The Significance of the Federal Debt Crisis

[Zoom-boing]

Power Line Blog held a prize competition for $100,000 for whoever can most effectively and creatively dramatize the significance of the federal debt crisis. Any creative product was eligible: videos, songs, paintings, screenplays, Power Point presentations, essays, performance art, or anything else.

Several entries have gotten a lot of attention and a lot of views or listens. But unquestionably, the one that has most gone viral so far is Doorbell. If you haven’t yet seen the one minute video yet, you should.

Doorbell

 

[editec]

LOL.

The voodoo of national debt.

Its all billshit, but its billshit that is going to bury this nation.

 

[Douger]

Power Line Blog held a prize competition for $100,000 for whoever can most effectively and creatively dramatize the significance of the federal debt crisis. Any creative product was eligible: videos, songs, paintings, screenplays, Power Point presentations, essays, performance art, or anything else.

Several entries have gotten a lot of attention and a lot of views or listens. But unquestionably, the one that has most gone viral so far is Doorbell. If you haven’t yet seen the one minute video yet, you should.

Doorbell

Some of us have understood for 40 years.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfkpi8Q_pVc&feature=related]Ron Paul - America where are you now? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Bfgrn]

 

[California Girl]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the left wing - Denial. It ain't just de river in Eygpt.

 

[Bfgrn]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the left wing - Denial. It ain't just de river in Eygpt.

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the right wing...swallow...

The level of our national debt is not actually high. In relation to GDP, it is only a bit over half of what it was in 1946. The relevant number is today below where it was in the mid-1950s, and comparable to the early 1990s.

What I learned from hanging out with deficit hawks

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

 

[California Girl]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the left wing - Denial. It ain't just de river in Eygpt.

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the right wing...swallow...

The level of our national debt is not actually high. In relation to GDP, it is only a bit over half of what it was in 1946. The relevant number is today below where it was in the mid-1950s, and comparable to the early 1990s.

What I learned from hanging out with deficit hawks

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Unlike you, I tend to review all the evidence, not just the shit that backs up my own side of the argument.

Your blindly naive stance is dangerous.

 

[Bfgrn]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the left wing - Denial. It ain't just de river in Eygpt.

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the right wing...swallow...

The level of our national debt is not actually high. In relation to GDP, it is only a bit over half of what it was in 1946. The relevant number is today below where it was in the mid-1950s, and comparable to the early 1990s.

What I learned from hanging out with deficit hawks

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Unlike you, I tend to review all the evidence, not just the shit that backs up my own side of the argument.

Your blindly naive stance is dangerous.

Bluster is not an argument, it is an emotional outburst. Your ignorance is the danger.

But even though our debt is not the immediate problem, it is a long term issue that needs to be addressed.

SO...the CBO did a study on long term debt. They came up with 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.

The Extended-Baseline Scenario is based on ending the Bush tax cuts in 2012, and enacting the cost savings in the Affordable Health Care Act.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is based on extending the Bush tax cuts and repealing 'Obamacare'...

The CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

Federal Debt Held by the Public (Percentage of GDP)

The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

 

[martybegan]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the right wing...swallow...

The level of our national debt is not actually high. In relation to GDP, it is only a bit over half of what it was in 1946. The relevant number is today below where it was in the mid-1950s, and comparable to the early 1990s.

What I learned from hanging out with deficit hawks

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Unlike you, I tend to review all the evidence, not just the shit that backs up my own side of the argument.

Your blindly naive stance is dangerous.

Bluster is not an argument, it is an emotional outburst. Your ignorance is the danger.

But even though our debt is not the immediate problem, it is a long term issue that needs to be addressed.

SO...the CBO did a study on long term debt. They came up with 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.

The Extended-Baseline Scenario is based on ending the Bush tax cuts in 2012, and enacting the cost savings in the Affordable Health Care Act.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is based on extending the Bush tax cuts and repealing 'Obamacare'...

The CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

Federal Debt Held by the Public (Percentage of GDP)

The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

You do realize that all the CBO does is crunch numbers, using ANY and ALL assumptions given to it by the party requesting the number crunch? So all those "savings" health reform are what the supporters say they are, even if the assumptions are fairy tales.

 

[Bfgrn]

Unlike you, I tend to review all the evidence, not just the shit that backs up my own side of the argument.

Your blindly naive stance is dangerous.

Bluster is not an argument, it is an emotional outburst. Your ignorance is the danger.

But even though our debt is not the immediate problem, it is a long term issue that needs to be addressed.

SO...the CBO did a study on long term debt. They came up with 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.

The Extended-Baseline Scenario is based on ending the Bush tax cuts in 2012, and enacting the cost savings in the Affordable Health Care Act.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is based on extending the Bush tax cuts and repealing 'Obamacare'...

The CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

Federal Debt Held by the Public (Percentage of GDP)

The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

You do realize that all the CBO does is crunch numbers, using ANY and ALL assumptions given to it by the party requesting the number crunch? So all those "savings" health reform are what the supporters say they are, even if the assumptions are fairy tales.

No, they are not 'fairy tales' They are increased revenues and concrete savings.

The fairy tale is that the teapublicans austerity plan will create growth. It is akin to medieval doctors using blood letting to cure patients.

Can you provide ONE historical example where austerity brought an industrialized nation out of a deep recession? There are historical facts where austerity caused a recession to turn back towards the depression.

Repeating Our Mistakes: The “Roosevelt Recession” and the Danger of Austerity

In 1937, after five years of sustained economic growth and a steadily declining unemployment rate, the Roosevelt Administration began to worry more about possible inflation and the size of the federal deficit than the ability of the economy to sustain the recovery. As a consequence, in the fall of 1937, FDR supported those in his administration who advocated a reduction in federal expenditures (i.e. stimulus spending) and a balanced budget. The results — which included a massive reduction in the number of people employed by such programs as the WPA — were catastrophic. From the fall of 1937 to the summer of 1938, industrial production declined by 33 percent; wages by 35 percent; national income by 13 percent; and not surprisingly, the unemployment rate rose by roughly 5 percentage points, with an estimated 4 million workers losing their jobs.

The economic downturn caused by the decline in federal spending was commonly referred to as the “Roosevelt recession,” and to counter it, FDR asked Congress in April of 1938 to support a substantial increase in federal spending and lending. Unlike the current situation, Congress backed FDR’s request, and as a result, the recovery was soon underway again.

Equally important, the lessons drawn from the 1937-38 recession convinced FDR that deficit spending and monetary expansion were critical to economic recovery. In essence, the Roosevelt Administration, through hard experience, finally endorsed Keynesian economics, and over the course of the next seven years, government spending on the economy — increasingly fueled by the demands of World War II — would grow to unprecedented levels, all but wiping out unemployment (which fell to below 2 percent by 1943) and turning the United States into a global super-power in the process.

I never gave anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.
Harry S. Truman

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, that video could have been worse...

...it could have been longer.

 

[Full-Auto]

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

A bit slow are you?

 

[martybegan]

Bluster is not an argument, it is an emotional outburst. Your ignorance is the danger.

But even though our debt is not the immediate problem, it is a long term issue that needs to be addressed.

SO...the CBO did a study on long term debt. They came up with 2 scenarios. For all practical purposes, you can call the Extended-Baseline Scenario the Democrat scenario and the Alternative Fiscal Scenario the Teapublican scenario.

The Extended-Baseline Scenario is based on ending the Bush tax cuts in 2012, and enacting the cost savings in the Affordable Health Care Act.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario is based on extending the Bush tax cuts and repealing 'Obamacare'...

The CBO lays it out perfectly clear...CRYSTAL.

Federal Debt Held by the Public (Percentage of GDP)

The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

You do realize that all the CBO does is crunch numbers, using ANY and ALL assumptions given to it by the party requesting the number crunch? So all those "savings" health reform are what the supporters say they are, even if the assumptions are fairy tales.

No, they are not 'fairy tales' They are increased revenues and concrete savings.

The fairy tale is that the teapublicans austerity plan will create growth. It is akin to medieval doctors using blood letting to cure patients.

Can you provide ONE historical example where austerity brought an industrialized nation out of a deep recession? There are historical facts where austerity caused a recession to turn back towards the depression.

Repeating Our Mistakes: The “Roosevelt Recession” and the Danger of Austerity

In 1937, after five years of sustained economic growth and a steadily declining unemployment rate, the Roosevelt Administration began to worry more about possible inflation and the size of the federal deficit than the ability of the economy to sustain the recovery. As a consequence, in the fall of 1937, FDR supported those in his administration who advocated a reduction in federal expenditures (i.e. stimulus spending) and a balanced budget. The results — which included a massive reduction in the number of people employed by such programs as the WPA — were catastrophic. From the fall of 1937 to the summer of 1938, industrial production declined by 33 percent; wages by 35 percent; national income by 13 percent; and not surprisingly, the unemployment rate rose by roughly 5 percentage points, with an estimated 4 million workers losing their jobs.

The economic downturn caused by the decline in federal spending was commonly referred to as the “Roosevelt recession,” and to counter it, FDR asked Congress in April of 1938 to support a substantial increase in federal spending and lending. Unlike the current situation, Congress backed FDR’s request, and as a result, the recovery was soon underway again.

