Ten Inconvenient Truths About The National Debt: It's Worse Than You Think...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by paulitician, Jul 31, 2012.

  1. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,137
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,976
    1.) The amount by which the public debt — the portion of the national debt not borrowed by the U.S. government from funds it administers — has increased since President Obama took office is unprecedented, not politics as usual: more than $4.75 trillion (more than 75%), according to the Treasury Department. If the president’s second-term budget is implemented, he will end up (according to the Congressional Budget Office) increasing the public debt by $8.9 trillion. That exceeds the public debt incurred by all previous presidents combined — by more than $2.6 trillion.

    2.) Large as the public debt is, it doesn’t include amounts the government has promised to pay but lacks the funds to pay. For example, the Social Security and Medicare trustees have estimated that we need more than $63 trillion right now to make promised payments for Social Security and Medicare benefits not covered by current Social Security and Medicare taxes.

    3.) The government can’t keep incurring debt without consequence. High debt slows economic growth (meaning fewer jobs and less income), according to one study by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff and a second study by Manmohan Kumar and Jaejoon Woo (refuting the claim that it is slow growth that causes higher public debt and not vice versa).

    4.) It’s not like the government is skimping on spending. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has estimated that this year the federal government will spend 24.3 cents out of every dollar of the value of all final goods we produce and services we provide (add state and local expenditures and that figure increases to 44.2 cents).

    5.) Interest payments on the debt are skyrocketing. The CBO has estimated that the president’s proposals will more than triple interest on the public debt from $237 billion in 2013 to $743 billion in 2022 (more than the Department of Defense is spending on military programs and more than seven times what the Department of Education is spending). That money will enrich other countries (the Treasury Department estimates that almost half of the debt is held by foreign investors).

    6.) There aren’t enough rich people to balance the budget on their backs. Ending President Bush’s income and estate tax cuts for the “rich” (defined as individuals with taxable income exceeding $200,000 and couples with taxable income exceeding $250,000) would (according to the OMB) reduce the 2013 deficit by less than 5% ($46.6 billion)...

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/27/ten-inconvenient-truths-about-the-national-debt/#ixzz22D4Fwj62
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
  2. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,263
    Thanks Received:
    1,402
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,081
    It's all Bush's fault in 3...2...1...
     
  3. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    32,792
    Thanks Received:
    6,624
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +11,110
    SS is pulling in less surplus...Under Bush and under Clinton, they had huge SS and Medicare surplus funds that were used....(borrowed) to lower the supposed deficits.....

    We have more boomers retiring and less of them working and have smaller Social security surplus to borrow from to lower the deficit now and future presidents will have no SS surplus to hide their deficits at all....because the day of the big SS surplus funds is over... thus more borrowing from creditors like China, Saudi Arabia, Japan etc....
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,174
    Thanks Received:
    10,170
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,745
    yeah and obummer takes the above scenario and decides to "give folks a thousand dollars" and cuts the amount of ss withdrawn from paychecks. It's gonna eat your asses up in 20 years. It makes me chuckle at your stupidity.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. DontBeStupid
    Offline

    DontBeStupid Look it up!

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,463
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Ratings:
    +422
    I see Pauli is once again copying and pasting. Such fun.

    1) When Bush was in office, he set a then record for increasing the debt. When Reagan was in office, he set a then record for increasing the debt. If Romney is elected, he will set a new record for increasing the debt. In short, using non-inflation adjusted numbers to talk about "records" means absolutely nothing.

    2) $63T over how long? That's not for one year, 5 years or even 10 years. Dropping large numbers with no time frame is dishonest to the conversation. I've seen that number reported as how much we need over 75 years! Very different from what you're presenting.

    3) High debt CAN slow economic growth. If interest rates are high and investors are putting money into savings bonds and not into private companies, that is bad. This is called "crowding out". This is not happening right now as interest rates are at historic lows and will be for a couple more years at least.

    4) 24.3 cents, or in other words, 24.3% of GDP. Funny how you now use a measure that is adjusted for inflation and applicable over varying time periods. Why didn't you do that before? Regardless, 24.3%, while higher than our historic average, is not radically high. Reagan had a high of 23.5% and an average of 22%. The first Bush also had an average around 22%.

    5) Again, no adjustment for inflation. Why are you jumping back and forth? That's just dishonest. Current interest payments are 1.58% of GDP. In 2022 they would be 3.68%. Higher? Yes. Skyrocketing? No. And, while half go to foreign countries, several of those are our allies: Japan, the UK, Canada; and where does the other half go? Back to U.S. citizens.

    6) Absolutely no one is suggesting we balance the budget on the wealthy alone. No one. I assume you only ever talk about this because you don't want to talk about how we could actually balance the budget by taxing business profits. In 2011, U.S. corporations set a new record for profits, some $6.6T. This is after all payroll is met, all expenses paid and all dividends paid. If we raised income taxes on just those businesses by 22.7 percentage points, we would completely eliminate our budget deficit. And that cost could not be passed on to customers, because it is a tax on money after expenses.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. paulitician
    Offline

    paulitician Platinum Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    38,401
    Thanks Received:
    4,137
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,976
    So what's your point?
     
  7. DontBeStupid
    Offline

    DontBeStupid Look it up!

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,463
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Ratings:
    +422
    Your choice of copy and paste is 100% inaccurate and our debt level right now is not an issue.
     
  8. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,263
    Thanks Received:
    1,402
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,081
    As of this morning, $139,643 owed by each and every tax payer...and rising fast. Not an issue at all...:eusa_eh:

    How will you be paying your share? Or is that for someone else to worry about?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,940
    Thanks Received:
    5,212
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,684
    California "taxes business profits" and look what's happening there. The solution all around is small government.
     
  10. DontBeStupid
    Offline

    DontBeStupid Look it up!

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,463
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Ratings:
    +422
    Correct. Not an issue at all. We have no need to pay back this debt. Ever. Why do you think we should?

    edit: and by that I mean the Public Debt.
     

Share This Page