Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I understand you don't like the debt, but tell me specifically what worries you so much about it.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
Debt is much like cancer, it just keeps growing. Every year it becomes a larger part of our budget, sooner or later that will catch up to us. Throw in a massive amount of debt in a short time such as in what happens in a recession and boom, we are there sooner than we thought.
This should bother everyone....
View attachment 310707
So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.The rate of growth of the debt took a big jump in 2018 and a big drop in 2019 and will likely drop more in 2020. President Trump has made significant changes in the economy and it will take a few more years to see where it will level off. Even so, if interest rates remain low, then the cost of servicing the debt will remain low, but if the debt goes too high it may harm the confidence in US bonds. I continue to believe that the best policy for the US government is to keep interest rates as low as possible and to encourage economic growth by removing unnecessary obstacle to growth, such as unnecessary regulations, and to reform tax laws and trade agreements to foster growth.debt is growing faster than the GDP, it is not really even close.
FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
No, we can borrow more to continue to provide what services we need. As long as our economy is sound, there will continue to be a market for our bonds.I understand you don't like the debt, but tell me specifically what worries you so much about it.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
Debt is much like cancer, it just keeps growing. Every year it becomes a larger part of our budget, sooner or later that will catch up to us. Throw in a massive amount of debt in a short time such as in what happens in a recession and boom, we are there sooner than we thought.
This should bother everyone....
View attachment 310707
I just did, what part did you not understand?
The debt eats up more and more of our national budget each year. Meaning we either have to cut services/military or we have to raise taxes to cover it.
I have had this discussion with my children as they prepared to leave the house, debt is like crack...and it seems you are addicted.
Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.The rate of growth of the debt took a big jump in 2018 and a big drop in 2019 and will likely drop more in 2020. President Trump has made significant changes in the economy and it will take a few more years to see where it will level off. Even so, if interest rates remain low, then the cost of servicing the debt will remain low, but if the debt goes too high it may harm the confidence in US bonds. I continue to believe that the best policy for the US government is to keep interest rates as low as possible and to encourage economic growth by removing unnecessary obstacle to growth, such as unnecessary regulations, and to reform tax laws and trade agreements to foster growth.Chump change in the context of federal expenditures. Just as you can afford more debt as you income increases, so if the growth of GDP increases at a rate equal to or exceeding the rate of growth of the debt, we will remain in good shape even if we have occasional jumps in debt during recessions.the current Fed rate is less than 1.25% and we will still pay more than 400 billion for it this year.
debt is growing faster than the GDP, it is not really even close.
FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.The rate of growth of the debt took a big jump in 2018 and a big drop in 2019 and will likely drop more in 2020. President Trump has made significant changes in the economy and it will take a few more years to see where it will level off. Even so, if interest rates remain low, then the cost of servicing the debt will remain low, but if the debt goes too high it may harm the confidence in US bonds. I continue to believe that the best policy for the US government is to keep interest rates as low as possible and to encourage economic growth by removing unnecessary obstacle to growth, such as unnecessary regulations, and to reform tax laws and trade agreements to foster growth.Chump change in the context of federal expenditures. Just as you can afford more debt as you income increases, so if the growth of GDP increases at a rate equal to or exceeding the rate of growth of the debt, we will remain in good shape even if we have occasional jumps in debt during recessions.the current Fed rate is less than 1.25% and we will still pay more than 400 billion for it this year.
debt is growing faster than the GDP, it is not really even close.
FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.The rate of growth of the debt took a big jump in 2018 and a big drop in 2019 and will likely drop more in 2020. President Trump has made significant changes in the economy and it will take a few more years to see where it will level off. Even so, if interest rates remain low, then the cost of servicing the debt will remain low, but if the debt goes too high it may harm the confidence in US bonds. I continue to believe that the best policy for the US government is to keep interest rates as low as possible and to encourage economic growth by removing unnecessary obstacle to growth, such as unnecessary regulations, and to reform tax laws and trade agreements to foster growth.
FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
No, we can borrow more to continue to provide what services we need. As long as our economy is sound, there will continue to be a market for our bonds.
The argument you are making is that eventually the cost of servicing out debt will become so great we will have to reduce government expenditures for important services, and your solution is to reduce government expenditures now so we will not have to reduce government expenditures later. It's hard to see the sense in that.
No, we can borrow more to continue to provide what services we need. As long as our economy is sound, there will continue to be a market for our bonds.
It cannot go on forever, the more we borrow the more we owe on the servicing so the more we have to borrow. Greece tired that, it did not end well.
The argument you are making is that eventually the cost of servicing out debt will become so great we will have to reduce government expenditures for important services, and your solution is to reduce government expenditures now so we will not have to reduce government expenditures later. It's hard to see the sense in that.
