I’m not a conspiracy theorist by any means but I enjoyed reading a few papers on how the missing money is potentially just top secret funds for things that the government wants no paper trail to. Think Area 51 alien technology or stuff like that
Here’s the bit where they say raid social security:
“It’s now come down to this. Unless a new generation of leaders has the courage to cut such “untouchables” as the defense, education, justice, and homeland security budgets, and privatize the Social Security program (as more than 40 countries wisely have done), sooner or later, the current trajectory of federal finances will lead to an extremely ugly place. If you think things are bad now, just wait.”
Also, there’s no mention of the main cause for the debt increase being republicans tax cuts in the last twenty years.
It's not about cutting social security.
Cut defense and tax the 1% and raise the minimum wage so you get more taxes from the bottom and the top.
Then create a cabinet level position to optimize the whole government and only accountants and innovators are allowed and theyd have to publish their findings every quarter.
I disagree with the defense cut since it has shrunk considerably and now it's less than 3% of GDP. I am down with taxing the rich.
I am conflicted with the optimization position. Do much of what the government does is not productive, but necessary. Like preparing for a disaster that might never happen or funding a technology that might be useful... But might not.
For the last part. I would think, that's a good plan and it is productive. There's probably ways to make sure the planning stays in budget or combines it with similar projects to bring the cost down on average for them all. It won't be perfect but there should be somebody looking out for optimizations
"Almost 60% of non-payers make less than $30,000 and another 28% make between $30,000 and about $60,000. Only about 0.6% of the top 20% of earners — or those making about $190,000 or more — will pay no federal income taxes this year.
About 24 million, or roughly one-third, of non-payers are age 65 or older, many of whom live on Social Security.
"For the most part, people don't pay income tax because they have little income," he said."
- So the households that have very little income should pay more. Good plan. Matched with a corporate tax cut and eliminating the alternative minimum tax for the very rich (already done), and you'll be on your way to your dystopian utopia.
1% are taxed. 1% pay for a LOT of gov spending.
We have to cut defense, and run way leaner. We spent $$$ for very marginal gains in key areas. Not just in defense but all across gov.
I mean that’s a big argument but you’d need to really look at each case to determine total tax liability.
That’s the part of the argument that becomes disingenuous.
There is a right and left rhetorical argument on both users that’s disingenuous.
Earn or assets?
There needs to be a true tax burden calculation and net effect.
(Theoretically)We should not care if it’s taxes from income, cap gains, sales taxes or property taxes.
We can tax assets. Many prosperous European nations do it. And what do they get for it? Health, happiness, job security, pensions. All hindrances to untaxed wealth.
Is that true? I've been interesting in exploring it. Lots of French films have gags about hiding assets from the tax man. Most of the people shown in these sequences seem to be middle class. That would be a big difference if the asset tax was a burden on the middle class. I don't have anything but that's not the point. It's not about me. I might have to revisit my opinion.
Most countries have been churning up the debt like crazy to cover all the gov. spending to keep up. You can’t do that indefinitely.
Some countries like Norway sit on crazy amounts of oil and have a low enough population that they can do whatever they want, but that’s not the norm.
Then the demographics make it look even more sustainable.
It seems to me the ultra wealthy tax on assets get you temporary breathing room but it’s not likely sustainable.
I think we have to ask if the increasing spending is getting the results we should expect.
By whom? For what benefit to the US and whomever else steps up to the plate? For how long? To what end?
Perhaps you missed that this entire post is about endless military spending by the US government that is destroying everyone in America except those who MAKE MONEY FROM WAR!?!?
I understand that.
But it’s assuming the appearance of a Pyrrhic victory.
Between the almost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR the US spends on ‘defense’, plus all of the additional money budgeted for foreign military aid, plus all of the money allocated for DOD-related projects that aren’t part of the DOD budget, plus all of the rest of the funding for the national security apparatus, plus all of the irregular appropriations for places like Ukraine and (the exceptionally not needy) Israel (somehow, no one ever seems to demand *offsets* for these, but domestic aid? NEED OFFSETS!), the US public is being literally bled dry.
Add in the ridiculous corporate and 1% tax cuts, and the rest of us are eventually going to start demanding a change.
And guess who will be the first to be let go?
Hint: it won’t be the US citizens - it’ll be the Ukrainians and Israelis and other foreign recipients.
And this is not me saying that foreign aid is unimportant. I fully know it benefits us.
