Close To Half Of Americans Have More Credit Card Debt Than Savings

[Dad2three]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

 

[Papageorgio]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

You have given us two answers, which is correct?

 

[Papageorgio]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Both parties spend way to much, both parties need to cut spending. Neither is committed to making the hard choices.

 

[g5000]

If you have more money than credit card debt, then you should pay off all your credit card debt. Not to do so is stupid.

 

[Dad2three]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Both parties spend way to much, both parties need to cut spending. Neither is committed to making the hard choices.

'Both parties' lol

We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important. They gutted revenues (down to below 15% of GDP) AND debt has gone up $12 trillion since then.

 

[SteadyMercury]

I understand you weren't saying it was good or bad, I was just commenting on a home being a liability if you own it outright.

A liability is an outstanding debt or expense, which a house is neither. Even a house in Detroit worth $1 is an asset.

In October I paid my real estate taxes to the county in full, therefore there is no outstanding tax due on my home. Furthermore it has a value as a real estate asset and no debt in the form of a mortgage. I don't understand how that can be considered a liability in any sense of the word.

A house is an asset.
A mortgage is a liability.
Outstanding (due but not paid) tax bills are a liability.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Pay cash for everything, except real estate and pay that off as quickly as you can.

Pay credit card for everything, and pay off the balance every month.

Better consumer protection, better record keeping, and cash back rewards.

We actually use one credit card for everything, pay the entire balance every month and for the exact reason you wrote - record keeping.

The card we use is Amazon Visa because it gives us points to spend at Amazon.

I use the Citi Double Cash

I get 2% cash back on all purchases

 

[MarcATL]

Pretty irresponsible to blame the government for your own choices as a couple of posters above apparently do.

In my 20s, I had credit card debt. Woke to the fact that I was enslaving myself, paid them off and have never let it happen again. Pay cash for everything, except real estate and pay that off as quickly as you can. We're retired, our homes are paid for, we paid cash for our cars and the result is, we have the money to travel and a secure future. Its a choice.

What do you expect from the self-proclaimed party of "personal responsibility?"

*SMHGOP*

 

[NYcarbineer]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

You have given us two answers, which is correct?

If the government were run on pay as you go as it was in the nineties, we would balance the budget.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The easiest way to keep from going too far into debt is to live as far within your means as you can stand when it comes to house and car.

 

[SwimExpert]

The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Not quite. Modern methods place a stronger emphasis on leaders abilities to motivate workers to perform at their best in situations where the generosity of workers' pay offers less inherent motivation, and remains in line with the natural market, i.e. what workers are willing to accept for pay.

Most companies are willing to provide generous compensation for their workers, consistent with the quality of work being done and how much the company needs that work at a certain quality level. Most companies nowadays do not require as much high level quality standards, as they have also found ways to successfully market their products and mitigate shortcomings in service to retain long term profitability.

The adjustments that workers need to make are exactly the adjustments that most often ignore. Negotiation is much more important nowadays. It's become much more common for workers to accept a job offer at whatever compensation is initially offered, without attempting to negotiate. This is a fatal mistake, as the overwhelming majority of hiring managers expect a candidate to negotiate, and are prepared to render pay higher than the initial offer. Many workers also fail to negotiate at performance reviews, losing out on opportunities for raises, or raises that could have been higher.

In addition to these, there are further mistakes that many workers frequently make that cause them to lose pay opportunities. Many workers see their jobs in terms of a series of daily duties and chores in exchange for today's paycheck, when they should be identifying meaningful metrics that they can achieve to demonstrate value and achievement in a future review. By focusing on achieving these metrics, instead of simply completing daily tasks, workers will prepare themselves for their next performance review and raise opportunity, the next opportunity for an internal promotion, or the next opportunity to be offered a better position with another company.

The modern day worker needs to first and foremost learn how to negotiate successfully. He then needs to learn to use their current position as a stepping stone to better pay, whether it is through a performance raise, a promotion, or an opportunity with another company. Finally, he needs to learn to integrate these efforts in a seamless, continual manner so as to maximize income potential at every opportunity in order to reduce stagnation of wages or career progression.

