It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911
"Life shrinks and expands in proportion to ones courage" - Anais Nin
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance" - Socrates
Two quotes I try to live my life in accordance with.
With respect to the US being broke, I have been saying this for the last 6 years, to ears that remain stubbornly closed.
Government has never created wealth, that is something that is created by the ingenuity and industry of people.
If these people cannot see that they are going to be permitted to keep a fair share of the wealth they create, put quite simply, they will not create that wealth.
So Obama and his cabal are in a cleft stick, either they stick to their beliefs that Government controls wealth making as well as wealth distribution, or they all of a sudden turn 180 degrees and become pragmatic enough to allow business the free reins in needs to create not only wealth, but jobs to create that wealth.
I am curious about what more short-term debt being demanded means for the government financing though. Does this make it harder for the US government to continue to "roll over" its debt onto the next year, since we consecutively have had deficits for 10 years now? I would think it would make it easier for the government to continue to borrow, however, a drop in demand for short term treasuries might trigger the government to have to use more long term debt to finance its activities.