Calling basic services provided to the people by the people's government "unfunded liabilities" betrays so much. First, questioning the people's government's ob

Calling basic services provided to the people by the people's government "unfunded liabilities" betrays so much. First, questioning the people's government's obligation to serve its own people's needs. Second, a deep (deliberate?) ignorance of how finances work for a sovereign issuer of currency. For such a government these are neither "unfunded" nor are they "liabilities." Think of it this way: When the government issues currency, why is it laundered as "debt"? And why should it be paying interest on it, and to whom? I can see West Virginia, Germany, Spain having to do that, because they do not not issue currency, having to use Dollars or Euros to conduct operations. But for the US, UK, Japan and the like this restriction does not apply. This is why banks can be bailed out, and aid for Ukraine can materialize seemingly out of nowhere. Pretending otherwise is a fiction that is used as a tool to un-democratically redirect fiscal priorities.