 

[SwimExpert]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Blah, blah, blah. You did not say anything that refutes my post. The reason we keep running up debt is because we keep spending money we don't have. It's entirely possible to substantially cut spending and start turning budgetary surpluses what we can use to pay down the debt.

 

[SwimExpert]

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

Having a credit card does not cause debt to be run up. You have to use the credit card and not pay it off in order to run up debt. See, a credit card is kinda like a gun. It doesn't do anything, unless you use it to do something. The object is blameless, the operator is at fault.

I have a credit card. I don't have a problem with increasing debt.

 

[Dad2three]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Blah, blah, blah. You did not say anything that refutes my post. The reason we keep running up debt is because we keep spending money we don't have. It's entirely possible to substantially cut spending and start turning budgetary surpluses what we can use to pay down the debt.

Weird, what happened the last time there were surpluses? Oh right after CLINTON'S first surplus the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut he had to veto to get 3 more. Cut the budget huh? lol

3/4ths of it is SS, Medicare or military. Where do we begin?


BTW, STARVING US OF REVENUES AS THEY BLEW UP SPENDING, THAT'S HOW 90%+ OF CURRENT DEBT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO REAGAN, BUSH AND BUSH POLICIES!

 

[Dad2three]

The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Not quite. Modern methods place a stronger emphasis on leaders abilities to motivate workers to perform at their best in situations where the generosity of workers' pay offers less inherent motivation, and remains in line with the natural market, i.e. what workers are willing to accept for pay.

Most companies are willing to provide generous compensation for their workers, consistent with the quality of work being done and how much the company needs that work at a certain quality level. Most companies nowadays do not require as much high level quality standards, as they have also found ways to successfully market their products and mitigate shortcomings in service to retain long term profitability.

The adjustments that workers need to make are exactly the adjustments that most often ignore. Negotiation is much more important nowadays. It's become much more common for workers to accept a job offer at whatever compensation is initially offered, without attempting to negotiate. This is a fatal mistake, as the overwhelming majority of hiring managers expect a candidate to negotiate, and are prepared to render pay higher than the initial offer. Many workers also fail to negotiate at performance reviews, losing out on opportunities for raises, or raises that could have been higher.

In addition to these, there are further mistakes that many workers frequently make that cause them to lose pay opportunities. Many workers see their jobs in terms of a series of daily duties and chores in exchange for today's paycheck, when they should be identifying meaningful metrics that they can achieve to demonstrate value and achievement in a future review. By focusing on achieving these metrics, instead of simply completing daily tasks, workers will prepare themselves for their next performance review and raise opportunity, the next opportunity for an internal promotion, or the next opportunity to be offered a better position with another company.

The modern day worker needs to first and foremost learn how to negotiate successfully. He then needs to learn to use their current position as a stepping stone to better pay, whether it is through a performance raise, a promotion, or an opportunity with another company. Finally, he needs to learn to integrate these efforts in a seamless, continual manner so as to maximize income potential at every opportunity in order to reduce stagnation of wages or career progression.

In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data Tax Foundation

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!

Keynes wrote "The End of Laissez Faire" in 1926. He was correct then, and his insight remains more valid than any economics that conservative Libertarians propound ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Laissez Faire is nothing more than a childish Christmas wish of no substance; just hope and myth, and smoke and mirrors. Fails every time we try even the tiniest bit.



"The greatest evils in our industrial system to-day are those which rise from the abuses of aggregated wealth; and our great problem is to overcome these evils and cut out these abuses. No one man can deal with this matter. It is the affair of the people as a whole. When aggregated wealth demands what is unfair, its immense power can be met only by the still greater power of the people as a whole, exerted in the only way it can be exerted, through the Government;..."
- Teddy Roosevelt 1910

 

[Dad2three]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

You have given us two answers, which is correct?

If the government were run on pay as you go as it was in the nineties, we would balance the budget.

Remember, the GOP was to worried that following Clinton's/Dems example (POLICIES) would pay off debt to fast? They took care of that

 

[NYcarbineer]

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

Having a credit card does not cause debt to be run up. You have to use the credit card and not pay it off in order to run up debt. See, a credit card is kinda like a gun. It doesn't do anything, unless you use it to do something. The object is blameless, the operator is at fault.

