National debt… - Page 14 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15326482
Hakeer there is a 1 in 7 chance you live in California. I know a great Cali municipal bond manager who will guarantee you tax free income FOR LIFE!!
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326483
SpecialOlympian wrote:I love explaining the downsides of Whole and Universal life insurance policies to people.

"So you give them money, and they graciously allow you to borrow it back?"

Can I ask what allocation they wanted in bonds? Because during market downturns people panic and sell stocks to buy bonds. A small allocation allows you to sell bonds when they are overpiced and buy stucks when they are on sale.


My hat is off to anyone who can consistently time the market to get in and out at the right price. That’s not my game. We never got specific about bond allocation, because I told them right off the bat that I am 100% in stocks and plan to stay there forever. They started to lose interest in me, and when they found I’m not a guy who panics and sells in downturns, they suggested I sign up for an online Merrill-Edge self-directed account. I agreed.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326484
SpecialOlympian wrote:Hakeer there is a 1 in 7 chance you live in California. I know a great Cali municipal bond manager who will guarantee you tax free income FOR LIFE!!


Yeah, another 5% yield. I get much better total return if I put the same money in stocks. I live in Washington state. And remember, I do a lot more buying than selling. As you say, my heirs can dance on my grave about the stocks I’ve held for 35 years.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326485
Potemkin wrote:The capitalist system, summed up in one sentence. :)


Only to you communists. I give very little thought to my bank. Bank ripoffs notwithstanding, you can be a good capitalist yourself if you take the trouble to learn how to manage capital instead of listening to “financial advisors.”
#15326490
Yeah. I think Merryl-Lynch is a joke. I've literally sat with their sales agents after wthdrawing cash and telling them,

"I can't invest with you. FINRA and the SEC monitor my bank accounts. The Compliance department of my office forced me to move my accounts to Schwab."

And they still tried to sell me their services, despite it being imposslble. And illegal. Very illegal. Some dipshit who sits in a retail office of a bank might know the calculations that go into figuring the principal you will pay on a mortgage. I would never trust a bank employee to tell me about investments.

1) I know it better than you do. I have the ears of people who will tell me. And you've never even talked to someone who has been within 5 feet of a Bloomberg terminal.

2) Your primary job is to sell debt. Owed to the bank. A bank's lending and investment arms are legally divided for good reason, we made that mistake before. And it's good we corrected it. That's why Merryl-Lynch is separate from Bank of America.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326494
SpecialOlympian wrote:Yeah. I think Merryl-Lynch is a joke. I've literally sat with their sales agents after wthdrawing cash and telling them,

"I can't invest with you. FINRA and the SEC monitor my bank accounts. The Compliance department of my office forced me to move my accounts to Schwab."

And they still tried to sell me their services, despite it being imposslble. And illegal. Very illegal. Some dipshit who sits in a retail office of a bank might know the calculations that go into figuring the principal you will pay on a mortgage. I would never trust a bank employee to tell me about investments.

1) I know it better than you do. I have the ears of people who will tell me. And you've never even talked to someone who has been within 5 feet of a Bloomberg terminal.

2) Your primary job is to sell debt. Owed to the bank. A bank's lending and investment arms are legally divided for good reason, we made that mistake before. And it's good we corrected it. That's why Merryl-Lynch is separate from Bank of America.


The people are nearly useless to me, but they do have good online stock screening and trading tools. The nearest BOA bank is 60 miles away, and I rarely go there.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326497
SpecialOlympian wrote:I asked about the allocation not the location.


I told you we didn’t talk about allocation, because I told them I will be 100% in stocks and that’s non-negotiable.

In my portfolio, one bond is one too many.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15326514
Back on topic of National debts:

Russia debt as % of gdp: 15.4% -> Maintenance of debt as % of budget is 8.5%
USA debt as % of gdp: 124.7% -> Maintenance of debt as % of budget is 10%

As I said, its not how much debt you have but how you handle the consequences and maintenance of debt and how you invest it. :lol:
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326523
JohnRawls wrote:Back on topic of National debts:

Russia debt as % of gdp: 15.4% -> Maintenance of debt as % of budget is 8.5%
USA debt as % of gdp: 124.7% -> Maintenance of debt as % of budget is 10%

As I said, its not how much debt you have but how you handle the consequences and maintenance of debt and how you invest it. :lol:


"Net Interest Outlays. Over the 10-year projection
period, net outlays for interest increase by 6.2 percent
a year, on average, rising from $951 billion in 2025 to
$1.6 trillion in 2034. Measured relative to the size of the
economy, those outlays rise from 3.2 percent in 2025 to
3.9 percent in 2034—1.9 percentage points higher than
their 50-year average and higher than they have been in
any year since at least 1940 (the first year for which the
Office of Management and Budget reports such data). "
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-0 ... k-2024.pdf

The question should be “Do we want to increase interest payments on the national debt by 6.2% every year for the next 10 years, ending in 2034 at $1.6 trillion.”?