Yes, I am saying we do it now when we still have some control over what changes we make, the longer we go, the less control we have.
I have to ask, do you live your life by this same philosophy? Do you take a 2nd mortgage on your house to pay off your credit cards and then use your credit cards to pay the mortgage payments?
No, we can borrow more to continue to provide what services we need. As long as our economy is sound, there will continue to be a market for our bonds.
It cannot go on forever, the more we borrow the more we owe on the servicing so the more we have to borrow. Greece tired that, it did not end well.
The argument you are making is that eventually the cost of servicing out debt will become so great we will have to reduce government expenditures for important services, and your solution is to reduce government expenditures now so we will not have to reduce government expenditures later. It's hard to see the sense in that.
Yes, I am saying we do it now when we still have some control over what changes we make, the longer we go, the less control we have.
I have to ask, do you live your life by this same philosophy? Do you take a 2nd mortgage on your house to pay off your credit cards and then use your credit cards to pay the mortgage payments?
I couldn't agree more Gator....But tell me, why is your go to seemingly the Military for any cuts that you think need to happen? Surely there are other programs in the budget that are waste? no?
lol Personal debt is entirely different from public debt. How many people do you know who can print money to control the interest rate on their debt? The Federal government currently owns 27% of the national debt and the Federal Reserve Bank owns 11.2% of the debt. If the cost of servicing the debt gets too high, the Fed can print more money and buy up enough of the new issues of bonds to bring it down. The debt will never have to be paid off and the interest rate can be manipulated down to near zero, so there would seem to be no limit to how long this can go on. A very different matter from personal debt.No, we can borrow more to continue to provide what services we need. As long as our economy is sound, there will continue to be a market for our bonds.
It cannot go on forever, the more we borrow the more we owe on the servicing so the more we have to borrow. Greece tired that, it did not end well.
The argument you are making is that eventually the cost of servicing out debt will become so great we will have to reduce government expenditures for important services, and your solution is to reduce government expenditures now so we will not have to reduce government expenditures later. It's hard to see the sense in that.
Yes, I am saying we do it now when we still have some control over what changes we make, the longer we go, the less control we have.
I have to ask, do you live your life by this same philosophy? Do you take a 2nd mortgage on your house to pay off your credit cards and then use your credit cards to pay the mortgage payments?
lol Personal debt is entirely different from public debt. How many people do you know who can print money to control the interest rate on their debt? The Federal government currently owns 27% of the national debt and the Federal Reserve Bank owns 11.2% of the debt. If the cost of servicing the debt gets too high, the Fed can print more money and buy up enough of the new issues of bonds to bring it down. The debt will never have to be paid off and the interest rate can be manipulated down to near zero, so there would seem to be no limit to how long this can go on. A very different matter from personal debt.
You would think so, but it doesn't. There are so many dollars in circulation around the world, that it makes no difference at all. It doesn't even seem to have any inflationary effect in our economy.lol Personal debt is entirely different from public debt. How many people do you know who can print money to control the interest rate on their debt? The Federal government currently owns 27% of the national debt and the Federal Reserve Bank owns 11.2% of the debt. If the cost of servicing the debt gets too high, the Fed can print more money and buy up enough of the new issues of bonds to bring it down. The debt will never have to be paid off and the interest rate can be manipulated down to near zero, so there would seem to be no limit to how long this can go on. A very different matter from personal debt.
printing new money makes every dollar worth less than before, thus just adding to the problem.
Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.FY-17 we added 671 billion to the debt
FY-18 we added 1.272 trillion to the debt
FY-19 we added 1.203 trillion to the debt.
That is a 5% drop, not a big drop by anyone's definition.
So far, 5 months in to FY2020 we have added 662 million. So, that will put us in the 1.2 trillion range again.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?Again, we'll have to wait and see where this levels off, but the cost of servicing the debt remains low and there is no drop in demand for US bonds. Clearly more has to be done to encourage faster economic growth and if he Republicans capture both houses of Congress and the WH, hopefully this will happen.
The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?The cost of servicing the debt is larger than the budget for all but 4 departments within the Fed Govt.
I think you dismiss this cost too easily.
1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
You are way out of your depth. No one who knows anything about economics expects the debt will ever be paid.Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.So tell me, what danger do you see in the debt?
1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
My opinion of government debt doesn't change based on which party is in the White House. My opinion is determined by economic conditions - based on Keynes' original theory - Government should go into debt to stimulate the economy when there's an economic downturn. Government should not go into debt or lower taxes when the economy is doing well. Instead the government should pay down the debt during a good economy, and only when a reasonable amount of debt has been paid, they should lower taxes.
I know that's hard for Conservatives to understand. They keep screwing our future by not paying down the debt before lowering taxes.