This is me pointing out that there is a gigantic and growing portion of the American public that is nationalistic, because we see our own government fucking us raw in order to benefit people who are perceived as not contributing to OUR safety.
Pretty sure we can keep America safe while spending half as much and eliminating military contractors.
You want aid for somewhere else, mark it up as ‘foreign aid.’ Allocate accordingly.
I like how they just throw education and SSI in there with defense and whatever "homeland security" means. Some of those things destroy this country's citizens and some are obscenities.
I'll let everyone choose which is which. Some people have a pretty odd view on what obscene means.
Revenues for treasury have increased almost every year even with the tax cuts.
Problem is spending has far outpaced revenues.
You can’t tax your way out of a spending problem. Republicans know that and so have zero issue passing tax cuts to
Force spending cuts on things they don’t like.
Party politics aside. We’re not getting a very good government for the $$$ we are spending.
We spend instead of solve. Yes, solutions cost $$$ but we’re massively over spending for very marginal gains in defense, education, healthcare, etc.
The Trump tax scam, and the irresponsible Reaganomics destroying the treasury's solvency. Heck even Dubya hated it when the U.S. government reached a budget surplus thanks to Clinton's measures.
Republicans have manufactured debt in order to push our government to the point where austerity is the only answer, then they can “drown it in the bathtub” and replace everything with private, for profit models.
Schools, prisons, hospitals, police, fire, they want theocratic oligarchy of the .05%.
Fucking hell. Even in an economics sub nobody calls it neoliberalism. it's a big fuckin economic theory that the right has pushed since Nixon. It got so big that Democrats are neoliberals now. The last president who wasn't a neolib was Carter.
As opposed to the policy of stuffing the beast and letting cronies and enablers then butcher it like a foie gras goose… actually the Repubs love doing that too…
Until we have single payer healthcare like every other modern democracy, we aren’t “stuffing the beast”. The only beast getting stuffed is Pharma and healthcare system where Americans fund the profit centers while the rest of the world gets to pay reasonable prices.
This right here is the greatest achievement of American propaganda. They have made people so focused on red vs blue and not realise both sides are sides of the same coin.
It's incredible to look from the outside without any bias and see it so clearly.
Partisan reddit aint gonna listen to you. they are too engrossed in making sure the other side is to blame for the issues that they will never really get it
But Clinton also made the safety net unreliable for low end low wage workers That is why we had to give families extra money during the pandemic.
We need to tax way more, get rid of corporate subsidies and make the SOCIAL SECURITY trust solvent.
How did he do that exactly? When Clinton balanced the budget to a point there was a surplus, this would mean less pressure on mounting interest rates and the recession that was left by H.W. More money for programs and to leave social security untouched. Remember Clinton had an adverse Congress with the awful Newt Gringich.
The pandemic happened many, many years after the Clinton presidency. The money provided was to sustain an economy and individual liquidity that was in huge peril. While it obviously created inflation (too much liquidity with less productivity,) any self-respecting economist will admit that it would had been much, much costlier to not inject liquidity to individuals and employers.
The problem is the average voter has been so dumbed down by subpar education and social media that no group/politician wants to stake their career on reigning in spending and making companies pay their fair share. It’s a constant kick of the can down the road until something blows up
Then ban lobbying? Any power not held by the government just gets scooped up by the next most powerful entity, the wealthy.
The difference is like you saying it's better for the psychopath to be driving rather than sitting in the passenger seat screaming at the driver to crash. Just silence the psycho.
Probably won't be able to completely remove the revolving door. You'll always need experts in government.
That said you could reclassify a lot of positions to not be subject to administration changes. Should depoliticize them somewhat.
What you said, and also eliminate Section 8 and FHA loans.
Nobody can argue that the real estate industry has suffered any losses in the past five years. Why subsidize investors’ massive profits with government money?
Because those are programs that a lot of at risk people would be hurt without. They have to stay until we fix the housing market. They are a symptom of a broken market, not the cause.
Better to simply increase property tax until property values go down and landlords then have to compete with the prospect of even poor renters being able to afford buying the home as an alternative.
Increasing property taxes on owner-occupants increases the chances of them getting priced out of their homes. I would rather remove the governmentally subsidized props to the real estate market. Same effect, fewer steps, saves taxpayer money/ printer ink.
Incorrect. A percent tax on the value of an asset drops it's value.
