Congressman Ro Khanna argues that not all deficit spending is equal. Spending on programs like healthcare and education can be justified as 'productive investments' if their long-term rate of return for society is higher than the initial cost, distinguishing them from non-productive spending.

Related Insights

Instead of a radical healthcare overhaul, a pragmatic solution is to lower Medicare eligibility by two years, every year. This phased approach would gradually move the US toward nationalized coverage, address the highest-cost demographic first, and allow the private sector time to adapt. This single policy change could potentially eliminate the entire annual federal deficit.

Meaningful affordability cannot be achieved with superficial fixes. It requires long-term, structural solutions: building 5-10 million more homes to address housing costs (40% of CPI), implementing universal healthcare to lower medical expenses, expanding public higher education, and aggressive antitrust enforcement to foster competition.

Not all debt is negative. Using leverage to acquire assets that generate returns—like real estate, inventory, or business investments—is a smart wealth-building tool. Conversely, financing depreciating lifestyle items ('flexing') creates a financial hole that's nearly impossible to escape.

Arguing to redirect inefficient government spending towards populist policies like free buses is a trap. It doubles down on a broken system by replacing one form of poor allocation with another, ultimately accelerating economic decline rather than fixing the fundamental problems.

To fund deficits, the government prints money, causing inflation that devalues cash and wages. This acts as a hidden tax on the poor and middle class. Meanwhile, the wealthy, who own assets like stocks and real estate that appreciate with inflation, are protected and see their wealth grow, widening the economic divide.

Treat government programs as experiments. Define success metrics upfront and set a firm deadline. If the program fails to achieve its stated goals by that date, it should be automatically disbanded rather than being given more funding. This enforces accountability.

An entrepreneurial view of public goods dictates that any service should generate more value than its costs. If a division, like public transit, consistently loses money, it's a market signal that society doesn't value it at its current price. Subsidizing it is an emotional, not a logical, decision.

The debate over government's size can be framed using political philosophy. 'Negative freedom' is freedom *from* state interference (e.g., censorship). 'Positive freedom' is the capability to achieve one's potential, requiring state support for basics like education and health to enable true flourishing.

Instead of attacking wealth, a more effective progressive strategy is to champion aggressive, 'hardcore' capitalism while implementing high, Reagan-era tax rates on the resulting gains. This framework uses the engine of capitalism to generate wealth, which is then taxed heavily to fund public investments in infrastructure and education, creating a virtuous cycle.

Unlike labor-dependent services that get more expensive, prescription drugs offer a unique societal ROI because they eventually go generic and become cheaper. This deflationary aspect is a powerful, underappreciated argument for investing in drug development, as successful medicines provide compounding value to society over time.