If Republicans would not lower taxes until after the debt has been paid we could have a permanently booming economy. Dumbasses!
You are way out of your depth. No one who knows anything about economics expects the debt will ever be paid.Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.1. The government can no longer service the debt.
2. The government prints ridiculous amounts of money to pay off the debt.
Either one strongly risks the U.S. losing it's place as the world's currency reserve (as did the U.K. in the 1920s).
Once the U.S. is no longer the world's currency reserve, we will no longer be a world super power. We will go the way of the British Empire.
Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
My opinion of government debt doesn't change based on which party is in the White House. My opinion is determined by economic conditions - based on Keynes' original theory - Government should go into debt to stimulate the economy when there's an economic downturn. Government should not go into debt or lower taxes when the economy is doing well. Instead the government should pay down the debt during a good economy, and only when a reasonable amount of debt has been paid, they should lower taxes.
I know that's hard for Conservatives to understand. They keep screwing our future by not paying down the debt before lowering taxes.
If Republicans would not lower taxes until after the debt has been paid we could have a permanently booming economy. Dumbasses!
None of it will be paid down on purpose. In the unlikely event that the US produces a surplus, it will borrow less to meet its budgetary needs and that will slightly lower the debt, but no one wants to try to pay down the debt at the expense of slowing the economy. You are thinking about debt the way people did in the middle of the last century, not the way economists think about it today.You are way out of your depth. No one who knows anything about economics expects the debt will ever be paid.Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Silly stuff. First the government is servicing the debt and two, the government is not paying off the debt and never will. It will simply refinance the debt as it has been doing for decades.
Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
My opinion of government debt doesn't change based on which party is in the White House. My opinion is determined by economic conditions - based on Keynes' original theory - Government should go into debt to stimulate the economy when there's an economic downturn. Government should not go into debt or lower taxes when the economy is doing well. Instead the government should pay down the debt during a good economy, and only when a reasonable amount of debt has been paid, they should lower taxes.
I know that's hard for Conservatives to understand. They keep screwing our future by not paying down the debt before lowering taxes.
If Republicans would not lower taxes until after the debt has been paid we could have a permanently booming economy. Dumbasses!
No it won't be completely paid. But some of it can be paid down - and that's been done before.
None of it will be paid down on purpose. In the unlikely event that the US produces a surplus, it will borrow less to meet its budgetary needs and that will slightly lower the debt, but no one wants to try to pay down the debt at the expense of slowing the economy. You are thinking about debt the way people did in the middle of the last century, not the way economists think about it today.You are way out of your depth. No one who knows anything about economics expects the debt will ever be paid.Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.Somehow I think that your opinion on this will change dramatically once there's a Democrat in the White House!
My opinion of government debt doesn't change based on which party is in the White House. My opinion is determined by economic conditions - based on Keynes' original theory - Government should go into debt to stimulate the economy when there's an economic downturn. Government should not go into debt or lower taxes when the economy is doing well. Instead the government should pay down the debt during a good economy, and only when a reasonable amount of debt has been paid, they should lower taxes.
I know that's hard for Conservatives to understand. They keep screwing our future by not paying down the debt before lowering taxes.
If Republicans would not lower taxes until after the debt has been paid we could have a permanently booming economy. Dumbasses!
No it won't be completely paid. But some of it can be paid down - and that's been done before.
It's the way all economists think about the debt today except for a few kooks. This really isn't a partisan issue.None of it will be paid down on purpose. In the unlikely event that the US produces a surplus, it will borrow less to meet its budgetary needs and that will slightly lower the debt, but no one wants to try to pay down the debt at the expense of slowing the economy. You are thinking about debt the way people did in the middle of the last century, not the way economists think about it today.You are way out of your depth. No one who knows anything about economics expects the debt will ever be paid.Any sign you are able to think is good news, but what I think you meant to say is that you opinion will change if a Democrat gets into the WH. The mechanism the Fed is using in part to cover the debt, quantitative easing was first used in 2008 to cover Obama's debt and I thought it was brilliant then.
My opinion of government debt doesn't change based on which party is in the White House. My opinion is determined by economic conditions - based on Keynes' original theory - Government should go into debt to stimulate the economy when there's an economic downturn. Government should not go into debt or lower taxes when the economy is doing well. Instead the government should pay down the debt during a good economy, and only when a reasonable amount of debt has been paid, they should lower taxes.
I know that's hard for Conservatives to understand. They keep screwing our future by not paying down the debt before lowering taxes.
If Republicans would not lower taxes until after the debt has been paid we could have a permanently booming economy. Dumbasses!
No it won't be completely paid. But some of it can be paid down - and that's been done before.
You means the way Conservative economists think about it while there's a Conservative in the White house.
As soon as there's a liberal in the White House the bitching and moaning will never end.
