Reducing the National Debt

[Old Rocks]

The debt is NOW more than 100% of GDP. A number most said just a short time ago would put Greece into default. Many believe that the ND should be no more than 70% of GDP.

No one is really concerned about paying back the debt, especially those most likely to tell you that your great-great grankids will have to do so (but only the debt run up by Repiblicans - debt run up by Dems is OK).

No... eventually the debt will cause an economic and then societal and then governmental collapse - a small price to pay just to maintain (relatively) short-term partisan political power.

Convert your 401k to ammunition - it will someday be the only valid currency.

Dumb. Brass, powder, and lead have little nutrative value. Unless you are planning on cannabalism.

 

[Old Rocks]

Really? Demand doesn't change with an increase in price?

Nope.

Surely you know that is not true.

It is true. And don't call me Shirley.

Ah. See, that's what I thought. You don't know what the Demand for a good means. It means a variety of quantities of that good over a variety of prices. This is why it's expressed as a curved line. You're fixating on the quantity at one price. That's different.
Didn't think you would.

If you increase the cost of labor, the price has to go up. No ifs, ands, or buts

False.

the price goes up and the business fails or at a minimum cuts jobs.

OR ....

Profits go down.

Last year was a record year for many corporations. The idea that if they suddenly paid workers a couple bucks more per hour it would cause them to go out of business, is just ludicrous and untrue. Companies in the U.S. have $1.9T in cash they are sitting on, while average salaries have grown in the past two years by 1%.

Wages could go up. Profits could go down. Consumption would go up. Things would be better.

Oh, but the amount the 1% got out of this deal would go down, cannot have that. Far more important than the state of the nation. Just ask any of the 'Conservatives' here.

 

[merrill]

Jobs Jobs Jobs is the key

Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs is the key to new economic growth,new wealth for the nation as a whole and to reasonable debt reduction.

A variety of avenues need to be put in place... YES!


Go To: Healthcare-NOW! - HR 676
====================================================
National Health Insurance For All = Jobs Jobs Jobs like our competing industrialized nations offer.
====================================================
The nations ability to attract or develop new industry is at stake. We're talking jobs jobs jobs. We’re talking about the need for a new strong economy for 8 million or more jobs lost. Perhaps as many as 15 million new jobs that cannot be outsourced.

Is the most expensive medical insurance in the world good for business? No it is anti business.

HR 676 National Health Insurance For All is key to recovery. Medicare Insurance for All is fiscally responsible.

Smart medical insurance improves our quality of life and our wallets!

City government,small and large business would be money ahead with National Health Insurance/HR 676. Taxpayers would be money ahead.

National Health Insurance does not remove competition from the actual health care industry. It will be alive and well. Profits will be based on customer service and clinic performance based on the clients experience. This is my perception of competition.

I love competition but maintenance of someone's good health should not be based on competition. It should be based on immediate availability not on how much one can afford to spend with an insurance corporation.

The thing I love about National Health Insurance is that it allows MY tax dollars to provide health care to my family.

AND it brings MY tax dollars back home.

AND it allows anyone to choose which doctor or clinic they choose. No booklet of of choices would be necessary ever again.

AND National Health Insurance would be there 365 days a year,24 hours a day and 7 days a week no matter what.

AND no more deductibles and co pays that in reality relieve the insurance industry of their responsibility.

National Health Insurance would make the USA far more attractive to new industry. Perhaps it would bring some american jobs back to the USA aka home.

AS I stated Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs Jobs is the key to new economic growth,new wealth for the nation as a whole and to reasonable debt reduction.

A variety of avenues need to be put in place... YES!

1. Do like other nations that have our jobs = provide health insurance to all

2. Spend tax dollars to invest in the USA = new industry = new jobs = new economic growth

3. Stop using new housing starts as a measure of the economy

4. Invest in education absolutely!

5. Stop bailing out banks and mismanaged industrials

6. Throw politicians in jail for breaking laws = good for the economy

7. Terminate corporate funding of all our elections

8. Immediately begin work on the interstate highway infrastructure

9. Tighten home buying guidelines

10. Bring on all forms of new energy = new jobs and new manufacturing opportunities

The Plan:

Renewing America's Economy (2004) | Union of Concerned Scientists

 

[Wiseacre]

Really? Demand doesn't change with an increase in price?

