How much debt is too much

[Synthaholic]

There should be no debt or surplus at the end of the fiscal year. The ledger should read 0.

That's terrible policy. Every economist with half a brain will tell you that the U.S. should not have zero debt.

 

[Redfish]

There should be no debt or surplus at the end of the fiscal year. The ledger should read 0.

That's terrible policy. Every economist with half a brain will tell you that the U.S. should not have zero debt.

only Keynesian economists believe that. Most believe that a balanced budget would the the best way to strengthen the economy and create jobs and opportunity.

and you are correct---keynesians economists only have half a brain.

 

[Synthaholic]

• Raise the taxes of people making over $500,000.
• Raise the capital gains tax rate to mid-1970s level.
• Close all tax loopholes.
• End corporate subsidies.
• Cut the Pentagon budget.
• Eliminate Dept. of Homeland Security.
• Revive the Estate Tax.

 

[Synthaholic]

There should be no debt or surplus at the end of the fiscal year. The ledger should read 0.

That's terrible policy. Every economist with half a brain will tell you that the U.S. should not have zero debt.

only Keynesian economists believe that. Most believe that a balanced budget would the the best way to strengthen the economy and create jobs and opportunity.

and you are correct---keynesians economists only have half a brain.

Why do you believe they are wrong?

 

[Redfish]

That's terrible policy. Every economist with half a brain will tell you that the U.S. should not have zero debt.

only Keynesian economists believe that. Most believe that a balanced budget would the the best way to strengthen the economy and create jobs and opportunity.

and you are correct---keynesians economists only have half a brain.

Why do you believe they are wrong?

Because the two end products of keynesian economics are inflation and debt.

 

[Synthaholic]

only Keynesian economists believe that. Most believe that a balanced budget would the the best way to strengthen the economy and create jobs and opportunity.

and you are correct---keynesians economists only have half a brain.

Why do you believe they are wrong?

Because the two end products of keynesian economics are inflation and debt.

If you cannot support your arguments then just say so.

 

[Redfish]

• Raise the taxes of people making over $500,000.
• Raise the capital gains tax rate to mid-1970s level.
• Close all tax loopholes.
• End corporate subsidies.
• Cut the Pentagon budget.
• Eliminate Dept. of Homeland Security.
• Revive the Estate Tax.

the rich already pay most of the federal income tax
capital gains make your 401K account work
close loopholes---sure, and do away with EIC
corporations do not get subsidies, tax credits are not subsidies
the DOD budget could be cut, close all foreign bases unless the host country pays the entire bill
DHS is needed
The estate tax still exists, if your estate is 600K or more it will be taxes

 

[Redfish]

Why do you believe they are wrong?

Because the two end products of keynesian economics are inflation and debt.

If you cannot support your arguments then just say so.

I just did. Everyone who has studied keynes knows that his economic policies always result itn inflation and debt. maybe an econ 101 class is in order for you.

 

[Synthaholic]

• Raise the taxes of people making over $500,000.
• Raise the capital gains tax rate to mid-1970s level.
• Close all tax loopholes.
• End corporate subsidies.
• Cut the Pentagon budget.
• Eliminate Dept. of Homeland Security.
• Revive the Estate Tax.

the rich already pay most of the federal income tax

Irrelevant.

capital gains make your 401K account work

How? Not true.

close loopholes---sure, and do away with EIC

EIC helps working people.

corporations do not get subsidies, tax credits are not subsidies

Of course they do. Big Sugar has gotten subsidies for decades. So has Big Agriculture and Big Oil.

End all corporate welfare.

the DOD budget could be cut, close all foreign bases unless the host country pays the entire bill

I'm not interested in closing down our overseas bases, except for clearly redundant.

But we don't need to continue to spend for items the Pentagon doesn't even want. And foreign countries need to kick in some money if we are defending their interests. Especially Saudi Arabia.

DHS is needed

It never was needed. It was just more big spending Republicans looking for ways to get richer.

