If the gop can actually say yes to 1trillion and not raise ANY taxes or appropriate more money, Biden should say yes

[bendog]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

 

[Dragonlady]

Even if it means dropping most of the "human infrastructure" which was imo bs anyway

“We are anxious to have a bipartisan agreement,” Capito told reporters on Capitol Hill.

A GOP aide who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private talks said the price tag would be $1 trillion over eight years, paid for by tapping funds that have been allocated as part of COVID-19 relief but not yet spent. The aide said about $700 billion remains in unspent virus aid.

GOP senators ready $1T infrastructure counteroffer to Biden

Senate Republicans revived negotiations Tuesday over President Joe Biden’s sweeping investment plan, preparing a $1 trillion infrastructure proposal that would be funded with COVID-19 relief money as a counteroffer to the White House ahead of a Memorial Day deadline toward a bipartisan deal...

www.yahoo.com

You know taxes are going up if Biden has his way!

Taxes went up when Joe undid Trump's tax cut....I think that was on day one....

Are you really this ill-informed and ignorant. Trump's tax cut is LAW, and you can only undo a law passed by Congress, but passing a NEW law. You're arguing on a political discussion board about government without the vaguest clue of how your own government works????? Are you really an American and you don't KNOW this????

Joe cannot "undo" a tax cut law without passing a new tax law.

Joe has the house and the senate and an urge to undo anything and everything Trump has done....he stated he will push a spending bill that undoes Trump's tax cut...so who is un informed?....I think you may be the one that has not kept up....besides don't you want Trump's tax cut overturned?...why are you taking this point?....

Please list the legislative accomplishments of Donald Trump, and the successful programs he has instituted.

Trump didn't DO anything, other than cut taxes, and a prison reform Bill. The tax cuts have to be undone because they keep causing economic crashes. Your country has to operate on fiscally sound principles and that hasn't happened since Reagan's first tax cut.

Immigration: Trump did nothing, other than stop prosecution of employers and dismantling immigration infrastructure. Illegal immigration was at a 50 year low when he took office, and Trump turned that into a declaration of a "National Emergency" at the Southern Border in 2019.

Biden took over a Southern Border in crisis and no facilities or personnel to deal with refugees or immigrants. Just "for profit prisons", overrun with abuse and covid That's the mess he left. No new immigration programs, or policy at all and a situation much worse than he started.

McConnell's tax cuts.

I mentioned the tax cuts. Other than the tax cuts and Jared's prison reform bill.

 

[Concerned American]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

To them I say, "If you don't like your situation, change it!" There are organizations a plenty to help people who are down on their luck. Co-ops have been formed by single parents to provide low cost child care for people in like circumstances. The government has many social programs to provide safety nets. They should quit whining and get off of their asses and help themselves. They are only victims as long as they make themselves victims. Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur.

 

[bendog]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

To them I say, "If you don't like your situation, change it!" There are organizations a plenty to help people who are down on their luck. Co-ops have been formed by single parents to provide low cost child care for people in like circumstances. The government has many social programs to provide safety nets. They should quit whining and get off of their asses and help themselves. They are only victims as long as they make themselves victims. Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur.

But they're not going to qualify for credit to borrow money to improve their economic status.

 

[Dragonlady]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

Look at you with all your rich white boy tricks for making money!!! Yeah everybody should do that. Make money by doing nothing - invest!!!

Trying actually being poor for a while. The first thing your banker wants to know is what kind of security do you have for the loan. And then they're going to look at your income and expenses, and since you're depending on food stamps and Section 8 for food and housing, they will laugh you right out the door.

 

[Concerned American]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

To them I say, "If you don't like your situation, change it!" There are organizations a plenty to help people who are down on their luck. Co-ops have been formed by single parents to provide low cost child care for people in like circumstances. The government has many social programs to provide safety nets. They should quit whining and get off of their asses and help themselves. They are only victims as long as they make themselves victims. Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur.

But they're not going to qualify for credit to borrow money to improve their economic status.

