Hey, Millennials, Do Deficits Matter?

American Thinker ^ | October 14, 2016 | Jon N. Hall

[expat_panama]

Progressives have said that “deficits don’t matter.” Even a few conservatives have said as much. Some, however, like Speaker Paul Ryan, worry that the sharp recent rise in the national debt could lead to a “debt crisis,” a situation in which there are no painless choices, a situation where we must act...

...real debt, has grown by $7.884T, or 125 percent, over the Obama presidency...

...most of the money for those overall budget surpluses came from off-budget surpluses run by Social Security...

...Democrats were in charge of Congress in fiscal 1992 and Republicans were in charge in 2000. So Democrats are responsible for the $300B deficit and Republicans are responsible for the $200B surplus that Hillary refers to. You see, budgets are legislation, they come out of Congress. It was only after Republicans captured Congress in 1994 that we saw real improvement in the budget...

...we’re headed the wrong direction again.

What accounts for this reversal? Most of it comes from entitlements...

...off-budget surpluses that created the overall surpluses that Clinton cited in the last debate are gone...

...our economic expansion, anemic...

...Clinton is proposing a slew of new spending...

...Democrat congresses gave us the trillion-dollar deficits, the “mandatory” spending programs that are mushrooming out of control, and ObamaCare, an unwanted program they forced down our craw which is proving far more expensive than advertised. America needs to elect a Republican Congress to manage the budget and control spending… regardless of who is elected president.

[expat_panama]

imho the most important point got left out, the fact that right now the debt is not a problem because interest rates are low. For now. They will go back up and when they do $trillions will have to be spent on interest payments and that will have to come out of spending. Yeah, they'll try higher taxes but in real life, there isn't any more money there.

[Alberta's Child]

The prime rate published in the Wall Street Journal has been below 6% since March of 2008. It was at 3.25% for seven years from December 2008 through December 2015.

I predict that it will be decades before it gets back up to the 6% range again.

[kearnyirish2]

IT doesn’t matter to millennials because unlike prior generations, they don’t fear burdening children and grandchildren they’ll never have. Much of their shortsighted voting reflects the fact that when they keel over their story on this Earth (as well as their DNA) is gone forever.

[expat_panama]

It's Friday!   Stock price trends have posted yet another 'distribution day' bringing the count up to 6/Nasdaq and 8/S&P500.  True, we're only talking about a fraction of a % this time but yesterday's levels had a bit of a dip for a while and today's stock index futures are -0.40%.  Meanwhile gold & silver slog along sideways while their futures are also dim.

Everyone made a fuss about the Fed's minutes this week, but in reality those guys are only taking orders from these:

8:30 AM PPI
8:30 AM Core PPI
8:30 AM Retail Sales
8:30 AM Retail Sales ex-auto
10:00 AM Business Inventories
10:00 AM Mich Sentiment
2:00 PM Treasury Budget

---and fresh from the Nobody Knows Nothin' News Service:

The November Election Won't Be Market Friendly - Doug Kass,RealMoney
'Halloween Indicator' Signals a Bullish Turn - Mark Hulbert, USA Today
A Sloppy, Ugly Market Could Get Worse - Mark DeCambre, MarketWatch
Bob Dylan: Economist, Financial Adviser - Robert Schroeder, MarketWatch
Slower Innovation Has Sapped Modern Productivity - Edmund Phelps,BV
London or New York? Brexit Shakes Up the Rivalry - Wallace & Wright,DT
Global Economy Caught In Middle of Central Bankers - Jeff Snider, RCM
Time to Seek Reform of the Federal Reserve - Allan Meltzer, Defining Ideas

[expat_panama]

I predict that it will be decades before it gets back up to the 6% range again.

That's crazy.  For years now all the signs are for rates soaring in just a few months!!

[rollo tomasi]

The debt/deficit hawks favorite phrase is “innovative productivity”. Fundamentals/reason can go to hell for all they care.

[rollo tomasi]

Whoops, ANTI-deficit hawks, my bad.

