Five Reasons Why A National Balanced Budget Amendment Is Lunacy

[Boss]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

 

[Dovahkiin]

It does indeed increase economic growth when you run a deficit.

Look... You can have a job earning a paycheck and live off your credit cards. But regardless of what you do with the money from your paycheck, the interest on your credit card debt will finally catch up with you and you'll lose your credit privilege.

Obviously we can have a debt and a deficit and not fall off the face of the earth... we've been doing it for many years. However, our debt has continued to grow and now has reached critical mass. Our debt interest is killing us. It's like a great big ball and chain around our leg and it's getting bigger every year. You now have two democrats running for president who propose adding $20 trillion MORE to our $20 trillion debt... and they don't blink an eye about it. It's absolute insanity.

Why should they blink an eye about it? We are barely utilizing the countries possible productive activity.

 

[Dovahkiin]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

You are literally wrong.

 

[Dovahkiin]

It does indeed increase economic growth when you run a deficit.

Look... You can have a job earning a paycheck and live off your credit cards. But regardless of what you do with the money from your paycheck, the interest on your credit card debt will finally catch up with you and you'll lose your credit privilege.

Obviously we can have a debt and a deficit and not fall off the face of the earth... we've been doing it for many years. However, our debt has continued to grow and now has reached critical mass. Our debt interest is killing us. It's like a great big ball and chain around our leg and it's getting bigger every year. You now have two democrats running for president who propose adding $20 trillion MORE to our $20 trillion debt... and they don't blink an eye about it. It's absolute insanity.

It is impossible for us to default on the national debt. We have a fiat currency. Comparing credit card debt to the national debt is wrong, as I've pointed out MANY TIMES.
LOL. They've been saying the debt has reached 'critical mass' every year. You know what actually does harm the economy?
Think big deficits cause recessions
Cutting the debt and drastic deficit reductions/surpluses.

 

[Boss]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

You are literally wrong.

I'm literally checking out of this thread now. You're not worth the effort to talk to.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Absolutely! We should just abolish all taxation... the more government spends the more we make... so that would be great for the economy... none of us having to pay 35-40% of our paycheck in taxes anymore... think of all that extra money pouring into the economy!

Correct, and it would work perfectly if his main point is accurate------> 1. We have total control of our money, and 2. Debt doesn't matter.

What he is admiting by extrapolation, is that higher rates on SOME people are no more than punishment, because we actually do not need any money as the government can just create it.

And so now it is HIS turn to explain that if his theory is accurate, while all the nice lefty politicians have a tax on the middle class at all, and why he wants to RAISE taxes on anyone, for any reason.

We are waiting their Mr Lefty for your pearls of wisdom-) And be careful what you say, lolol. You either blow your own OP out of the water, or make the Democrats look like Attilla The Hun. In either case, it should be entertaining to watch you try and spin-)

My main point is accurate. We have control of our money. We are not like Greece.
I am against raising taxes, unless people begin to move towards another currency. Taxes help drive demand for the currency of our nation.
Taxes can also reduce aggregate demand.

So then, by your short summation, are we to assume that since................taxes drive the currency..........the more debt that is accumulated, the more tax revenue is needed to drive the currency at the same rate that would be enjoyed, if the debt was less? REREAD what I asked before you answer please-)

Taxes are the main reason people want the US currency, yes.
Why are you assuming we need to collect more revenue when their is more debt?

Because if the value of a dollar is tied to taxes, minus the debt owed, then the more debt we accumulate, the more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

Here is a little exercise-----> look at what a dollar was worth in 1920 in buying power, and what it is worth today. This devaluation did not happen because of the private sector, it happened because the Fed printed more dollars than the goods the private sector created.

If we follow your logic, there is no reason to save anything we make, because any interest we acrue through saving, is eaten up by the fed creating to many dollars. It is exactly why the stock market roared with all of the QE. Free dollars needed a place to make money, and just saving them would be done at a loss.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced. By economics 101, if we do try it, the dollar loses value, and every person who has 1 dollar saved, loses buying power with that dollar also, after the interest rate is deducted.