Bad credit, No credit? We can help. I hear it daily on the tube. Cry me a river. Whiners never improve their lot. You promote the "woe is me" culture. What happened to American tenacity. These "victims" deserve what they get, I have no sympathy nor would I expect any if I was in a similar situation. Whining never improved one person's lot in life.

 

[NightFox]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

I'm not sure what you're asking with respect to the post you replied to.

 

[NightFox]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

Look at you with all your rich white boy tricks for making money!!! Yeah everybody should do that. Make money by doing nothing - invest!!!

Trying actually being poor for a while. The first thing your banker wants to know is what kind of security do you have for the loan. And then they're going to look at your income and expenses, and since you're depending on food stamps and Section 8 for food and housing, they will laugh you right out the door.

You should probably go back and read the ENTIRE CONVERSATION before chiming in since if you had you'd realize that your reply isn't germane to the topic that was being discussed which, for your edification, was a side bar concerning the possibility of "borrowing ones way to prosperity", Concerned American saw it one way, I saw it another and after an interesting conversation we came to a common ground.

Then of course YOU step in and want to turn that perfectly rational and civil discussion into a nasty PISSING CONTEST, is it possible for you to EVER behave like a rational adult or do you have your head so far up your hyper-partisan ass that there's no hope of recovery? I know it's ALOT to ask of someone like yourself but STOP BEHAVING LIKE AN INFANT.

 

[bendog]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

I'm not sure what you're asking with respect to the post you replied to.

More of an overall comment on your's and CA's discussion. It's absolutely true that if you are a borrower, you are better off in a low interest rate environment. If you are a lender (or more probably a person who has low debt and some investments like bonds or savings) you are better off when rates are higher. AND inflation means rates will be higher. I'm not suggesting we return to pre-1976, but it was NOT that way before Carter and Reagan, when the democrats opposed fighting inflation by raising rates and causing a temporary recession.

But this means that having low rates doesn't benefit anyone who works two jobs and still can't afford to provide food and housing, or is a one wage earner parent, and who can't qualify for a loan. Mitt Romney was a bad candidate, but that was a point he tried to make in 2012. The McConnell republicans argue their tax cut of 17 helped address that. I'm not convinced that causing profits to rise for corporate share holders turns into higher wages for workers.

I think both Romney and McConnell were saying we need to do better than we were doing in 1974 and better than 0% rates and 0% pay raises.

 

[Concerned American]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

I'm not sure what you're asking with respect to the post you replied to.

More of an overall comment on your's and CA's discussion. It's absolutely true that if you are a borrower, you are better off in a low interest rate environment. If you are a lender (or more probably a person who has low debt and some investments like bonds or savings) you are better off when rates are higher. AND inflation means rates will be higher. I'm not suggesting we return to pre-1976, but it was NOT that way before Carter and Reagan, when the democrats opposed fighting inflation by raising rates and causing a temporary recession.

But this means that having low rates doesn't benefit anyone who works two jobs and still can't afford to provide food and housing, or is a one wage earner parent, and who can't qualify for a loan. Mitt Romney was a bad candidate, but that was a point he tried to make in 2012. The McConnell republicans argue their tax cut of 17 helped address that. I'm not convinced that causing profits to rise for corporate share holders turns into higher wages for workers.

You are aware that the minimum wage has nearly doubled since the '17 tax cut, are you not? What I think is slipping through the cracks of this discussion is that with that min. wage hike and the irresponsible printing and distribution of trillions in stimulus/relief comes the inevitable inflationary cycle and those low wage earners will soon be worse off than they were before. As an unintended consequence, retirees and disabled on fixed incomes will see their purchasing power disappear and will become more unfortunate new victims. Short-sighted.

 

[NightFox]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

I'm not sure what you're asking with respect to the post you replied to.

More of an overall comment on your's and CA's discussion. It's absolutely true that if you are a borrower, you are better off in a low interest rate environment. If you are a lender (or more probably a person who has low debt and some investments like bonds or savings) you are better off when rates are higher. AND inflation means rates will be higher. I'm not suggesting we return to pre-1976, but it was NOT that way before Carter and Reagan, when the democrats opposed fighting inflation by raising rates and causing a temporary recession.

