CDZ How important is spending and debt in government?

[Slade3200]

For those of you who object to the debt, what specifically are you objecting to? Discretionary spending or the sale of treasury bonds or both?

 

[jwoodie]

For those of you who object to the debt, what specifically are you objecting to? Discretionary spending or the sale of treasury bonds or both?

Automatic cost-of-living increases. ALL federal programs should be frozen at current per capita spending levels until the the federal budget is balanced, which will then eventually occur through economic growth and inflation.

 

[sealybobo]

When we "spend" on the debt, we are simply crediting accounts. Most of the time, the money created from thin air used to credit the accounts of those who have treasury securities never enters the economy at all. Keep in mind this is all in us dollars.

It is true that only about $5 trillion or so of our $19+ trillion dollar debt, growing by mega millions every single day, is owed to other countries. It is also true that the government can print whatever money it needs to print to pay down any portion of the debt. It doesn't do that because each dollar it creates out of thin air results in a decrease in value of the money already printed. Print enough dollars out of thin air and the value of our money becomes critically devalued and/or even worthless. And then nobody is willing to accept it so the economy collapses, nobody is willing to lend us money that would be paid paid in worthless dollars, and we become a third world country. Greece, Italy et al are relatively small countries that the European Union was able to prop up sufficiently to prevent a major EU recession.

Who is there to prop up the USA when other countries are no longer willing to lend, there is no way to pay owed entitlements and/or the value of the bonds etc. sold to our own people, and it all ultimately collapses under the weight of its own debt?

Didn't they wipe out a lot of that money they printed after the 2007 great recession? A lot of people lost their homes and half their 401K's. I believe they got rid of a lot of the $ they created out of thin air by having a crash. I'm suggesting it was man made and done on purpose. THey can create or manufacture a crash anytime they want.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Both sides accuse the other.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of irresponsibly cutting taxes and spending but massively increasing the national debt.

The Republicans accuse the Democrats of irresponsibly increasing taxes and spending and massively increasing the national debt.

So which is it? Does cutting taxes and spending increase the debt? Or does more taxes and spending increase the debt?

And what is most important? Spending on what is considered important? Or the debt?

How much national debt can we stand?

And what, if anything, should be done about it? Can be done about it?

I think that the spending on the poor is absolutely ridiculous and needs to be stopped. After 20 trillion dollars of spending since 1964, the poor are still poor and need to get a boot to their arse. When you take away their ability to sit on their butts all day without earning the cash, then they keep doing the same thing. Take the trillion dollars a year and pay down the debt, not only will more people be working, but the debt would be gone in 20 years.. Win, Win.....

War on poverty cost
$22 trillion -- three
The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion - NCPA
www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25288

 

[Foxfyre]

When we "spend" on the debt, we are simply crediting accounts. Most of the time, the money created from thin air used to credit the accounts of those who have treasury securities never enters the economy at all. Keep in mind this is all in us dollars.

It is true that only about $5 trillion or so of our $19+ trillion dollar debt, growing by mega millions every single day, is owed to other countries. It is also true that the government can print whatever money it needs to print to pay down any portion of the debt. It doesn't do that because each dollar it creates out of thin air results in a decrease in value of the money already printed. Print enough dollars out of thin air and the value of our money becomes critically devalued and/or even worthless. And then nobody is willing to accept it so the economy collapses, nobody is willing to lend us money that would be paid paid in worthless dollars, and we become a third world country. Greece, Italy et al are relatively small countries that the European Union was able to prop up sufficiently to prevent a major EU recession.

Who is there to prop up the USA when other countries are no longer willing to lend, there is no way to pay owed entitlements and/or the value of the bonds etc. sold to our own people, and it all ultimately collapses under the weight of its own debt?

Didn't they wipe out a lot of that money they printed after the 2007 great recession? A lot of people lost their homes and half their 401K's. I believe they got rid of a lot of the $ they created out of thin air by having a crash. I'm suggesting it was man made and done on purpose. THey can create or manufacture a crash anytime they want.

The housing bubble, building over a long time, that burst and caused the 2008 crash was certainly man made out of irresponsibility, blind greed, and a congress unwilling to act to deal with it. But that did not in any way bring down the national debt that continue to rise at an alarming rate, was already hugely unacceptable by the end of Bush 43's term and almost doubled again during the Obama administration.

On inauguration day in 2001, the national debt was $5.7 trillion
On inauguration day in 2009, the national debt was $10.626 trillion
On inauguration day in 2017, the national debt was $19.944 trillion

The debt increased in the Bush administration by 4.9 trillion.
The debt increased in the Obama administration by 9.3 trillion

Since inauguration day in January the national debt has increased to $20.6 trillion or has increased by 1.3 trillion so it has not slowed down. We have been operating under Obama's last budget up to October 1, so we will have to see if anything improves in a 100% Trump economy but I am not optimistic unless the culture in Washington completely changes and law makers start tending to business. Currently they are the permanent poltiical class who seem to care little about anything other than making themselves look good and increase their personal power, prestige, influence, and personal fortunes. I am pretty sure they they'll have theirs and be long gone so that somebody else gets the blame when the whole thing collapses around us.