EXAMPLE----------> If I have a 100 dollar economy, and have 100 dollars in circulation, then I am 1 for 1. But, if I have a 100 dollar economy, have 100 dollars in circulation, then decide to print 100 dollars more, I have 200 dollars chasing 100 dollars worth of goods, meaning the price of said goods rises. Why? Because people can demand more for their goods.

And what about the guy/gal that saved 1 dollar from the last go round? Well, now he has to use that 1 dollar to buy goods that the price just went up on. Good luck with that!

The value of our fiat currency is indeed tied to taxes. Thanks for agreeing. This isn't the 30's.

more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

What makes you think we need to do this? It should be clear by now that the govt isn't constrained by taxing/borrowing.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced

I'm not disagreeing. The problem is, we have so many potential untapped resources. We need to run a deficit and begin utilizing these resources, getting us back to full employment, exporting more then importing..

 

[Dovahkiin]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

You are literally wrong.

I'm literally checking out of this thread now. You're not worth the effort to talk to.

Dude, your claim is wrong. I shouldn't have to explain why.

 

[imawhosure]

Correct, and it would work perfectly if his main point is accurate------> 1. We have total control of our money, and 2. Debt doesn't matter.

What he is admiting by extrapolation, is that higher rates on SOME people are no more than punishment, because we actually do not need any money as the government can just create it.

And so now it is HIS turn to explain that if his theory is accurate, while all the nice lefty politicians have a tax on the middle class at all, and why he wants to RAISE taxes on anyone, for any reason.

We are waiting their Mr Lefty for your pearls of wisdom-) And be careful what you say, lolol. You either blow your own OP out of the water, or make the Democrats look like Attilla The Hun. In either case, it should be entertaining to watch you try and spin-)

My main point is accurate. We have control of our money. We are not like Greece.
I am against raising taxes, unless people begin to move towards another currency. Taxes help drive demand for the currency of our nation.
Taxes can also reduce aggregate demand.

So then, by your short summation, are we to assume that since................taxes drive the currency..........the more debt that is accumulated, the more tax revenue is needed to drive the currency at the same rate that would be enjoyed, if the debt was less? REREAD what I asked before you answer please-)

Taxes are the main reason people want the US currency, yes.
Why are you assuming we need to collect more revenue when their is more debt?

Because if the value of a dollar is tied to taxes, minus the debt owed, then the more debt we accumulate, the more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

Here is a little exercise-----> look at what a dollar was worth in 1920 in buying power, and what it is worth today. This devaluation did not happen because of the private sector, it happened because the Fed printed more dollars than the goods the private sector created.

If we follow your logic, there is no reason to save anything we make, because any interest we acrue through saving, is eaten up by the fed creating to many dollars. It is exactly why the stock market roared with all of the QE. Free dollars needed a place to make money, and just saving them would be done at a loss.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced. By economics 101, if we do try it, the dollar loses value, and every person who has 1 dollar saved, loses buying power with that dollar also, after the interest rate is deducted.

EXAMPLE----------> If I have a 100 dollar economy, and have 100 dollars in circulation, then I am 1 for 1. But, if I have a 100 dollar economy, have 100 dollars in circulation, then decide to print 100 dollars more, I have 200 dollars chasing 100 dollars worth of goods, meaning the price of said goods rises. Why? Because people can demand more for their goods.

And what about the guy/gal that saved 1 dollar from the last go round? Well, now he has to use that 1 dollar to buy goods that the price just went up on. Good luck with that!

The value of our fiat currency is indeed tied to taxes. Thanks for agreeing. This isn't the 30's.

more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

What makes you think we need to do this? It should be clear by now that the govt isn't constrained by taxing/borrowing.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced

I'm not disagreeing. The problem is, we have so many potential untapped resources. We need to run a deficit and begin utilizing these resources, getting us back to full employment, exporting more then importing..

OK, untapped resources------->who/whom is stopping the tapping, and who/whom taps them? The government allows, but does not do the actual work, it is a policy that creates this. We both know who is stopping it, and if we can't agree on this one, then I give up!

 

[Dovahkiin]

My main point is accurate. We have control of our money. We are not like Greece.
I am against raising taxes, unless people begin to move towards another currency. Taxes help drive demand for the currency of our nation.
Taxes can also reduce aggregate demand.