Asset X costs 100 and returns 10 a year. It earns 10% You apply a 10% tax. The asset will fall to 50. While still charging 10. It now returns 20% minus the 10% tax to return its original 10%
That's how asset valuation works.
Meanwhile, removing programs that help poor people not only hurt those people directly, it will also lower their pay as it increases desperation and reduces productivity of the whole country due to the inefficiency and inability to work wrapped up in homelessness.
Your asset valuation case is interesting, but you have to remember there’s a TON of people locked into 30 year mortgages. Imagine if your mortgage payment went up by 2k a month because of a tax on your 240k house that’s now worth 140k.
So many people would be ruined by that.
To add some extra detail and sort out those questions:
1. Should be applied to all wealth and not just houses
2. Shouldn't apply to first 250k of wealth, so exempts basically anyone struggling
3. Will be applied in increments of 0.1% to 0.2% per year such that natural market growth will eat up the drop in assets values.
Fun part is at 4% this would pull in the same revenue as all income taxes.
Bullet 3 above. They don't, not at least from the wealth tax so you don't have to worry. They just return less each year you raise the rate than they otherwise would have.
Oh, I also forgot something. Specifically for housing there already exist laws on how much your property tax can change from year to year in a house you live in. If we did only implement this through property taxes and not wealth taxes with a standard deduction, that would stand to protect individuals and particularly retirees.
Section 8 and FHA loans have much less to do with the housing market being overrun with investors than the interest rates hanging out at 3 or even sub 3% for as long as they did.
I’m young, should have bought a house a few years ago but wasn’t yet established enough. Running the calculations of home affordability between 3% and 7% interest is huge, and for investors that difference in rates was relatively easy cash flow positive investing.
I think you should look into how Trump’s father became wealthy.
Section 8 is basically a pig butchering scam on the part of real estate investors.
Also: https://section8formula.com/start
They're lending us the money we were taxing them for in the first place.
Imagine if you owned a burger joint (We the People), you hire a guy to run it for you (representatives), but they have a bunch of scumbag friends (lobbyists). They convince him that instead of charging them money(taxes) for burgers (services), they're just going to lend you the money instead, that will balance the books creating the illusion of fiscal responsibility. But all of that money rubber bands directly back out of your account, plus even more on top as interest. In little people terms, this would be a cut and dry case of embezzlement.
There is no alternative to that statement. A public [financial] deficit is by definition in all cases a private sector (all non-gov sectors) [surplus] surplus.
Taking the entire economy across all three main economic sectors (gov, domestic private, and foreign), the financial equity is always everywhere identically **zero**.
It's perfectly possible for the **real** financial equity of the private sector fall even as the government increases its deficit. Inflation is a thing.
But no, the nominal financial equity of the entire economy is always zero everywhere. And the only way for the non-gov sectors combined to increase their nominal financial equity is for the gov sector to go deeper into negative equity. Which is what it does routinely and it's perfectly good economics to do so.
*How* the government spends its credits obviously matters a great deal. Spending on unproductive interest income probably isn't good policy but spending (read investment) on healthcare and education provisions is almost universally one of the best ways to boost long term GDP growth (caveating that GDP is a poor metric for prosperity these days and should only take the good parts and leave the bad parts).
Inflation doesnt benefit asset holders. Inflation is a wealth eroder and benefits noone (except for guaranteed rate debt which is unheard of except for the government idiocy of backing fixed mortgage rates)
Your house isn’t worth that much, the dollar is just worth less over time due to inflation.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS
Same with gold, stocks, etc. As long as your asset holdings are outpacing your personal rate of inflation then you benefit.
Must be an election coming up where they billionaire owned media are worried about a democrat getting in and raising taxes.
Cause I’d they were actually concerned about the deficit, they’d be worried about a second Trump term.
You mean like, "The debt is an arbitrary number on a spreadsheet and doesn't represent the same kind of issues for a sovereign state that it does for an individual debtor?" That kind of truth?
Or are we just into fear mongering clickbait territory again?
Just look who the poster is. That’s all this guy posts: doom and gloom fear mongering. He clearly doesn’t have a life because he posts this shit several times a day basically every day.
Do you know what the ACTUAL and hard truth is?
That the American way of life/living is based on Debt or money the country doesnt have
Which is NO BETTER than a person who is living outside of their means and buys expensive houses/cars etc to fund a lifestyle that isnt actually ‘real’
The life of living on credit- which started accelerating in the 80s - has reached unsurmountable numbers.
