National debt… - Page 17 - 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

User avatar
By Hakeer
#15327009
Red_Army wrote:Worrying about the national debt is like being scared of ghosts - grow up.


LOL your tax money and mine went into paying $658 billion interest expense on that $36 trillion ghost in 2023. Do you run up debt on your credit card?
User avatar
By Red_Army
#15327016
Hakeer wrote:LOL your tax money and mine went into paying $658 billion interest expense on that $36 trillion ghost in 2023. Do you run up debt on your credit card?


The ability to run up debt on a credit card is itself wealth. Millions of people cannot do that and instead starve and die.

The US federal government prints and in part decides the value of the US dollar. Any debt they accrue is basically meaningless. Nobody will ever collect and that debt will never result in a lack of funds (they are printing the money after all). This is basically like crying about how chuck e cheese is going to run out of tokens.

I am mad about how our government spends, but the only way this problem actualizes is if the US government collapses - at which point the problem is solved.
User avatar
By Indi
#15327044
Hakeer wrote:That would be OK with me so long as there is earmarks in the budget to protect Social security, Medicare, etc. to keep them in the mandatory rather than discretionary spending category. Old people and sick people need to know that money will be there, regardless which party controls Congress.

It would be nice if we could get several, or many, others to begin a discussion working out the details finding and using real government provided figures.
Social Security and Medicare would become made a mandatory budget spending item as I've suggested previously.
From what data I've been able to gather, the tax code algorithm I'm using appears capable of providing adequate revenue to fully fund budgets currently being produced, and being an algorithm would adjust tax tables without human intervention going forward each year.
IMO, we would benefit greatly were we to put our collective time spent looking to resolve some issues instead of incessantly complaining about them.
What I presented previously, if you noticed, would reduce the taxes of about 70% of taxpayers who have income of less than the GNI per person each year, and raise the taxes progressively applied to income each of the following 4 multiples of GNI per person.
In addition to what I showed earlier, would be a surtax which if the CBO projected insufficient revenue to fund the budget would be applied across the board, meaning that ALL taxpayers would bear the cost of increased spending. Most years, from what I've gathered would result in a balanced budget, no deficits, and no increased debt, perhaps even some debt reduction if a surplus resulted. In a time of great catastrophe which would require an unreasonable surtax, a deficit might then result with a debt increase. Perhaps a maximum surtax beyond which debt would be allowed should be decided as well.
As I said everything needs to be discussed, if we are to fix anything.
User avatar
By Indi
#15327046
Hakeer wrote:LOL your tax money and mine went into paying $658 billion interest expense on that $36 trillion ghost in 2023. Do you run up debt on your credit card?

Per treasury.gov FY2023 interest paid was $33,170,000,000,000×.0297 = $985,149,000,000.
But I found your figure and several others searching by Google.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#15327049
Indi wrote:Without recovering, none, but Germany, Argentina, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, to name a few.

They owed money to parties external to their nation in currencies over whose issuance they had no control. The trick is to either owe money to yourself (ie, your own citizens, as Japan does) or owe it in a fiat currency which you can print more of at will. Then it’s literally impossible to go bankrupt.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15327051
Potemkin wrote:They owed money to parties external to their nation in currencies over whose issuance they had no control. The trick is to either owe money to yourself (ie, your own citizens, as Japan does) or owe it in a fiat currency which you can print more of at will. Then it’s literally impossible to go bankrupt.


Well, “bankrupt” is not the right word. Countries that monetize debt, however, suffer other consequences such as runaway inflation.
User avatar
By Indi
#15327053
Potemkin wrote:They owed money to parties external to their nation in currencies over whose issuance they had no control. The trick is to either owe money to yourself (ie, your own citizens, as Japan does) or owe it in a fiat currency which you can print more of at will. Then it’s literally impossible to go bankrupt.

The country, but at cost to the low income earners as the result of inflation. The annual property tax on the house my Dad bought in 1950 is now nearly equal to the purchase price of the house. My Mom and Dad had to sell and move decades ago due to the rising cost of property taxes.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#15327057
Indi wrote:The country, but at cost to the low income earners as the result of inflation. The annual property tax on the house my Dad bought in 1950 is now nearly equal to the purchase price of the house. My Mom and Dad had to sell and move decades ago due to the rising cost of property taxes.

I didn’t say there would be no consequences. But bankruptcy will not be one of them.
User avatar
By Indi
#15327061
Potemkin wrote:I didn’t say there would be no consequences. But bankruptcy will not be one of them.

The consequences are what matters most.
Perhaps I should have said "The consequences are ALL that matters."
User avatar
By starman2003
#15327064
Hakeer wrote:You are not a communist? A fascist? Most authoritarian governments are one or the other.