So then, by your short summation, are we to assume that since................taxes drive the currency..........the more debt that is accumulated, the more tax revenue is needed to drive the currency at the same rate that would be enjoyed, if the debt was less? REREAD what I asked before you answer please-)

Taxes are the main reason people want the US currency, yes.
Why are you assuming we need to collect more revenue when their is more debt?

Because if the value of a dollar is tied to taxes, minus the debt owed, then the more debt we accumulate, the more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

Here is a little exercise-----> look at what a dollar was worth in 1920 in buying power, and what it is worth today. This devaluation did not happen because of the private sector, it happened because the Fed printed more dollars than the goods the private sector created.

If we follow your logic, there is no reason to save anything we make, because any interest we acrue through saving, is eaten up by the fed creating to many dollars. It is exactly why the stock market roared with all of the QE. Free dollars needed a place to make money, and just saving them would be done at a loss.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced. By economics 101, if we do try it, the dollar loses value, and every person who has 1 dollar saved, loses buying power with that dollar also, after the interest rate is deducted.

EXAMPLE----------> If I have a 100 dollar economy, and have 100 dollars in circulation, then I am 1 for 1. But, if I have a 100 dollar economy, have 100 dollars in circulation, then decide to print 100 dollars more, I have 200 dollars chasing 100 dollars worth of goods, meaning the price of said goods rises. Why? Because people can demand more for their goods.

And what about the guy/gal that saved 1 dollar from the last go round? Well, now he has to use that 1 dollar to buy goods that the price just went up on. Good luck with that!

The value of our fiat currency is indeed tied to taxes. Thanks for agreeing. This isn't the 30's.

more tax rates or tax revenue have to rise to keep the dollar at the same valuation.

What makes you think we need to do this? It should be clear by now that the govt isn't constrained by taxing/borrowing.

Today, to keep the currency stable, we can NOT have more money printed than goods produced

I'm not disagreeing. The problem is, we have so many potential untapped resources. We need to run a deficit and begin utilizing these resources, getting us back to full employment, exporting more then importing..

OK, untapped resources------->who/whom is stopping the tapping, and who/whom taps them? The government allows, but does not do the actual work, it is a policy that creates this. We both know who is stopping it, and if we can't agree on this one, then I give up!

The private sector never fully taps resources. This is where the public sector needs to step in. The govt also has the role, or should have the role, of boosting the private sector. I agree that the govt is literally stopping the tapping of resources, have you heard of NAIRU? Labor is a valuable resource.

 

[Boss]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

You are literally wrong.

I'm literally checking out of this thread now. You're not worth the effort to talk to.

Dude, your claim is wrong. I shouldn't have to explain why.

No... MY claim is NOT wrong. Governments do not produce or create anything. That is only done by individuals using their labor, skill, talent and ingenuity. Every dollar the government spends comes from the taxpayers or they have to borrow or print it. There is no other resource.

Keynesian policy is an assault on individual liberty and that's exactly why you could give me NO examples of where it has enabled or enhanced individual liberty. You also can't give examples of where it has improved economies without making wild speculations that the economy wouldn't have improved otherwise. Economy is cyclical regardless of policy.

Keynesian policy leads to austerity, not prosperity.

 

[Dovahkiin]

"The government doesn't produce or create anything."
And this is why we need to educate our children better.

Unfortunately, popping off little insults doesn't address the point.

You are literally wrong.

I'm literally checking out of this thread now. You're not worth the effort to talk to.

Dude, your claim is wrong. I shouldn't have to explain why.

No... MY claim is NOT wrong. Governments do not produce or create anything. That is only done by individuals using their labor, skill, talent and ingenuity. Every dollar the government spends comes from the taxpayers or they have to borrow or print it. There is no other resource.

Keynesian policy is an assault on individual liberty and that's exactly why you could give me NO examples of where it has enabled or enhanced individual liberty. You also can't give examples of where it has improved economies without making wild speculations that the economy wouldn't have improved otherwise. Economy is cyclical regardless of policy.

Keynesian policy leads to austerity, not prosperity.