But this means that having low rates doesn't benefit anyone who works two jobs and still can't afford to provide food and housing, or is a one wage earner parent, and who can't qualify for a loan. Mitt Romney was a bad candidate, but that was a point he tried to make in 2012. The McConnell republicans argue their tax cut of 17 helped address that. I'm not convinced that causing profits to rise for corporate share holders turns into higher wages for workers.

I think both Romney and McConnell were saying we need to do better than we were doing in 1974 and better than 0% rates and 0% pay raises.

I understand what you’re saying but the question of the working poor and how debt relates them is an ENTIRELY different discussion than what Concerned American & I were having. Nobody was intending to criticize those folks for not have the wherewithal to borrow for investment purposes.

The fact that to a large degree consumer debt has replaced higher wages and that being “credit poor” is an enormous burden to many people is a subject of keen interest to me and would probably be a discussion that you and I would largely agree on (based on your posts that I’ve read).

Anyways, don’t want to get off track and thanks for clarifying doggie *WOOF**WOOF*.

 

[Dragonlady]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

To them I say, "If you don't like your situation, change it!" There are organizations a plenty to help people who are down on their luck. Co-ops have been formed by single parents to provide low cost child care for people in like circumstances. The government has many social programs to provide safety nets. They should quit whining and get off of their asses and help themselves. They are only victims as long as they make themselves victims. Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur.

These people aren't "down on their luck". These people are living exactly the way the Republican economy was set out to make them live. They need raises and resources, not stupid ideas from people who are as clueless as you.

Just your comment that co-ops have been formed to provide low cost child care. NO THEY HAVE NOT!!! NOT IN POOR NEIGHBOURHOODS. That isn't even a realistic suggestion for the working poor.

Forming a co-op takes time and volunteer resources that people working two jobs to keep food on the table, simply do not have. You also have to have the legal skills and expertise to navigate the health, fire, safety, and licensing requirements. A coop daycare requires financial resources for rent, furniture, fixtures, equipment, and toys.

You cannot operate a licensed day care center without trained, qualified ECE workers either, so unless you have paid staff, you'll be restricted to fewer than 5 kids for you co-op. You need financial resources to keep going too, so you need ongoing financial resources. The people who are already needing government assistance for food and housing aren't going to be in a position to contribute the day care center's expenses, nor can they afford to pay fees.

My church congregation actually tried to start a day care center in our inner city church, to provide quality, low cost day care, and even with the money, the resources and the time to set it up, it was more work than our small congregation could take on.

Basically, you've provided a rich, white person's solution to a serious problem facing poor, inner city women who are trying to go to work and provide for their families. Instead of looking at what rich people are doing to solve the problem of dealing with child care, try looking at the circumstances of the people you're asking to trying to impose this solution on.

As a working woman who had the resources to have "help" throughout my working life, when my kids were small, I have a real appreciation for my privileged resources. These included a full time housekeeper, when I was a single parent. I am well aware of how much I depended on not having to worry about child care or household chores, at the end of my workday.

 

[Dragonlady]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

I'm not sure what you're asking with respect to the post you replied to.

More of an overall comment on your's and CA's discussion. It's absolutely true that if you are a borrower, you are better off in a low interest rate environment. If you are a lender (or more probably a person who has low debt and some investments like bonds or savings) you are better off when rates are higher. AND inflation means rates will be higher. I'm not suggesting we return to pre-1976, but it was NOT that way before Carter and Reagan, when the democrats opposed fighting inflation by raising rates and causing a temporary recession.

But this means that having low rates doesn't benefit anyone who works two jobs and still can't afford to provide food and housing, or is a one wage earner parent, and who can't qualify for a loan. Mitt Romney was a bad candidate, but that was a point he tried to make in 2012. The McConnell republicans argue their tax cut of 17 helped address that. I'm not convinced that causing profits to rise for corporate share holders turns into higher wages for workers.

You are aware that the minimum wage has nearly doubled since the '17 tax cut, are you not? What I think is slipping through the cracks of this discussion is that with that min. wage hike and the irresponsible printing and distribution of trillions in stimulus/relief comes the inevitable inflationary cycle and those low wage earners will soon be worse off than they were before. As an unintended consequence, retirees and disabled on fixed incomes will see their purchasing power disappear and will become more unfortunate new victims. Short-sighted.