You want to refocus the question to ask, “Can we afford to do this another 10 years?”

Even if we can, do we want to do this? It is not sustainable forever, and in the meantime, we are asking our children and grandchildren (like my two grand daughters) to pay that $1.6 trillion, or possibly pass even worse debt on to their own children.

The alternative is to finally start acting fiscally responsible in Congress. According to CBO, this will all come to a head in Congress in the 2030’s, as funds for Social Security, Medicaid, and other “entitlement” programs become critical. The Republicans will finally have their chance to gut this spending from the federal budget. Or the Democrats will have their chance to tax billionaires to pay for them. If neither party has control of the government to get anything done (as usual), I have no idea what they will do. They probably don’t, either. In fact, I doubt many members of Congress bother to think beyond their next reelection campaign, which is largely how we got here.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15326534
Hakeer wrote:If neither party has control of the government to get anything done (as usual), I have no idea what they will do. They probably don’t, either. In fact, I doubt many members of Congress bother to think beyond their next reelection campaign, which is largely how we got here.


Decades of experience show the problem will never be solved by a democratic government. The solution to deficits--and other problems--is sacrifice but it's too unpopular to be possible in our democracy. Try to win an election by cutting benefits or raising taxes sufficiently. The most likely scenario is ever mounting debt, until the whole economic house of cards comes crashing down. The ensuing crisis will destroy not civilization but what's really responsible--democracy--the means by which the masses ruin the quality of leadership and policy.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326543
starman2003 wrote:Decades of experience show the problem will never be solved by a democratic government. The solution to deficits--and other problems--is sacrifice but it's too unpopular to be possible in our democracy. Try to win an election by cutting benefits or raising taxes sufficiently. The most likely scenario is ever mounting debt, until the whole economic house of cards comes crashing down. The ensuing crisis will destroy not civilization but what's really responsible--democracy--the means by which the masses ruin the quality of leadership and policy.


If Trump is elected, we’ll get there in 2025 essentially. Raising taxes on billionaires is actually very popular in the polls. Need to get more peopled registered and VOTING in this country! It’s not impossible, unless we just surrender. But time is running out, as the trust funds for Social Security and Medicare both run OUT by 2033. At that point, Congress MUST finally decide whether to screw old people or tax billionaires, because “kicking the can down the road” will run out. It’s coming.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15326592
Hakeer wrote:If Trump is elected, we’ll get there in 2025 essentially. Raising taxes on billionaires is actually very popular in the polls.


If you tax the rich more heavily they'll only leave with their money, or put it in Swiss bank accounts. It's economically most workable to cut burgeoning social spending but that is anything but popular.
Experience shows that no elected leader can effectively address the issue --not even Reagan or Trump 2017-21.

Need to get more peopled registered and VOTING in this country!


Na, it'll only mean more resistance to sacrifice.


But time is running out, as the trust funds for Social Security and Medicare both run OUT by 2033. At that point, Congress MUST finally decide whether to screw old people or tax billionaires, because “kicking the can down the road” will run out. It’s coming.


Unfortunately, from a political point of view, "kicking the can down the road" is essentially the only option. Anything else will mean a lost election (either $ from wealthy donors dries up or the masses turn against politicians who cut benefits). That's why deficit spending has continued, unsolved, for several decades. If a democratic government could do it it would've happened long ago. The country is headed for economic disaster, followed by the real solution--authoritarianism.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326642
starman2003 wrote:If you tax the rich more heavily they'll only leave with their money, or put it in Swiss bank accounts. It's economically most workable to cut burgeoning social spending but that is anything but popular.
Experience shows that no elected leader can effectively address the issue --not even Reagan or Trump 2017-21.



Na, it'll only mean more resistance to sacrifice.