You also can't give examples of where it has improved economies without making wild speculations that the economy wouldn't have improved otherwise.

Yes I can.
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective: The US Recession of 1920–1921: Some Austrian Myths

The average duration of US recessions in the post-1945 era of classic Keynesian demand management (1945–1980) and the neoliberal era (1980–2010) has been about 11 months (see Carbaugh 2010: 248 and the data in Knoop 2010: 13; curiously, there has only been one post-1945 US recession that lasted 18 months: the Great Recession of December 2007–June 2009, which was much worse than the 1920–1921 downturn). The average duration of recessions in peacetime from 1854 to 1919 was 22 months (Knoop 2010: 13), and the average duration of recessions from 1919 to 1945 was 18 months (Knoop 2010: 13).

In the post 1945 period this was cut to about 11 months. Thus the average duration of recessions was essentially cut in half after 1945, because of countercyclical fiscal and monetary policy. Even expansions in the post-1945 business cycle became longer: the average duration of post-1945 expansions was 50 months. By contrast, the average duration of expansions from 1854 to 1919 was 27 months, and the average from 1919 to 1945 was 35 months (Knoop 2010: 13). In other words, the average length of post-1945 expansions became 43% higher compared with that of 1919 to 1945, and 85% higher than between 1854 to 1919.

Macroeconomic performance after 1945 has been superior, without any doubt, to that of the previous gold standard eras. The recession of 1920–1921 with a duration of 18 months was in fact of long duration relative to the average of post-1945 recessions. Keynesian and even neoliberal economic management of the business cycle has been superior to the system that existed before 1933.

Governments do, in fact, produce things. The us dollar is FIAT, issued at will by the currency authority, the us government.
Claiming keynesian policy leads to austerity is hilarious. Have any evidence?

 

[Boss]

Yes I can.

No, all you continue to do is post speculative Keynesian propaganda. There were measures enacted after the Great Depression to prevent the stock market from crashing.

Governments do, in fact, produce things.

So that's why you presented me a long list of things governments produce?
"The dollar is FIAT" is not something the government produced... you need to try again because that was weak.

Claiming keynesian policy leads to austerity is hilarious. Have any evidence?

Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland... to name a few.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Yes I can.

No, all you continue to do is post speculative Keynesian propaganda. There were measures enacted after the Great Depression to prevent the stock market from crashing.

Governments do, in fact, produce things.

So that's why you presented me a long list of things governments produce?
"The dollar is FIAT" is not something the government produced... you need to try again because that was weak.

Claiming keynesian policy leads to austerity is hilarious. Have any evidence?

Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland... to name a few.

Yes, and which of those countries above has control of their currency? They're on the euro, which has to be borrowed. Their governments do not control the currency like ours does here.
It's not propaganda, it's historical fact that you fail to actually refute, you resort to ideological ramblings, which I've come to expect at this point.
The us government literally creates dollars, are you stupid?
(Which of the countries you list off is a fiat currency regime?)

 

[Boss]

The us government literally creates dollars, are you stupid?

No.. sorry... it doesn't. It creates currency. The dollar is a monetary unit.

 

[Dovahkiin]

The us government literally creates dollars, are you stupid?

No.. sorry... it doesn't. It creates currency. The dollar is a monetary unit.

The united states dollar is the CURRENCY of the united states. Also, Deficit spending adds net created govt assets, whether it be bonds, or dollars.

 

[Boss]

The united states dollar is the CURRENCY of the united states. Also, Deficit spending adds net created govt assets, whether it be bonds, or dollars.

Right... it's the currency. The government doesn't create the currency. If it could, it could just make $1 = $1,000,000. The government can PRINT currency, but it only decreases the value of the currency. The market creates value in the currency, not the government. The government also doesn't create assets in bonds. If it could, it would simply create a bond worth $20 trillion and we wouldn't have any more debt. The value of bonds are determined (created) by the market.

You're really exposing yourself as a very retarded person here. The government doesn't produce or create anything. The PEOPLE do.

 

[my2¢]

Since October (through January) here is the expense for interest on the national debt the government has paid: $147,857,540,343.99. I could certainly think of better use for that money, in fact, it is dough I would prefer the government would not have to come up with in the 1st place.