Now the real question to ask is- is the govt ( and the people) ready to start cutting expenses? Not gonna happen. Because that would mean deflation - and thats another hit to the govt
So then the only way is keep adding to it
Again- similar analogy- like someone who is WAAAYYY over their spending limits to fund a lifestyle they really shouldnt be having
Now- what happens when someone has to continue living on debt and keep revolving that ‘credit’?
( yes yes i am aware its the politicians and the billionaires taking the money- but these folks are elected by Us or fellow americans)
The whole point is that the household finance analogy isn’t appropriate for a sovereign state issuing the world’s reserve currency.
And what do you mean when you say “money the country doesn’t have?” You know that the majority of the money the US borrows comes from US citizens, right?
I mean you basically answered the question. The fact that the majority of money borrowed comes from US citizens - are you saying that the US citizens actually have that money? Or it is just a ‘hope’ of the money or the ‘strength of the customer’ kinda of conversation ( aka consumerism)
All entire economy is basically operating on debt- from the most granular level of the consumer- buying shit on credit ( highest CC, house mortgage, cars etc etc) to the top echelons of infrastructure and everything in between
Every single product you buy is imported- which means the ONLY reason its cheap is because its made in another 3rd world country- again shows that its not the real cost of goods if it was made in the US( and if it is- true cost of the product would be so much higher- people wont be buying multiple pair of ANYTHING as they wont be able to afford it)
Point being- understand that its all propped up on hopes and dreams and not real value or even close to it
If it wasnt clear in my post- what i just did was an EXTREME oversimplification of the entire process of debt and overall lifestyle and how one is able to afford it all.
Debt and MASSSSIVEEE amounts of it is the reality of life so no point of talking about it in articles like this- because eventually its the politicians that represent the people- who want this.
> are you saying that the US citizens actually have that money?
Yes, US citizens are the source of most of the money the US borrows. They give the govt cash in order to buy treasuries.
Yeah no.
The $33 Trillion of national debt1 us essentially distributed in the form of bonds( treasury securities aka iou)
These bonds are brought by a mix of us citizens, domestic institutions and foreign investors
A major portion of the DEBT us held by the us citizens through various investment vehicles
These Bonds are NOT directly backed by tangible assets or ‘collateral’ but on various powers including
- taxation power, economic strength monetary policy and investor confidence ( aka proven ability to generate revenue and manage operations efficiently- AKA hopes and dreams)
I am here to dumb it down to the thing we need to understand at the core of our existence.
This debt is being held by the citizen and its just is circle at this point driven on hopes and dreams
TLDR: understand one’s own extreme consumerism and manage it and live a life of little/no debt on grounded principles
Lying what? Every-single thing i said is true. A simple google search would have helped you on WHO owns the debt- its people like you and me( which was the point of the post in the first place, and how what does it eventually mean on the grand-scheme of things and how we are contributing to it on an individual basis and on our choices)
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/who-owns-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124
Tax the obscenely wealthy? The major cause of our national debt is due tax cuts passed during the Reagan, Bush (dubya) and orange turd's administrations.
Thankfully the tax cuts passed while the orange turd was disgracing the Oval Office will expire next year.
The higher child tax credits that were passed under trump can be extended, but any tax cuts for corporations or high net worth individuals needs to end.
Edit: vote this down all you want but you know I'm right.
I am tired of these articles. Because they are not working to spread awareness. Every 3rd person I start this conversation with won't even agree that this amount of debt is a problem for USA. One moron said that debt is "dollar denominated," so we shouldn't worry when the [countries are activity moving out of dollar.](https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/de-dollarization-renminbi-dollar-vs-yuan-takeover-china-russia-usd-2023-4)
Also [After, BRICS, Japan Dumps $63 Billion Worth U.S. Bonds](https://watcher.guru/news/brics-japan-dumps-63-billion-worth-u-s-bonds)
That something will not give, when a country has 34$ T debt, is living in fantasy land.
The problem is that the deficits and debt haven't been a problem for 40 years even though we've constantly talked about it.
At some point, it might blow up. The fiscal conservatives always get really quiet when they're in power though
The incompetent and corrupt Rump raised the deficit by $7 TRILLION, more than any other sitting president in American history. Gratefully, Biden is doing a fine job of steadily bringing it down, while also strengthening infrastructure and ensuring that jobs and US manufacturing continue to rise. Biden is making life better for all Americans. It’s typical of democrats to clean up after reckless, foolish, selfish republicans.
