansas City, a government-run grocery store scheme lost nearly $900,000 just last year. 

Lincicome says that if New York politicians want to give their constituents access to cheaper groceries, they could allow Walmart in the Big Apple. But New York politicians have used zoning regulations to keep the nation’s largest and most affordable supermarket from opening a store anywhere in the five boroughs. 

“Walmart is the absolute leader in supply chain efficiencies,” Lincicome told Reason. It “does this via a truly global network of warehouses and trucks and airplanes and all of these amazing things that shave off fractions of a penny off of every transaction.” The idea that New York “could somehow try to replicate Walmart’s global supply chain and entire business model is just laughable.”

2. New York Has Fewer “Food Deserts” Than Any Other City 

Mamdani says his grocery stores will help address the problem of neighborhoods lacking easy access to fresh food. But Lincicome cites a recent study showing that “ranked the Big Apple the No. 1 U.S. metro area in terms of residents’ ‘equitable access’ to a local supermarket.”

“You can basically walk almost everywhere in New York City in 10 minutes and find a grocery store,” he told Reason.

Lincicome cites multiple studies (1, 2, 3) showing that new grocery stores don’t improve food access. But this is old news: In 2012, Reason covered three earlier studies that exploded the myth that adding neighborhood supermarkets improves the diets of their surrounding communities.

3. It’s a waste of money

Mamdani said that he is going to pay for his grocery stores by “redirecting” $140 million worth of city funding that is already being spent subsidizing corporate grocers. As the Washington Examiner’s Timothy Carney was the first to notice, that number is based on a misreading of a city website. The city subsidizes some private grocery stores at a cost of about $3.3 million per year.. As some Bronx residents told Fox News‘ Kennedy in a new video published by Reason, the city should focus instead on helping the homeless, dealing with “rats the size of cats,” and cleaning “all of the needles on the street.”

Direct assistance is a more cost-effective and less destructive way to support low-income households than government-run supermarkets, and it’s something the federal government already does in abundance. Through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps, 1.79 million New Yorkers—20 percent of the city’s population—receive help purchasing groceries each month.

As one New Yorker told Kennedy in Reason‘s latest video, “you’re focusing on the wrong things, Mamdani.”

Keep reading

Who gets food stamps? Viral chart misleads about SNAP recipients’ race, ethnicity

With millions of people at risk of losing access to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program starting Nov. 1, a viral chart claimed to show the majority of the nation’s food stamp recipients are non-white and noncitizens.

The chart, titled “Food Stamps by Ethnicity,” listed 36 groups of people and said it showed the “percentage of U.S. households receiving SNAP benefits.” 

The groups were labeled by nationality such as “Afghan,” “Somali,” “Iraqi,”  along with the racial groups “white,” “Black” and “native.” The chart appeared to show that Afghan people were the largest group receiving SNAP benefits, at 45.6%, followed by Somali (42.4%) and Iraqi (34.8%). White people, represented on the chart with the American flag, were third to last at 8.6%.

The federal government shutdown, which started Oct. 1, is the cause of the looming SNAP funding lapse. SNAP provides food purchasing benefits to low-income households. Conservatives have peddled the misleading narrative that Democrats are pushing for healthcare for illegal immigrants, and people commenting on the chart rehashed a similar talking point.

“Who is getting their EBT cut,” read the caption of an Oct. 25 X post sharing the chart, which had 3.1 million views as of Oct. 27. EBT stands for Electronic Benefits Transfer, which is a SNAP payment system.

“Only 18.7% of EBT or food stamp recipients are American. Let that sink in…” read another post sharing the chart, seemingly mistakenly referring to the figure next to the word “Armenian”; there was no “American” category in the chart. “We are subsidizing foreigners on the taxpayers dime.”

The chart doesn’t show the full picture of SNAP recipients by race or ethnicity. The most reliable source for the breakdown of SNAP recipients by demographics comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the program. 

According to the most recent USDA data available, from 2023, white people are the largest racial group receiving SNAP benefits, at 35.4%. African Americans are next, making up 25.7% of recipients, then Hispanic people at 15.6%, Asian people at 3.9%, Native Americans at 1.3% and multiracial people at 1%. The race of 17% of participants is unknown.

The same report found that 89.4% of SNAP recipients were U.S born citizens, meaning less than 11% of SNAP participants were foreign-born. Of the latter figure, 6.2% were naturalized citizens, 1.1% were refugees and 3.3% were other noncitizens, including lawful permanent residents and other eligible noncitizens.

While large shares of the groups listed in the chart may receive food stamps, “they are certainly a tiny share of the households and spending on SNAP,” said Tracy Roof, University of Richmond associate professor of political science.

Keep reading

Ex-Army Sergeant Sentenced to 4 Years for Offering Secrets to China

A federal judge sentenced a former Army intelligence sergeant to 4 years in prison on Tuesday for offering national defense secrets to China. Sergeant Joseph Daniel Schmidt, who had top secret clearance, served in western Washington at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, where he worked in military intelligence.

According to court documents, he served in the Army from January 2015 to January 2020. Schmidt was discharged after a mental health episode in late 2019.

The judge said he considered Schmidt’s mental health as well as the seriousness of the crime in sentencing him to 4 years in prison. Schmidt’s public defender requested that he be sentenced for time served, arguing that the crime was the result of schizophrenia. Schmidt mistakenly believed he was “subject to a mind control network operated by the FBI and [was] hoping to warn the Chinese government about the Program,” according to the public defender Dennis Carroll.

In the Army, Schmidt led a team that de-briefed and interrogated potential intelligence sources. His work gave him access to intelligence collection and reporting systems. After being discharged, he kept a device that gave him access to secure military computer networks. He later offered the device to Chinese authorities for them to access the secure system.

“He used his training to provide sensitive information to the Chinese security service. He knew what he was doing was wrong—he was doing web searches for such things as ‘Can you be extradited for treason,’” said Assistant United States Attorney Todd Greenberg in a statement.

In February 2020, Schmidt flew to Turkey. Court documents state that while there, he searched online about defecting from the United States. He also emailed the Chinese consulate offering to share information with a Chinese official in person.

Keep reading

Rosie O’Donnell’s Daughter Sentenced to Prison amid Sexual Assault Allegations

Rosie O’Donnell’s daughter is facing time behind bars.

According to documents obtained by Us Weekly, O’Donnell’s daughter Chelsea was sentenced to prison last week after violating her terms of probation.

A judge in Wisconsin ruled that the 28-year-old had violated her probation due to sexual assault allegations and had also failed to show adequate progress in her drug treatment program.

“The facts surrounding this request have been staffed with the Marinette County Treatment Drug Court Team and have been deemed sufficient grounds to warrant termination from the Marinette County Treatment Drug Court Program,” the filing read.

Chelsea will reportedly serve her sentence at Taycheedah Correctional Institution, a medium-security prison in Wisconsin.

However, the length of her sentence has not yet been publicly disclosed.

Her mother took to Instagram to ask people to pray for her troubled daughter.

“My child chelsea belle – before addiction took over her life – i loved her then i love her now as she faces a scary future- prayers welcomed,” the actress wrote.

Keep reading