The estate tax still exists, if your estate is 600K or more it will be taxes

It needs to go back to pre-Reagan levels.

 

[editec]

You libs never can provide an answer so here's another chance

current debt 17 T
when obama leaves office 20 T

At what point must the govt stop spending more than it takes in?

25 T
50 T
100 T

?

The debt is a gfake as the money lad.

The fact that you ask this question suggests that you have been completely hoodwinked.

Don't feel bad, though, so have most of this generations' economists.

\

 

[Redfish]

we could tax the rich at 100% and it would be a drop in the bucket, I don't care if their tax rates are raised, but it will not fix our fiscal mess

capital gains make your 401K account grow, if you want to give that up to taxes, fine.

EIC is a negative tax, we are rewarding people for having a low income. why isn't zero enough?

A subsidy is a direct payment, I have no problem doing away with all corporate tax credits, but be ready for the price of gas to go up as well as the price of all kinds of food.

DOD pork should be eliminated, we agree. Foreign aid of all kinds should be ended, we can't afford it

DHS is needed, eliminate the coast guard and border patrol if you want and put them under DHS

Why do you want to tax family farms and businesses out of business? how does that help the country?

 

[Redfish]

• Raise the taxes of people making over $500,000.
• Raise the capital gains tax rate to mid-1970s level.
• Close all tax loopholes.
• End corporate subsidies.
• Cut the Pentagon budget.
• Eliminate Dept. of Homeland Security.
• Revive the Estate Tax.

Irrelevant.



How? Not true.



EIC helps working people.




Of course they do. Big Sugar has gotten subsidies for decades. So has Big Agriculture and Big Oil.

End all corporate welfare.



I'm not interested in closing down our overseas bases, except for clearly redundant.

But we don't need to continue to spend for items the Pentagon doesn't even want. And foreign countries need to kick in some money if we are defending their interests. Especially Saudi Arabia.



It never was needed. It was just more big spending Republicans looking for ways to get richer.

The estate tax still exists, if your estate is 600K or more it will be taxes

It needs to go back to pre-Reagan levels.

You libs never can provide an answer so here's another chance

current debt 17 T
when obama leaves office 20 T

At what point must the govt stop spending more than it takes in?

25 T
50 T
100 T

?

The debt is a gfake as the money lad.

The fact that you ask this question suggests that you have been completely hoodwinked.

Don't feel bad, though, so have most of this generations' economists.

\

Then why not just tell our creditors to kiss off and stop paying them interest payments?

I understand what you are trying to say, that because our money is not backed by anything then its all a monopoly game, but at some point the piper has to be paid.

 

[Synthaholic]

we could tax the rich at 100% and it would be a drop in the bucket, I don't care if their tax rates are raised, but it will not fix our fiscal mess

capital gains make your 401K account grow, if you want to give that up to taxes, fine.

EIC is a negative tax, we are rewarding people for having a low income. why isn't zero enough?

A subsidy is a direct payment, I have no problem doing away with all corporate tax credits, but be ready for the price of gas to go up as well as the price of all kinds of food.

So, if we take away their welfare, we will be subjected to blackmail?

DOD pork should be eliminated, we agree. Foreign aid of all kinds should be ended, we can't afford it

I don't agree. It's chump change, and gives us leverage with other countries.

DHS is needed, eliminate the coast guard and border patrol if you want and put them under DHS

It's not needed, and never was. We still have 15-20 intel services all speaking past each other.

Why do you want to tax family farms and businesses out of business? how does that help the country?

They weren't taxed out of business in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.

 

[Redfish]

we could tax the rich at 100% and it would be a drop in the bucket, I don't care if their tax rates are raised, but it will not fix our fiscal mess

capital gains make your 401K account grow, if you want to give that up to taxes, fine.

EIC is a negative tax, we are rewarding people for having a low income. why isn't zero enough?

A subsidy is a direct payment, I have no problem doing away with all corporate tax credits, but be ready for the price of gas to go up as well as the price of all kinds of food.