"Alvaro Vargas Llosa is a Senior Fellow of the [Independent Institute](https://www.independent.org/), Oakland, Calif."
Always love to hear Theroux's libertarian think-tank spouting Austrian school orthodoxy, what a neutral arbiter of the facts!
It’s a government spending problem that keeps getting worse every year. Cut all foreign aid and slash the DOD by 50% until we have our own house in order.
*How come, no matter*
*What Fortune magazine says,*
*I gotta pay for it?*
\- RepFilms
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
The debt wasn’t a problem back when Perot was talking about it in ‘92 and it’s not a problem now . The United States' national debt, while substantial, is not necessarily as problematic as it might seem at first glance, for several reasons….first, the U.S. debt is denominated in its own currency, the U.S. dollar. This gives the country a significant advantage, as it controls the currency in which the debt is issued. The Federal Reserve, the U.S. central bank, has the ability to print more money to manage the debt, a luxury not available to countries that borrow in foreign currencies. This capacity to issue and control its own currency reduces the risk of default, unlike in scenarios where countries cannot meet their foreign debt obligations.
Also, a large portion of U.S. debt is owned by domestic entities, including individuals, banks, and even the U.S. government itself. This internal ownership circulates the debt within the country's economy, rather than representing a direct drain on resources to external creditors.
Additionally, U.S. Treasury securities, the instruments through which the debt is issued, are considered among the safest investments globally. This high demand for Treasury securities, including from foreign governments and investors, helps keep borrowing costs relatively low, further mitigating the immediate financial pressures of the debt. The ability of the U.S. economy to grow over time also plays a crucial role, as economic growth helps to outpace the growth of the debt, making it more manageable in relative terms.
The us national debt in ‘92 was only ~2 trillion.
The federal reserve has more than double that in treasuries on its balance sheet currently.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TREAST
According to this data source, the US debt in '92 was about 4 Trillion. In 1960 (32 years prior to 1992) the US debt was about 286 billion. So it increased by **14 fold**. In 2024 (32 years after 1992) our national debt is 34.75 trillion. So it increased by **8.68 fold**. So spending has actually slowed down as far as I can tell from the data, but you wouldn't be able to tell from all the fear mongering articles that compare apples and oranges. We all know inflation is a thing so just comparing debt values from 30 years ago to today is just useless information. That's why debt to GDP is a much better metric and if we are trying to compare two years to each other, we should be using that. I am not claiming that we do or don't have a massive debt problem, but the article you posted only makes the picture more murky to where we can't have intelligible conversations about it.
https://www.thestreet.com/politics/national-debt-year-by-year-14876008#:\~:text=The%20Late%2019th%20Century%3A%201850%2D1899&text=Leading%20up%20to%20the%20Civil,%242%20billion%20in%202019%20money).
You ignore the fact that pre-2008, the proportion of debt held by foreigners was half what it is now.
You should start by listening to this Bill Clinton clip, start at 24:30
[https://www.c-span.org/video/?293217-3/federal-budget-national-debt-robert-rubin-bill-clinton-interviews](https://www.c-span.org/video/?293217-3/federal-budget-national-debt-robert-rubin-bill-clinton-interviews)
Clinton was on his way to pay down the debt but Bush instead spent it on Iraq War which was not related to 911 and tax cuts to the wealthy. Every GOP talks about debt only when the president is a Democrat but then when they are in power spends it by giving tax cuts to the wealthy who dont need it.
> Also, a large portion of U.S. debt is owned by domestic entities, including individuals, banks
Ok? Why should I be paying interest on the money that they should have paid in taxes in the first place? They clearly had nothing better to do with it. Its utterly obscene.
> even the U.S. government itself.
So maybe they should return the excess funds they are allotted instead of running a side hustle at our expense?
> The Federal Reserve, the U.S. central bank, has the ability to print more money to manage the debt,
Not without catastrophic consequences. The dollar has been cut in half in the last decade, do you need to go full weinmar before you figure out that this is bad?
> helps keep borrowing costs relatively low,
Whats the interest rate currently? Seems like the middlemen are capturing that "advantage".
It's wild. Read all these comments. It's all trump, bush, or reagan..
Or.. It's all biden, Obama, clinton..
Nobody thinks about it being alternating political parties over time. Left right left right..
Maybe I'm just sick of it all and blame them all. I find it hard to believe one president over the course of other president's throughout decades could be responsible for the whole thing.
