Posted on 04/23/2016 9:18:03 AM PDT by expat_panama
Since this is an election year, you’re hearing a lot about the size of the national debt — and the financial imperative to expunge it before it gets passed on to our kids and grandkids.
Donald Trump ... ...suggested earlier that it would be possible to pay off the entire national debt in about eight years...
...the only way to advance the debate is to get past the myths...
#1) The federal government’s books are not like a family’s finances
...put yourself in the position of the government. Say you earn the typical American family income, and you spend and borrow as the government does... ...The Federal government does not have a literal ticking clock to race against.
#2) Even if government finances were like a family’s checkbook, things aren’t at a boiling point — yet.
At the very least, you probably want your elected representatives in Washington to spend within their means...
...What matters to families isn’t their total debt; it’s their ability to service those obligations.
Typically, families seeking a mortgage...
#3) American households aren’t just victims of the national debt — we’re benefiting from it too.
By most accounts, the U.S. debt stands at nearly $19 trillion. But in his Time article, Grant points out that some of this money is owed by the Treasury to other parts of the federal government...
#4) There are some unintended consequences to lowering the debt.
...the balance sheets of corporations and individuals have improved significantly... ...it’s preferable to have rising government debt and private-sector surpluses than the other way around... ...With fewer Treasury bonds floating around, it would be harder for investors ...
#5) Even if the debt isn’t at crisis levels, it is an important issue.
...“excess inflation” and a bond market in turmoil aren’t exactly minor concerns...
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
There is a law on the books that states that the Federal government can not spend more than it takes in. This law was adopted in 1981, Public Law 95-435, Section 7. It's still valid, so why do our elected officials in Congress not obey that law?
That raises a number of other questions. Is there a penalty clause for violations of the law? Can every politician who voted in favor of violating the law be punished? Is a violation a misdemeanor or a felony? Who would be in charge of prosecuting the offenders?
We the people are expected to obey the law; why won't we hold our servants (who have, regrettably, morphed into masters) to the same standard?
Finally, since the law is already being ignored, what makes us think that an amendment would not also be ignored? The Second Amendment being a prime example in New Jersey; what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?
Note: Part of this was lifted from another FReeper's commentary and I rewrote it in the form of a letter to the editor. If I remembered who, I'd give credit.
That chart can’t be right. Everyone knows that our Social Security we paid all these years is in a lock box.
What a load of BS. The national debt is important enough that the Fed and our government have driven interest rates as low as they dare in order to keep the interest on the national debt as low as possible. And, of course, that self-serving government action has reduced the returns available to tens of millions of small savers in the US to almost nothing.
Small savers are being forced to help bail out big spending government and careless investment firms and banks. If interest were around historical levels of the past 50 or so years, the interest on the debt will be a cool trillion per year in the federal budget.
A bunch of nonsense from an idiot.
If debt were so great let’s take it to $100 zillion dollars! Everyone lives for freeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cloward-Piven is reality.
The people we owe the money too are not imaginary. They are mostly Chinese and Chinese or not, they don't like us.
Libs have been selling the lie about the Debt being some pie in the sky theoretical construct... it is not.
Trump is the first to address it seriously.
Just as he was the first to address the fact that we are being invaded by hostiles, and that the rest of the world is eating our lunch.
Trump is sanity. You can be sure of this because Peggy Noonan says he is a crazy man.
True. But I was implying it couldn’t be done legitimately.
Actually, it is a myth that the money for SS has been stolen. It has been effectively in a "lock box" gaining interest. The SS contributions are collected and put into non-market, interest-bearing T-bills. The SSTF is included in the $19 trillion national debt as a liability, just like the T-bills held by China or Japan.
SS is a pay as you go program. Today's workers pay for today's retirees. SS has been running in the red since 2010 (benefits paid out exceed revenue) and will continue to do so if left unreformed. As a result, the shortfall is made up by cashing in some T-bills from the SSTF by the General Fund. All of the T-bills will be exhausted by 2033. Thereafter, by law, SS benefits will reduced to only the level of revenue received--about a 20% reduction in benefits.
SS is going broke because it is actuarially unsound. Our aging population places more and more demands for benefits while the number of workers supporting the system declines. In 1950 there were 16 workers for every retiree; today it is less than 3; and by 2030 there will be two workers for every retiree. We will need to reduce benefits or increase taxes (as was done in 1983) or some combination thereof to keep the system solvent.
http://ticdata.treasury.gov/Publish/mfh.txt
According to Paul Krugman, “It’s true that foreigners now hold large claims on the United States, including a fair amount of government debt. But every dollar’s worth of foreign claims on America is matched by 89 cents’ worth of U.S. claims on foreigners. And because foreigners tend to put their U.S. investments into safe, low-yield assets, America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors.
A bunch of absurd BS trying to justify national bankruptcy
All I know is my Social Security is being delayed by a year-and-a-half (and the delay is growing) because politicians spent my money buying votes for themselves.
already tried in Zimbabwe; ended up with 79,600,000,000% inflation
“The majority of people in the US are so ignorant that they couldn’t tell you the difference between the debt and the deficit.”
I actually heard one Obama supporter claim that, under Obama, BOTH the deficit and the national debt were decreasing! He’s a computer science graduate too! Apparently he didn’t pass simple business math though.
“Our children won’t have the prosperity we had, and our grandchildren will be impoverished.”
WE don’t have the prosperity our grandparents had, regardless of how many say otherwise. Yes, we have a lot of toys that didn’t exist a few years ago but we are worse off financially.
So a fast food lunch will still be affordable, only about a hundred and fifty dollars or so. There will be a twenty dollar menu rather than a dollar menu. No problem, the minimum wage will be up to fifteen an hour.
“100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal Debt ... all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from government.”
-Grace Commission report submitted to President Ronald Reagan - January 15, 1984
http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9044/m1/1/high_res_d/IP0281G.pdf
“So a fast food lunch will still be affordable, only about a hundred and fifty dollars or so. There will be a twenty dollar menu rather than a dollar menu. No problem, the minimum wage will be up to fifteen an hour.”
When I was a teenager, gas was 25 cents a gallon, candy bars were 5 cents, and gold was about 30 dollars an ounce.
It has been done before, and you can bet this is the trick they will use again.
Then we could pay down the $19 Trillion faster
So, Brill Krinton balancing the budget was a one off and not beneficial to our America?
And yes, I understand that was accomplished under “The Contract with America”, sheperded by Newt.
What next, more people living on welfare is beneficial to our economy?
How is it mathematically impossible? Start spending less than you have coming in, and start lowering the debt. It might take a thousand years, but impossible? That’s impossible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.