So, if we take away their welfare, we will be subjected to blackmail?

DOD pork should be eliminated, we agree. Foreign aid of all kinds should be ended, we can't afford it

I don't agree. It's chump change, and gives us leverage with other countries.

DHS is needed, eliminate the coast guard and border patrol if you want and put them under DHS

It's not needed, and never was. We still have 15-20 intel services all speaking past each other.

Why do you want to tax family farms and businesses out of business? how does that help the country?

They weren't taxed out of business in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.

foreign aid does not give us leverage, it makes us look like chumps

If you make the cost of doing business higher, prices will go up. like it or not, thats the way it works.

I thought you libs wanted consolidation of govt agencies. DHS is a consolidation of USCG, border patrol, etc

inheritance taxes forced many family farms and businesses to sell out in the 50s-70s. Do you now prefer large corporate farms and big box stores to family businesses?

 

[Bern80]

• Raise the taxes of people making over $500,000.
• Raise the capital gains tax rate to mid-1970s level.
• Close all tax loopholes.
• End corporate subsidies.
• Cut the Pentagon budget.
• Eliminate Dept. of Homeland Security.
• Revive the Estate Tax.

The problem is not government needing more money. You're completely naive if you think the increased revenue that would bring would result in government spending within its means.

 

[Redfish]

OK, let me change the question in the OP.

Libs and dems: Is it good or bad that the country is now 17 trillion in debt and the debt increasing by around 1 trillion per year?

Good or Bad. Simple question.

 

[itfitzme]

OK, let me change the question in the OP.

Libs and dems: Is it good or bad that the country is now 17 trillion in debt and the debt increasing by around 1 trillion per year?

Good or Bad. Simple question.

It is neither.

 

[Bern80]

OK, let me change the question in the OP.

Libs and dems: Is it good or bad that the country is now 17 trillion in debt and the debt increasing by around 1 trillion per year?

Good or Bad. Simple question.

It is neither.

It really is amazing how adamantly libs try to avoid answering a question they know the answer to when it isn't favorable to their ideology. It's as if you people actually think if you deny it, it's not true. Frankly Red, you don't need libs to admit it's bad. We all know it is. Whether people like ifitzme have the integrity to admit it is entirely irrelevant.

 

[itfitzme]

OK, let me change the question in the OP.

Libs and dems: Is it good or bad that the country is now 17 trillion in debt and the debt increasing by around 1 trillion per year?

Good or Bad. Simple question.

It is neither.

It really is amazing how adamantly libs try to avoid answering a question they know the answer to when it isn't favorable to their ideology. It's as if you people actually think if you deny it, it's not true. Frankly Red, you don't need libs to admit it's bad. We all know it is. Whether people like ifitzme have the integrity to admit it is entirely irrelevant.

To start, I'm not a "lib". I simply present facts and fundamental drawn from how the money supply functions. If, in fact, they fail to support your own crap, that is because your a moron.

I have seen no demonstrated or deduced arguement that the $17 T debt is good or bad. It is simply an accounting on the national books. For every dollar of government debt, there is an equivalent dollar of private savings. Additionally, the money supply exists in dollar for dollar balance with some matching debt. So the question to be answered by you is, if not the government, then who should carry the debt? Households? Businesses? some mix?

To say something is good or bad requires evidence. So what is your evidence? Or are you just gonna go with the magical "cuz I think so"?

 

[itfitzme]

OK, let me change the question in the OP.

Libs and dems: Is it good or bad that the country is now 17 trillion in debt and the debt increasing by around 1 trillion per year?

Good or Bad. Simple question.

It is neither.

It really is amazing how adamantly libs try to avoid answering a question they know the answer to when it isn't favorable to their ideology. It's as if you people actually think if you deny it, it's not true. Frankly Red, you don't need libs to admit it's bad. We all know it is. Whether people like ifitzme have the integrity to admit it is entirely irrelevant.

What is amazing is how idiots that cannot support their point of view all follow up with labelling everyone else a "lib".