Replies

While these numbers, both past and future, are a bit depressing, they also present a challenge to advocates of small government. If taxes and spending are bad for growth, why did the United States (and other nations in the Western world) enjoy considerable prosperity all through the 20th Century?

Tax dollars and dollars the government borrows via international banking...

<<<<----- get funneled back to

companies that sell products and services to the government.

It looks like an economy where the people are well off because a lot of business revenue is flowing.

But the effort is going to make things for government, which are not necessary to produce.

One must consider the alternative to do a valid comparison: what would it have been like if government both did not tax so much and did not spend so much ?

Companies would have made far more products and services that were sold to business or to people. People who were employed making things for government or directly by the government would have instead worked at producing those products and services.

Absent the pushing of international banking / globalism to increase government spending and thereby borrow more, if spending were minimized, borrowing could be eliminated.

Any shortfall from taxes could be replaced by government simply creating its own money.

Instead of $17 trillion in government debt (which means $17 trillion in future taxes at the least, just to pay back the debt), we would have $0 in government debt.

This shows how the "prosperity" the author speaks of was a sham prosperity. The government spent trillions it did not have, and put taxpayers on the hook for it.