Nope.

Surely you know that is not true.

It is true. And don't call me Shirley.

Ah. See, that's what I thought. You don't know what the Demand for a good means. It means a variety of quantities of that good over a variety of prices. This is why it's expressed as a curved line. You're fixating on the quantity at one price. That's different.
Didn't think you would.

If you increase the cost of labor, the price has to go up. No ifs, ands, or buts

False.

the price goes up and the business fails or at a minimum cuts jobs.

OR ....

Profits go down.

Last year was a record year for many corporations. The idea that if they suddenly paid workers a couple bucks more per hour it would cause them to go out of business, is just ludicrous and untrue. Companies in the U.S. have $1.9T in cash they are sitting on, while average salaries have grown in the past two years by 1%.

Wages could go up. Profits could go down. Consumption would go up. Things would be better.

Thanks for your point of view.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The debt is NOW more than 100% of GDP. A number most said just a short time ago would put Greece into default. Many believe that the ND should be no more than 70% of GDP.

No one is really concerned about paying back the debt, especially those most likely to tell you that your great-great grankids will have to do so (but only the debt run up by Repiblicans - debt run up by Dems is OK).

No... eventually the debt will cause an economic and then societal and then governmental collapse - a small price to pay just to maintain (relatively) short-term partisan political power.

Convert your 401k to ammunition - it will someday be the only valid currency.

Dumb. Brass, powder, and lead have little nutrative value. Unless you are planning on cannabalism.

Those that are armed can get whatever food is available - if not on their own, then from those who are not.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The Plan:
Renewing America's Economy (2004) | Union of Concerned Scientists

More horsepuckey.

 

[editec]

The national debt isn't the problem.

 

[tenthertoo]

The national debt isn't the problem.

What is the problem?

 

[freedombecki]

Trying to even get a handle on the magnitude of the ND is a real challenge. Most of us, I think, can't even get what $16,000,000,000,000 (did I get it right) really is.

It's a number that defies comprehension.

From here down all numbers are approximate.(and many probably wrong - remember I'm just a retired working stiff)

The debt is NOW more than 100% of GDP. A number most said just a short time ago would put Greece into default. Many believe that the ND should be no more than 70% of GDP.

Let's start there. 70% would be about $11 trillion. So let's look at what it would take to get there.

Our current deficit is running 1.4 -1.5 trillion a year. To get the ND down to we'd have to generate an annual surplus of 100 billion a year for 50 years. That would require a turn around of 1.5 - 1.6 trillion a year.

Of course the task is aggravated by several very significant issues.

• Current interest of Fed notes is about 1/2 of 1 % - The average is about 5%. At that rate the interest would be 100 billion a year more that would have to be added to the 1.5 trillion turn around number (sheesh I'm getting out of breath)
• Taking more than 2 trillion out of the economy would create a loss in federal revenue of (about) 200 billion?? - we'll have to add THAT to the turn around number
• And many more I'm sure the fertile minds on the forum will add

I got lost somewhere in the second paragraph so y'all help me out here!

To understand what a trillion is, one trillion seconds equals 31,546 years, because

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]How Big is a Trillion?[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the U.S., one trillion is written as the number "1" followed by 12 zeros (1,000,000,000,000). One year of clock time =[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](60sec/min) x (60 min/hr) x (24 hr/da) x (365.25 da) = 3.16 x 107 sec[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One trillion seconds of ordinary clock time =[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]( 1012 sec)/( 3.16 x 107 sec/yr) = 31,546 years!

[/FONT]

$16 trillion if noted in seconds would equal 504,736 years. Imho, $16 trillion is not a manageable load of debt. Just sayin
​

 

[M14 Shooter]

Imho, $16 trillion is not a manageable load of debt. Just sayin

It is when a Democrat is Presiddent and there's an election to buy.