I have a credit card. I don't have a problem with increasing debt.

No one's keeping you in office for spending but not taxing to pay for it.

 

[SwimExpert]

No. We keep running up debt because the government has a credit card. Just like the individual as referred to in the OP.

Having a credit card does not cause debt to be run up. You have to use the credit card and not pay it off in order to run up debt. See, a credit card is kinda like a gun. It doesn't do anything, unless you use it to do something. The object is blameless, the operator is at fault.

I have a credit card. I don't have a problem with increasing debt.

No one's keeping you in office for spending but not taxing to pay for it.

That......I'm not sure that even qualifies as a complete sentence.

 

[SwimExpert]

In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data Tax Foundation

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!

Keynes wrote "The End of Laissez Faire" in 1926. He was correct then, and his insight remains more valid than any economics that conservative Libertarians propound ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Laissez Faire is nothing more than a childish Christmas wish of no substance; just hope and myth, and smoke and mirrors. Fails every time we try even the tiniest bit.



"The greatest evils in our industrial system to-day are those which rise from the abuses of aggregated wealth; and our great problem is to overcome these evils and cut out these abuses. No one man can deal with this matter. It is the affair of the people as a whole. When aggregated wealth demands what is unfair, its immense power can be met only by the still greater power of the people as a whole, exerted in the only way it can be exerted, through the Government;..."
- Teddy Roosevelt 1910

Translation: I'm going to babble on about an entirely different matter, reciting the party line propaganda about something else entirely, and pretend that my previous bullshit wasn't demolished.

 

[SwimExpert]

And ironically we keep running up government debt by not taxing enough to pay our bills,

No, we keep running up government debt by spending more than we can afford.

We can leave our children with an unrepayable massive debt and a shattered economy, or we can leave them liberty in a land where every individual has the opportunity to be whatever God intended us to be. All it takes is a little common sense and recognition of our own ability. Together we can forge a new beginning for America."
- Ronald Reagan: Address to the Nation on the Economy, Feb. 5, 1981


The irony of this speech is that the national debt was not out of control at all in 1981, in fact the national debt was at the lowest point it has ever been since World War II in 1980. In the speech Reagan cited national debt figures in raw dollar amounts, unadjusted for inflation and not tied to GDP. Those figures are essentially worthless and no economist would ever use them as a measure of the national debt. But presenting the national debt as a problem was a means of justifying significant cuts in domestic spending, which he framed as "redistribution".

How Reagan Sowed the Seeds of America s Demise


"Starving the beast" is a political strategy employed by American conservatives in order to limit government spending by cutting taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to force the federal government to reduce spending.


Before his election as President, then-candidate Ronald Reagan foreshadowed the strategy during the 1980 US Presidential debates, saying "John Anderson tells us that first we've got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you've got a kid that's extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker."


Starve the beast - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Do you remember 2001 when we had a budget surplus. Alan Greenspan testified before Congress in favor of the Bush tax cuts,"we are in danger of paying down the debt too fast". How absurd is that statement today! By the way, not a single GOPer voted for the 93 reconciliation act that led to the balanced budget and eventual surplus.

The Republicans would not pay down the debt when times were much better. Now they want to focus on deficits.
Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Blah, blah, blah. You did not say anything that refutes my post. The reason we keep running up debt is because we keep spending money we don't have. It's entirely possible to substantially cut spending and start turning budgetary surpluses what we can use to pay down the debt.

Weird, what happened the last time there were surpluses? Oh right after CLINTON'S first surplus the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut he had to veto to get 3 more. Cut the budget huh? lol

3/4ths of it is SS, Medicare or military. Where do we begin?


BTW, STARVING US OF REVENUES AS THEY BLEW UP SPENDING, THAT'S HOW 90%+ OF CURRENT DEBT CAN BE TRACED BACK TO REAGAN, BUSH AND BUSH POLICIES!

Can you please stop with the emotional rants stick to the subject at hand?