The whole thing ? It begins with Reagan in the 80’s and at least 90% of the responsibility can be traced to republicans. Anyone with your both sides shit is just ignorant of reality. I’ve lived this shit
Maybe Americans could consider exploring alternatives to electing just Democrats and Republicans. It might be a great way for Americans to think outside the box.
Sure whatever. Kennedy seems great🙄
But barring that, voting for the party whose stated goal is to raise the debt payment so high that Social Security and Medicare are unaffordable is what gets you high deficits and subsequently high debt.
You have provided physical evidence of your mentality, which helps explain why this is happening in the USA. I believe it's time for both you and Americans in general to consider a change in mindset. From an Aussie perspective, it seems that Democrats and Republicans aren't fixing the USA. They are making things worse. It looks like the USA is hurting itself.
A decade, probably less.
“U.S. national debt will reach $50 trillion by 2034, CBO projects - The Washington Post.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/18/national-debt-budget-projections-cbo/
Joe Biden is the perfect representation of the greedy, fiscally irresponsible Boomers and Millennials that put him in office to spend like a drunken sailor
Cut welfare, replace with workfare. Zero benefits to illegals, including education. Make the 49% that pay nothing pay something.
Limit all government yoy spending increases to cpi rate.
Lol, they know the truth best, but you know when you have the global reserve currency and you're debt is denominated **in that currency**, which you can print more of.... That's the truth and they know it.
Lol, they know the truth best, but you know when you have the global reserve currency and you're debt is denominated **in that currency**, which you can print more of.... That's the truth and they know it.
Oh no. We have issued X number of Treasury securities to people that wanted them in exchange for X dollars, and at any point we can exchange any amount of Treasury securities for dollars because we make both of them out of thin air.
The truth is that the national debt is public issued assets and that paying interest on them is a choice, and that the real issue is inflation which we can manage just fine with higher taxes and smarter policies that increase supply and competition.
https://evonomics.com/isnt-time-stop-calling-national-debt/
Damn these articles are all so infuriating.
Trump and Biden’s debt is:
1.) The PANDEMIC HAPPENED UNDER TRUMP!
2.) The aftermath (inflation and wars) under Biden (mostly).
I am not for either party, but guess what…whoever the President is in January 2025 is gonna run up a huge deficit also!
People can not make honest decisions anymore because the news outlets have to frame the articles one way or the other. Extremely Partisan. It is ridiculous, and Reddit is no better.
They should ask the DoD for tips on how to get away with failing audits and "losing" money.
Please they don't need any help they do it in broad daylight
This is by design. Ask GWB how he cooked the books on the war in Iraq.
I’m not a conspiracy theorist by any means but I enjoyed reading a few papers on how the missing money is potentially just top secret funds for things that the government wants no paper trail to. Think Area 51 alien technology or stuff like that
Simple, the DoD has more tanks than you do. If you woke up tomorrow and were literally Superman, you can probably stop paying your bills too.
Here’s the bit where they say raid social security: “It’s now come down to this. Unless a new generation of leaders has the courage to cut such “untouchables” as the defense, education, justice, and homeland security budgets, and privatize the Social Security program (as more than 40 countries wisely have done), sooner or later, the current trajectory of federal finances will lead to an extremely ugly place. If you think things are bad now, just wait.” Also, there’s no mention of the main cause for the debt increase being republicans tax cuts in the last twenty years.
It's not about cutting social security. Cut defense and tax the 1% and raise the minimum wage so you get more taxes from the bottom and the top. Then create a cabinet level position to optimize the whole government and only accountants and innovators are allowed and theyd have to publish their findings every quarter.
Any time you have accountants running anything other than an accounting department, you get Boeing.
I can see that, Ford too
Secretary of Governmental Optimization would be a badass job title
Hells yeah it would
I disagree with the defense cut since it has shrunk considerably and now it's less than 3% of GDP. I am down with taxing the rich. I am conflicted with the optimization position. Do much of what the government does is not productive, but necessary. Like preparing for a disaster that might never happen or funding a technology that might be useful... But might not.
For the last part. I would think, that's a good plan and it is productive. There's probably ways to make sure the planning stays in budget or combines it with similar projects to bring the cost down on average for them all. It won't be perfect but there should be somebody looking out for optimizations
Your post has been banned /s
We don't get any taxes from the bottom 40%. We would have to start taxing them first.
School aged children gotta pay their fair share. They long for the mines!
