 If you want to get a politician to change the subject, ask them how they're going to deal with the federal debt, which is growing to be bigger than all of the US GDP and has us on a path to fiscal disaster. That's what happened when I asked GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy what he would do to cut spending. He said he'd focus instead on supercharging the economy so that we can grow our way out of it. It's as though we've forgotten that's an option. And in all of those projections that say we're going to run out of money, assume, you know, fairly enough, I guess the current GDP growth rate. And if you extrapolate that out, yes, we're going bust, you know, financially and fiscally speaking. It doesn't have to be that way. Our government has been on an economic bender for this entire century. And in 2023, the national debt held by the public will be roughly equal to our gross domestic product. And the debt is projected to get bigger and bigger over the coming years. We already know the boomer response to questions about cutting spending, especially entitlements. And it won't cut a single bit of Medicare or self security. Under no circumstances should Republicans vote to cut a single penny from Medicare or social security. So what happens when you bring up cutting spending to Vivek Ramaswamy? He starts talking about unleashing economic growth. So guess what? We don't really have to tackle the major drivers of debt and deficits. We've grown at more than four plus percent GDP growth for most of our national history. If we get back to a three-handle, three-point-something, actually most of those fiscal problems are completely gone. According to figures from the Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Officer, CBO, since 1970, annual GDP growth has averaged 2.7 percent, helped along by a rapidly growing labor force thanks to immigration, the baby boom, and women going to work. So what happens if Ramaswamy becomes president and is actually able to unleash economic growth that pushes the U.S. economy to average 4 percent annual GDP growth for two full terms? Would most of our fiscal problems be completely gone? Not even close. The CBO already projects that GDP will grow by 2 percent per year through 2033. For argument's sake, let's assume that GDP growth runs twice that at 4 percent a year, a rate far above what it's been so far in the 21st century. In a recent report, the CBO estimated that for every 1.2 percentage points that GDP exceeds its projected level for 2033, the deficit would be $51 billion smaller. By that measure, if GDP growth ran 4 percent, instead of 2 percent over those eight years, the projected deficit in 2033 of $1.4 trillion would be cut almost in half to about $700 billion. In other words, we'd be better off, but the government would still be running a red ink every year, and the federal debt would just keep growing. We can't let Ramaswamy or anyone running for president duck questions about cutting spending. These guys want to steer clear of the third rail of American politics, Social Security and Medicare entitlements. But we have to make them grab it fully with both hands. If we don't start seriously cutting spending and scaling back elder care entitlements, we're not gonna balance the budget or stop growing the debt. And our nation's economy is headed for disaster.