Equally important, the lessons drawn from the 1937-38 recession convinced FDR that deficit spending and monetary expansion were critical to economic recovery. In essence, the Roosevelt Administration, through hard experience, finally endorsed Keynesian economics, and over the course of the next seven years, government spending on the economy — increasingly fueled by the demands of World War II — would grow to unprecedented levels, all but wiping out unemployment (which fell to below 2 percent by 1943) and turning the United States into a global super-power in the process.

I never gave anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.
Harry S. Truman

They are projections and estimates, based on the hope that the economy recovers, and the savings listed under the health plan actually happen. They are about as concrete as a styrofoam cup.

The one thing you keep forgetting about keysian economics is that during economic expansion, you are supposed to PAY DOWN the debt you create during deficit spending during a recession. The problem becomes that, when the economy recovers, we have been just increasing the size of the government, and increasing costs, instead of using the excess to reduce the debt.

Just how do you suppose we can pay down the current debt we have, balance the budget, and keep government spending at the levels we currently have?

Lemme guess, it rhymes with "aise axes"

 

[Greenbeard]

Federal Debt Held by the Public (Percentage of GDP)

The Extended-Baseline Scenario adheres closely to current law. Under this scenario, the expiration of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and most recently extended in 2010, the growing reach of the alternative minimum tax, the tax provisions of the recent health care legislation, and the way in which the tax system interacts with economic growth would result in steadily higher revenues relative to GDP.

The Alternative Fiscal Scenario
The budget outlook is much bleaker under the alternative fiscal scenario, which incorporates several changes to current law that are widely expected to occur or that would modify some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period. Most important are the assumptions about revenues: that the tax cuts enacted since 2001 and extended most recently in 2010 will be extended; that the reach of the alternative minimum tax will be restrained to stay close to its historical extent; and that over the longer run, tax law will evolve further so that revenues remain near their historical average of 18 percent of GDP. This scenario also incorporates assumptions that Medicare’s payment rates for physicians will remain at current levels (rather than declining by about a third, as under current law) and that some policies enacted in the March 2010 health care legislation to restrain growth in federal health care spending will not continue in effect after 2021.

Well, that's awkward.

 

[Bfgrn]

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

A bit slow are you?

Big numbers, but they must be measured against growth. We are a big nation with a big economy. Small nations have a small economy. America is not Greece.

Billionaire Warren Buffett paid $6,938,744 income tax last year. But it was only 17.4 percent of his taxable income.

Mere parsimony is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

 

[Poli_Sigh]

Ahhhh, the resort of choice for the left wing - Denial. It ain't just de river in Eygpt.

Fair is fair, apparently the Republicans are floating down that same river. It seems to have completely slipped their fragile minds that it was one of their own who ran up this astronomical debt in the first place. And quadrupled the size of the federal government, which according to the Bush Doctrine of the Role of Government in American Life doesn't do all that much either.

I'd say the Democrats and Republicans rented their boats at about the same time from the same place and put them in the river at about the same time.

 

[editec]

What I find odd and distirbing is that people are more concerned about the national debt than they are concerned about the welfare of citizens of this nation.

And yet these same people typically didn't care about the national debt until recently To the credit, however, their indifference about their fellow citizens has remains unchanged.

FYI

Goods and Services

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, through the Department of Commerce, announced today that total June exports of $170.9 billion and imports of $223.9 billion resulted in a goods and services deficit of $53.1 billion, up from $50.8 billion in May, revised.

June exports were $4.1 billion less than May exports of $175.0 billion. June imports were $1.9 billion less than May imports of $225.8 billion.

In June, the goods deficit increased $2.1 billion from May to $67.6 billion, and the services surplus decreased $0.1 billion to $14.5 billion. Exports of goods decreased $4.1 billion to $121.2 billion, and imports of goods decreased $1.9 billion to $188.8 billion.

Exports of services remained virtually unchanged at $49.6 billion, and imports of services remained virtually unchanged at $35.1 billion.

The goods and services deficit increased $6.2 billion from June 2010 to June 2011.

Exports were up $19.5 billion, or 12.9 percent, and imports were up $25.7 billion, or 13.0 percent.

source

How many US jobs does a $53,100,000,000 MONTHLY trade imbalance actually represent?

What is the USA capital to worker ratio?

Anybody know?

I cannot locate it.

Now I understand that CtW/trade imbalance would not a fair way of determining what the trade imbalance is costing us in jobs because the CtW figures change depending on what industry one is talking about.

Still that number DOES represent lost jobs in the USA.

Millions upon millions of unemployed US citizens are unemployed (perhaps now unemployable) because of our foolish trade polcies.

IN order to benefit some US exporters, we threw other US industries under the bus.

And if you look at the kinds of industries we helped, and which we hurt by these policy decisions, what you find is that we screwed the lowest paid workers almost consistently.

IN other words, our trade polcies are ALSO an example of class war in action.