 

[DiamondDave]

The national debt isn't the problem.

What is the problem?

People like edit who blindly ignore that our huge debt is a problem and continue to vote for those who wish to increase spending, increase the size of government, all the while trying to disproportionately tax earners and producers in an attempt to redistribute wealth and services so that votes may be bought

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Increasing the tax base would be a great place to start. C'mon private sector... bring back the good paying jobs so currently unemployed people can start doing their part in lowering the National Debt.

Oh.... that's right. They are allowed to profiteer.. I forgot.

Yes increasing the tax base.. implementing the flat tax with zero exceptions, zero loopholes, and no salary floor.

....Or, better YET.....an option that's......

....PROVEN to work!!!!

Whatta concept, huh?​

"Forbes – a business magazine not especially prone to fits of liberalism – found that over the past fifty years, Democratic presidents have had substantially more success with economic prosperity during their terms than have Republicans."

Economic Prosperity And The Presidents​

 

[DiamondDave]

And the colorful posting of winger links once again, by Mr. Shithead

yawn

 

[Bern80]

There is no reason we need to pay down our national debt.

True, my State repudiated its debt in the 1880's - I understand ilDuce repudiated his COUNTRY's debt in the 30's (I think)

I do think the consequences would be a disaster however

No need to do that either.

If we hand our grandkids a debt of $20T when they have a GDP of $45T, absolutely no one will be complaining.

And what reason is there to expect our GDP will reach that?

 

[Bern80]

The national debt isn't the problem.

Both you and ActuallyIsStupid both....tell me, why is something that would be a real problem for any private business, household or individual not a problem for the government?

 

[DontBeStupid]

True, my State repudiated its debt in the 1880's - I understand ilDuce repudiated his COUNTRY's debt in the 30's (I think)

I do think the consequences would be a disaster however

No need to do that either.

If we hand our grandkids a debt of $20T when they have a GDP of $45T, absolutely no one will be complaining.

And what reason is there to expect our GDP will reach that?

In 1970, our GDP was $1T and our debt was $400B. We now have a GDP of $14.5T and if we had the same debt level, none of you would be crying right now.

That's how you handle the debt. You hold it in check and let GDP grow.

 

[DontBeStupid]

The national debt isn't the problem.

Both you and ActuallyIsStupid both....tell me, why is something that would be a real problem for any private business, household or individual not a problem for the government?

Because the government is not a private business, household or individual.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

And the colorful posting of winger links once again, by Mr. Shithead

yawn

I always enjoy smackin' the shit outta your sophomoric-tripe.....

September 27, 2000​

"Eight years ago, our future was at risk," Clinton said Wednesday morning. "Economic growth was low, unemployment was high, interest rates were high, the federal debt had quadrupled in the previous 12 years. When Vice President Gore and I took office, the budget deficit was $290 billion, and it was projected this year the budget deficit would be $455 billion."

Instead, the president explained, the $5.7 trillion national debt has been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years -- $223 billion this year alone.

This represents, Clinton said, "the largest one-year debt reduction in the history of the United States."

Another Record Budget Surplus​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Clintonomics II​

. . . . ​

 

[Bern80]

No need to do that either.

If we hand our grandkids a debt of $20T when they have a GDP of $45T, absolutely no one will be complaining.

And what reason is there to expect our GDP will reach that?

In 1970, our GDP was $1T and our debt was $400B. We now have a GDP of $14.5T and if we had the same debt level, none of you would be crying right now.

That's how you handle the debt. You hold it in check and let GDP grow.

And one of those things isn't happening (debt being held in check). And you didn't answer the other question what reason is there to believe that GDP will triple in two generations time? Citing that GDP has gone up before isn't good enough. That didn't happen in a vacuum though I agree with your premise. Growing debt is only a problem if income doesn't go up with it. Economic conditions allowed that to happen. What such conditions are in effect now or do you foresee coming into effect in the near future that will allow GDP to increase to that point?