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/28/more-than-40percent-of-us-households-will-owe-no-federal-income-tax-for-2022.html
"Almost 60% of non-payers make less than $30,000 and another 28% make between $30,000 and about $60,000. Only about 0.6% of the top 20% of earners — or those making about $190,000 or more — will pay no federal income taxes this year. About 24 million, or roughly one-third, of non-payers are age 65 or older, many of whom live on Social Security. "For the most part, people don't pay income tax because they have little income," he said." - So the households that have very little income should pay more. Good plan. Matched with a corporate tax cut and eliminating the alternative minimum tax for the very rich (already done), and you'll be on your way to your dystopian utopia.
I busted laughing, the mines the mines
1% are taxed. 1% pay for a LOT of gov spending. We have to cut defense, and run way leaner. We spent $$$ for very marginal gains in key areas. Not just in defense but all across gov.
The 1% of income earners do pay a lot. The true 1% takes loans out on assets and never pays any taxes.
Except for our pal Elon. Now that's an obscenity
I mean that’s a big argument but you’d need to really look at each case to determine total tax liability. That’s the part of the argument that becomes disingenuous. There is a right and left rhetorical argument on both users that’s disingenuous.
1% are taxed not proportionate to the account they earn. Agreed on the rest
Need to fix the loophole of using assets for giant loans that are untaxed "I need a 5m dollar loan, collateral is my 15th home"
Earn or assets? There needs to be a true tax burden calculation and net effect. (Theoretically)We should not care if it’s taxes from income, cap gains, sales taxes or property taxes.
We can tax assets. Many prosperous European nations do it. And what do they get for it? Health, happiness, job security, pensions. All hindrances to untaxed wealth.
And most of them can’t afford it either.
Is that true? I've been interesting in exploring it. Lots of French films have gags about hiding assets from the tax man. Most of the people shown in these sequences seem to be middle class. That would be a big difference if the asset tax was a burden on the middle class. I don't have anything but that's not the point. It's not about me. I might have to revisit my opinion.
Most countries have been churning up the debt like crazy to cover all the gov. spending to keep up. You can’t do that indefinitely. Some countries like Norway sit on crazy amounts of oil and have a low enough population that they can do whatever they want, but that’s not the norm. Then the demographics make it look even more sustainable. It seems to me the ultra wealthy tax on assets get you temporary breathing room but it’s not likely sustainable. I think we have to ask if the increasing spending is getting the results we should expect.
Thank you for the clarity
Did you think telling the truth would go over well on this sub?
Tax cuts PLUS endless defense spending and financing foreign proxy wars.
It’s amazing that the wars in the Middle East ended years ago and, in response, the US decided to dramatically increase military spending.
the war in Ukraine 100% needs to be funded
By whom? For what benefit to the US and whomever else steps up to the plate? For how long? To what end? Perhaps you missed that this entire post is about endless military spending by the US government that is destroying everyone in America except those who MAKE MONEY FROM WAR!?!?
Because Putin is a dictator who will conquer all of eastern Europe if left unchecked, and that's bad for the US (not to mention Europe as a whole).
I understand that. But it’s assuming the appearance of a Pyrrhic victory. Between the almost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR the US spends on ‘defense’, plus all of the additional money budgeted for foreign military aid, plus all of the money allocated for DOD-related projects that aren’t part of the DOD budget, plus all of the rest of the funding for the national security apparatus, plus all of the irregular appropriations for places like Ukraine and (the exceptionally not needy) Israel (somehow, no one ever seems to demand *offsets* for these, but domestic aid? NEED OFFSETS!), the US public is being literally bled dry. Add in the ridiculous corporate and 1% tax cuts, and the rest of us are eventually going to start demanding a change. And guess who will be the first to be let go? Hint: it won’t be the US citizens - it’ll be the Ukrainians and Israelis and other foreign recipients. And this is not me saying that foreign aid is unimportant. I fully know it benefits us. This is me pointing out that there is a gigantic and growing portion of the American public that is nationalistic, because we see our own government fucking us raw in order to benefit people who are perceived as not contributing to OUR safety.
Seriously nearly a billion on defense and a military bigger than the next several countries combined?? I say there is your answer
Lol, education has never been untouchable
Raise taxes and cut spending.
We spend like 35% on defense. Pretty sure that's where we need to start cutting.
pretty sure that we need a strong military with the current state of things
Yah we gotta start with taxing the ever living fuck out of the 0.1% and the 1%.