The minimum wage is still $7.50 per hour. There has been no increase in the federal minimum wage since 2009.

 

[Dragonlady]

And how bad can debt be?

St Trumpy built a real estate empire based entirely on debt and His sycophants claim He was the best president ever?

..and how many times did Donny go bankrupt? You sure you want to use him as an example of how to make debt work on a national scale?

I'm all for thinking outside the box but I'm not sure going Taj Mahal Resort with our already broken national finances is the way forward.

Neither is borrowing your way to prosperity.

You actually can do that , if you borrow at X rate and then invest that borrowed money with a return at X + Y + rate of inflation, rate.

The Federal Government doesn't do that most of the time though, it borrows at X rate and gets a return of ZERO, sometimes they actually get less than ZERO returns since the borrowing actually ends up inhibiting economic activity and efficiency.

Been through these boom and bust cycles and it can't be done. You can borrow, but at some point you have to deal with the pain of payback. There are no magic beans.

Sure there is, borrow some beans at say 1% and get a return of say 5% on that money, successful businesses and wealthy individuals do it all the time. You lose if you take stupid risks but with prudence it's fairly safe.

It's how banks used to make most of their money before they started acting like giant derivative casinos.

Good trick if you can do it. Back in the 50s and 60s you could borrow money for 5 or 6% but you could also get 5 or 6% compound interest on savings. In the 70s and 80s you could get 12-15% on junk bonds (if they lasted until maturity) but a mortgage would cost 15-18% and up. Since the turn of the century, you're lucky if you can get .5% on your savings. Borrowing also has better interest rates now. I am not saying that there are not ways to make money for prudent investors, but if you think you're going to borrow 100K and prosper from it, you are sorely mistaken unless you purchase something with real value that will appreciate more than the money is costing you.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, the “real value” is anything that’s going to provide you with a return that’s higher than the rate your paying + the rate of inflation (and compensates you appropriately for the risk you’re taking).

That could be anything, stocks, bonds, a factory, a savings account, whatever, as long as the return fits the bill and the risk/reward makes sense, so you see you CAN borrow your way to prosperity. The sad part is most people don’t use debt that way, they use it to increase their CONSUMPTION (which just makes all the borrow for investment gang richer).

But what of people working two jobs and even then not having enough food? Or two single women, each with a kid or two, living together to share childcare?

To them I say, "If you don't like your situation, change it!" There are organizations a plenty to help people who are down on their luck. Co-ops have been formed by single parents to provide low cost child care for people in like circumstances. The government has many social programs to provide safety nets. They should quit whining and get off of their asses and help themselves. They are only victims as long as they make themselves victims. Personal responsibility has gone the way of the dinosaur.

But they're not going to qualify for credit to borrow money to improve their economic status.

Bad credit, No credit? We can help. I hear it daily on the tube. Cry me a river. Whiners never improve their lot. You promote the "woe is me" culture. What happened to American tenacity. These "victims" deserve what they get, I have no sympathy nor would I expect any if I was in a similar situation. Whining never improved one person's lot in life.

You hear it daily on the tube, but you have no idea of the reality. The Republican Party has murdered the American Dream. There are no longer enough "middle class jobs" for all of today's college graduates. The jobs in the information hi-tech fields can't be filled because you don't have enough technical graduates for these jobs, but you have a LOT of people spending $200,000 on a degree that will get you a $40,000 a year job.

The "good jobs" that fed my family when we were growing up - small, low skill, union, manufacturing jobs, in small towns across North America, that gave you a gold watch and a pension when you retired, are long gone. Companies, looking to compete with 3rd world countries, are off-shoring all of those jobs, increasing the numbers of people competing for low wage service sector jobs. The middle class is dwindling, and poverty is increasing.

The USA is no longer the land of opportunity for hard working people. And the public school system ensures that the children of the poor will not have the skills or the resources to move out of poverty. You are now headed to second world status.