Unfortunately, from a political point of view, "kicking the can down the road" is essentially the only option. Anything else will mean a lost election (either $ from wealthy donors dries up or the masses turn against politicians who cut benefits). That's why deficit spending has continued, unsolved, for several decades. If a democratic government could do it it would've happened long ago. The country is headed for economic disaster, followed by the real solution--authoritarianism.


When the trust funds run out for Social Security and Medicare in a few years, Congress will have to decide what to do about it. Thomas Picketty is right that the only way to completely screw billionaires requires international cooperation, but there are ways to hit them hard with raising marginal rates and closing loopholes like “carried interest” (a tax give-away to hedge fund billionaires). On the other hand, if the decision is to screw old people by raising retirement age and slashing benefits, there could be a massive backlash against Republicans. Like drug addicts, sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before you do what’s necessary to recover.

We may end up with a dictator in this country, but my side isn’t going down without a fight.
User avatar
By Indi
#15326656
Hakeer wrote:The interest on the national debt in 2024 will be $892 billion. That is now even more than the defense budget! Congress won’t do anything about it. Most politicians don’t even want to talk about it, because the solution (cut spending and raise taxes) is painful to their voters and, therefore, their next reelection campaign.

Most economists say it is “unsustainable.” CBO says it will increase over $1 trillion every year for next 10 years. I think it will take an absolute catastrophe in the bond markets to force Congress into some fiscal discipline. That may happen by 2050. Many of us will be dead by then, but our children and grandchildren suffer from our generation running the credit card through the roof. Each generation has a moral responsibility to TRY to make the world a better place for the next. This is a shameful neglect of that responsibility.

Okay, end of rant.

Any threads discussing HOW to resolve the issue?
The tax code, IMO, is where the issue could easily be resolved ONCE and FOR ALL.
User avatar
By Indi
#15326657
Hakeer wrote:When the trust funds run out for Social Security and Medicare in a few years, Congress will have to decide what to do about it. Thomas Picketty is right that the only way to completely screw billionaires requires international cooperation, but there are ways to hit them hard with raising marginal rates and closing loopholes like “carried interest” (a tax give-away to hedge fund billionaires). On the other hand, if the decision is to screw old people by raising retirement age and slashing benefits, there could be a massive backlash against Republicans. Like drug addicts, sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before you do what’s necessary to recover.

We may end up with a dictator in this country, but my side isn’t going down without a fight.

Social Security and Medicare can also easily be resolved in the income tax code.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15326660
Indi wrote:Social Security and Medicare can also easily be resolved in the income tax code.


There has to be a will to save them, and the Republicans have wanted to slash them forever. When the trust funds run dry, that will give them the pretext to make their move. It will come down to who controls Congress. They will start demagoging over the national debt, as if they suddenly care.
User avatar
By Indi
#15326663
Doubtful they will ever be eliminated, government has relied on the trust fund surplus so most likely the ceiling will be raised applicable to the FICA tax. And that will be done prior to the trust funds running dry, as usual.
As I've been saying for some time now, the fix is in the income tax code. SS and Medicare should simply become paid from the general revenue fund, eliminating the interest bearing trust funds completely.
User avatar
By starman2003
#15326667
Hakeer wrote:When the trust funds run out for Social Security and Medicare in a few years, Congress will have to decide what to do about it.


As I've posted, they've done essentially nothing about it for decades simply because they can't; it's not politically feasible.

Thomas Picketty is right that the only way to completely screw billionaires requires international cooperation, but there are ways to hit them hard with raising marginal rates and closing loopholes like “carried interest” (a tax give-away to hedge fund billionaires).


The problem is, nations can't afford to alienate or drive away those with ample $$. Instead of cooperating to screw them they compete to attract them.

On the other hand, if the decision is to screw old people by raising retirement age and slashing benefits, there could be a massive backlash against Republicans. Like drug addicts, sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before you do what’s necessary to recover.


Sure, it'll take a major crisis to solve this problem and others. When the economy collapses a new leadership will step in, eliminate the system ultimately at fault and finally do what has to be done.

We may end up with a dictator in this country, but my side isn’t going down without a fight.


You're like Canute trying to prevent the tide from coming in. Just like the Roman republic in the first century, US democracy is obsolete and doomed.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 20

When you talk to your friends and family members […]

Neither of them. You are thinking of someone els[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

OMG ! Mainstream media was never THIS funny. Just […]

Zero-Hour Work Week

I retired almost 30 years ago at age 50. I got[…]