[Alberta's Child]

Maybe foreign investors should demand higher rates for U.S. government debt, but I believe several things are going to keep rates down for a long time:

1. Nobody is going to borrow money in the U.S. at higher rates. Business activity will literally come to a standstill.

2. Higher rates will depress the value of heavily-leveraged assets like homes.

3. With 93 million working-age people in the U.S. out of the work force and Baby Boomers retiring en masse, we're actually looking at a deflationary environment here in the U.S.

4. There is no need for foreign investors to demand a premium for U.S. government debt because we'll be seen as a safe currency for the foreseeable future.

[Robert DeLong]

Most millennials have no clue what deficits are, let alone what they really mean to them. To them it is just government money. They haven’t realized that the bulk of that government money being spent, that does not exist, is coming from them, payable in their future and their future children’s future.

[cgbg]

My predication is that all the discussion about interest rates will be irrelevant because...

At some point the government will just issue a new currency—call them Patriots—at 10 cents on the dollar and everything will be worth 90% less including the deficit.

That is how it is normally done in third world countries, and we are well on our way to becoming a third world country.

[Alberta's Child]

That won’t work in a country engaged heavily in foreign trade. It’s one thing to reduce the purchasing power of your currency by 90% when you are a third world sh!t-hole who only deals with internal matters, but trading partners are never going to accept your currency in trade transactions if that’s the way you conduct business.

[cgbg]

Well, perhaps everybody hold hands and devalues together, or perhaps they fight a war over it...

I won’t be in the room so they won’t ask my opinion!

[RFEngineer]

“Democrat congresses gave us the trillion-dollar deficits”

BS. The GOP and Democrats both allowed for the trend of greater government to continue without interruption for 30 years fueled by debt.

The reason we have continued low-interest rates is that it allows for the growth of government to continue until we can no longer borrow any more money.

It is this transition that both the GOP and the Democrats are afraid of. What will happen when they have to tell people “no”. It will sweep out the present crop of thieves in government who enrich their cronies and pet corporations, and sweep in a new crop who will be fighting to steal any remaining revenue.

Governments cannot be trusted with debt. If we have learned anything at all out of the grand experiment that is the US, it is that one lesson.

I suspect that we won’t need to have a “balanced budget amendment” or anything like that. In the end, everyone will realize that a “government promise” or a “government bond” will be as worthless as the politicians who issue them.

Money is too important to be left to government.

Our present situation will make that all too obvious.

We live in interesting times. When government can’t enrich voting blocs or special interests, we will find out whether America can survive.

[PLMerite]

Didn’t they try to raise the rate by a tiny bit a few months back and it bombed?

[grey_whiskers]

Remember Lloyd Bentsen during his campaign?

"I could create the illusion of prosperity if you'd let me write $200 billion in hot checks every year."

Now, $200 billion isn't much more than a rounding error, and we are still in poverty.

Tar and feathers? Or pitchforks & tumbrils?

[Flick Lives]

The GOP and Democrats both allowed for the trend of greater government to continue without interruption for 30 years fueled by debt.

GOP and Democrats; the Uniparty. There is no difference. Just ask Paul Ryan.

[i_robot73]

>
At some point the government will just issue a new currency—call them Patriots—at 10 cents on the dollar and everything will be worth 90% less including the deficit.

That is how it is normally done in third world countries, and we are well on our way to becoming a third world country.
>

Been done once when we went from a Republic to a Democracy (Treasury\silver\gold to Federal Reserve Notes)

[Vermont Lt]

Running a deficit is not always a sin. Taking a mortgage out for a home is deficit spending. But, the key is what percentage of your gross income is spent paying back the debt.

When the debt service is greater than your income, you will find yourself in trouble pretty quickly.

We do not have to ERASE the debt, just cut it by 25-30%.

But-—Millennials seem to be shocked by the amount of their school loans. I am not sure they can really conceive of the debt load for the country.

[i_robot73]

IMO, the most important will never be discussed: the illegality and unconstitutional of said Acts, counter to our Rights.

The Right has no idea how to successfully counter the narrative, arguing from the premise of the Socialists, never the root

[Drew68]

Most millennials have no clue what deficits are, let alone what they really mean to them. To them it is just government money.

Trillion, as a number, is meaningless. 15 trillion, 20 trillion, what does it matter? People just can't visualize this. Meanwhile, a 55" HDTV costs $350.