I favor authoritarianism based on a new ideology, and while I relate better to fascism than communism I don't like either of those terms, which refer to failed systems of nearly a century ago.



The Republcans will fake (I hope) a government shutdown over the debt ceiling again. They will want Social Security and Medicare on the table as a bargaining chip.


No way the republicans will get rid of those social programs. Reagan and trump couldn't do it.

What they will shutdown is any attempt to increase taxes one dime on billionaires, which means another big budget deficit. The national debt was pretty stable from WW2 to 1980. That is when Reagan arrived and Republicans started their tax cutting. That is what makes the social spending a budget problem.


The seeds of the debt were sown under democratic administrations starting with FDR and LBJ. Government assumed more responsibility for people's welfare and this naturally was very costly. I don't doubt tax cuts exacerbated the debt, greatly. But all socioeconomic levels or people in general are to blame. Or, the system which empowers the irresponsible. The electorate demands largesse without adequate taxation or demands tax cuts without speeding cuts--- in a nutshell the irresponsibility of the electorate and the inability of democratic government to resist it ie. impose sacrifice.
#15327077
Indi wrote:Without recovering, none, but Germany, Argentina, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, to name a few.

No, that is not even one. None of those countries went bankrupt by owing money they could issue at will. They all had onerous debts denominated in other countries' currencies. So you have no examples.
#15327079
Red_Army wrote:Worrying about the national debt is like being scared of ghosts - grow up.

Ghosts that eat the food in your fridge...

The interest on the national debt represents wealth given to the holders of the debt in return for no contribution to production. If it is 1% of GDP, that is not a reason to be concerned. But what happens when 1% turns into 5%, and then 20%?
#15327081
Red_Army wrote:The ability to run up debt on a credit card is itself wealth.

No it isn't. It's just evidence that the issuer expects you to be able to come up with wealth to pay it off.
Millions of people cannot do that and instead starve and die.

Being able to get into debt is not wealth. Being able to pay it off is wealth.

Clear?
The US federal government prints and in part decides the value of the US dollar. Any debt they accrue is basically meaningless.

That will be news to the folks who live off the interest.
Nobody will ever collect and that debt will never result in a lack of funds (they are printing the money after all).

Lack of funds is not the problem. The flow of unrequited purchasing power in the form of interest payments is the problem.
This is basically like crying about how chuck e cheese is going to run out of tokens.

Running out of tokens is not the problem. Not being able to get a meal because too many other people are trying to redeem their tokens is the problem.
#15327082
Indi wrote:The annual property tax on the house my Dad bought in 1950 is now nearly equal to the purchase price of the house.

Because the community has increased the value of the land for them, shoveling wealth into their pockets.
My Mom and Dad had to sell and move decades ago due to the rising cost of property taxes.

So the community shoveled so much wealth into their pockets in the form of increased land value, they couldn't afford to repay even 1% of it per year?

Oh, the humanity!
#15327084
Hakeer wrote:Well, “bankrupt” is not the right word. Countries that monetize debt, however, suffer other consequences such as runaway inflation.

Runaway inflation does not happen because countries monetize debt, as that is a self-limiting process. Runaway inflation happens when governments try to consume more than their economies can produce, and pay for it by printing money. There is almost always an element of economic collapse, sharply declining production, and loss of confidence in the currency before the runaway inflation.
User avatar
By Indi
#15327087
Truth To Power wrote:Because the community has increased the value of the land for them, shoveling wealth into their pockets.

So the community shoveled so much wealth into their pockets in the form of increased land value, they couldn't afford to repay even 1% of it per year?

Oh, the humanity!

Actually, a large corporation moved into the area with a number of high income earners seeking homes.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#15327089
Indi wrote:Actually, a large corporation moved into the area with a number of high income earners seeking homes.

That’s pretty much what @Truth To Power said. The expansion of the productive forces of society increased the value of their property, without any contribution on their part.
User avatar
By Hakeer
#15327090
Truth To Power wrote:Runaway inflation does not happen because countries monetize debt, as that is a self-limiting process. Runaway inflation happens when governments try to consume more than their economies can produce, and pay for it by printing money. There is almost always an element of economic collapse, sharply declining production, and loss of confidence in the currency before the runaway inflation.


That’s right. The story is a little different in every country but the result is the same. Once the public loses confidence in the currency, inflation takes off like a rocket.
#15327098
Indi wrote:Actually, a large corporation moved into the area with a number of high income earners seeking homes.

So the community -- which includes the corporation and its employees -- made the location more economically advantageous, shoveling wealth into your parents' pockets in return for no contribution from them. Like I said.
  • 1
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20

I am with you on this Rothbard guy. I read two se[…]

It was undoubtedly the most august gathering ever[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Friedrich Merz, the incoming Chancellor: https[…]

Exactly ! This is more than anything , why I who v[…]