 

[Foxfyre]

Both sides accuse the other.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of irresponsibly cutting taxes and spending but massively increasing the national debt.

The Republicans accuse the Democrats of irresponsibly increasing taxes and spending and massively increasing the national debt.

So which is it? Does cutting taxes and spending increase the debt? Or does more taxes and spending increase the debt?

And what is most important? Spending on what is considered important? Or the debt?

How much national debt can we stand?

And what, if anything, should be done about it? Can be done about it?

I think that the spending on the poor is absolutely ridiculous and needs to be stopped. After 20 trillion dollars of spending since 1964, the poor are still poor and need to get a boot to their arse. When you take away their ability to sit on their butts all day without earning the cash, then they keep doing the same thing. Take the trillion dollars a year and pay down the debt, not only will more people be working, but the debt would be gone in 20 years.. Win, Win.....

War on poverty cost
$22 trillion -- three
The War on Poverty has cost $22 trillion -- three times more than what the government has spent on all wars in American history. Federal and state governments spend $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars on America's 80 means-tested welfare programs annually.
The War on Poverty Has Cost $22 Trillion - NCPA
www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=25288

But there we have the elephant in the room. Even reducing future spending on any of the 'poverty' or 'beneficial' programs will generate hateful headlines that will quickly go viral: "President (whomever) or Republicans (or whatever) slash or abolish programs for the poor or college kids or the elderly or women or whatever minority, etc." Images of evil Republicans pushing granny off the cliff or snatching food out of the mouths of babes appear.

It takes a politician with more courage and intellectual honesty than most of the people in Washington have to withstand that kind of negative publicity, however dishonest that publicity is.

 

[sealybobo]

The biggest problem we face is that excessive short-term borrowing has turned our national debt into an ARM with no upper limit. As a result, debt service payments could go up by multiples while GDP growth is limited to a few percent. Once we start borrowing just to pay the interest, we will have entered asymptotic curve territory.

But Republicans aren't doing anything about it.

 

[Leo123]

Both sides accuse the other.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of irresponsibly cutting taxes and spending but massively increasing the national debt.

The Republicans accuse the Democrats of irresponsibly increasing taxes and spending and massively increasing the national debt.

So which is it? Does cutting taxes and spending increase the debt? Or does more taxes and spending increase the debt?

And what is most important? Spending on what is considered important? Or the debt?

How much national debt can we stand?

And what, if anything, should be done about it? Can be done about it?

Fiat money makes monetary policy political.

 

[Foxfyre]

Both sides accuse the other.

The Democrats accuse the Republicans of irresponsibly cutting taxes and spending but massively increasing the national debt.

The Republicans accuse the Democrats of irresponsibly increasing taxes and spending and massively increasing the national debt.

So which is it? Does cutting taxes and spending increase the debt? Or does more taxes and spending increase the debt?

And what is most important? Spending on what is considered important? Or the debt?

How much national debt can we stand?

And what, if anything, should be done about it? Can be done about it?

Fiat money makes monetary policy political.

But it requires some form of government to determine what value money will have. And it is a much simpler and more efficient means to buy and sell goods than is the barter system.

But whatever value government places on the various forms of currency, if we owe more than we receive, we have accumulated debt.

And some debt is reasonable and fiscally responsible such as appropriate debt to own a home or in business.

And government may have very good reasons to incur some debt for important spending it must do to meet its constitutional responsibilities.

But when is debt at the personal level, the corporate level, the city or state level, or the federal level a bad thing?

 

[MarathonMike]

There is a debt level somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 Trillion where it will be literally impossible to EVER pay it down unless we artificially depressed interest rates to zero. Since we are over $20 Trillion, it might be time to start taking debt seriously rather than spending money like spoiled rich kids.

 

[Votto]

There is a debt level somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 Trillion where it will be literally impossible to EVER pay it down unless we artificially depressed interest rates to zero. Since we are over $20 Trillion, it might be time to start taking debt seriously rather than spending money like spoiled rich kids.

Anarchist! How dare you question the government?

Spend, spend, spend!!!!

Not to worry, soon you will have the anarchy you desire

 

[sealybobo]

There is a debt level somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 Trillion where it will be literally impossible to EVER pay it down unless we artificially depressed interest rates to zero. Since we are over $20 Trillion, it might be time to start taking debt seriously rather than spending money like spoiled rich kids.

Republicans will get on board as soon as a democrat is back in the white house

 

[MarathonMike]

There is a debt level somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 Trillion where it will be literally impossible to EVER pay it down unless we artificially depressed interest rates to zero. Since we are over $20 Trillion, it might be time to start taking debt seriously rather than spending money like spoiled rich kids.

Republicans will get on board as soon as a democrat is back in the white house

Tackling the debt is not sexy and it's always the other guys fault.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is a debt level somewhere in the neighborhood of $25 Trillion where it will be literally impossible to EVER pay it down unless we artificially depressed interest rates to zero. Since we are over $20 Trillion, it might be time to start taking debt seriously rather than spending money like spoiled rich kids.

Well thank you for putting a number up there. $25 trillion is the tipping point you think?

I think we/re closer than that.

So what should we stop spending money on? I have a LONG list of suggestions.