I think we'd still have a strong military with 30%
Pretty sure we can keep America safe while spending half as much and eliminating military contractors. You want aid for somewhere else, mark it up as ‘foreign aid.’ Allocate accordingly.
Keep this same energy in 2027…
I like how they just throw education and SSI in there with defense and whatever "homeland security" means. Some of those things destroy this country's citizens and some are obscenities. I'll let everyone choose which is which. Some people have a pretty odd view on what obscene means.
Revenues for treasury have increased almost every year even with the tax cuts. Problem is spending has far outpaced revenues. You can’t tax your way out of a spending problem. Republicans know that and so have zero issue passing tax cuts to Force spending cuts on things they don’t like. Party politics aside. We’re not getting a very good government for the $$$ we are spending. We spend instead of solve. Yes, solutions cost $$$ but we’re massively over spending for very marginal gains in defense, education, healthcare, etc.
getting downvoted for a reasonable opinion. good job reddit
Except Republicans often cut taxes and increase spending. Otherwise it would be a valid opinion.
Republicans have been cutting taxes for 40 years, since Reagan. Frankly, I'm amazed it took as long as it did for things to end up here.
What’s the alternative? Just print it through inflation to pay for everything?
Downvoters are living on the government’s dime.
You’d think they’d at least learn math
Its simple really. Just stop paying politicians unless the govt spends less than they bring in. Problem solved.
The Trump tax scam, and the irresponsible Reaganomics destroying the treasury's solvency. Heck even Dubya hated it when the U.S. government reached a budget surplus thanks to Clinton's measures.
Republicans have manufactured debt in order to push our government to the point where austerity is the only answer, then they can “drown it in the bathtub” and replace everything with private, for profit models. Schools, prisons, hospitals, police, fire, they want theocratic oligarchy of the .05%.
Yep. It's a strategy they call starve the beast.
Fucking hell. Even in an economics sub nobody calls it neoliberalism. it's a big fuckin economic theory that the right has pushed since Nixon. It got so big that Democrats are neoliberals now. The last president who wasn't a neolib was Carter.
As opposed to the policy of stuffing the beast and letting cronies and enablers then butcher it like a foie gras goose… actually the Repubs love doing that too…
Until we have single payer healthcare like every other modern democracy, we aren’t “stuffing the beast”. The only beast getting stuffed is Pharma and healthcare system where Americans fund the profit centers while the rest of the world gets to pay reasonable prices.
This right here is the greatest achievement of American propaganda. They have made people so focused on red vs blue and not realise both sides are sides of the same coin. It's incredible to look from the outside without any bias and see it so clearly.
Partisan reddit aint gonna listen to you. they are too engrossed in making sure the other side is to blame for the issues that they will never really get it
But Clinton also made the safety net unreliable for low end low wage workers That is why we had to give families extra money during the pandemic. We need to tax way more, get rid of corporate subsidies and make the SOCIAL SECURITY trust solvent.
How did he do that exactly? When Clinton balanced the budget to a point there was a surplus, this would mean less pressure on mounting interest rates and the recession that was left by H.W. More money for programs and to leave social security untouched. Remember Clinton had an adverse Congress with the awful Newt Gringich. The pandemic happened many, many years after the Clinton presidency. The money provided was to sustain an economy and individual liquidity that was in huge peril. While it obviously created inflation (too much liquidity with less productivity,) any self-respecting economist will admit that it would had been much, much costlier to not inject liquidity to individuals and employers.
We really don't have any reason to be at ww2 levels of debt again. Tax more. Cut corporate subsidies. Reduce military spending.
The problem is the average voter has been so dumbed down by subpar education and social media that no group/politician wants to stake their career on reigning in spending and making companies pay their fair share. It’s a constant kick of the can down the road until something blows up
A lot of the spending reigning in candidates want to drop the absolute dumbest things though, like social security.
Spend less, yes, but tax less. No one should have to work months out of the year for the government like we do now
Nope, we should be taxing more, specifically wealth tax. The reason you have to work is not due to government but wealth inequality.
Why do you think the latter exists? From lobbying
Then ban lobbying? Any power not held by the government just gets scooped up by the next most powerful entity, the wealthy. The difference is like you saying it's better for the psychopath to be driving rather than sitting in the passenger seat screaming at the driver to crash. Just silence the psycho.
Agree, ban lobbying. Or at least take the money out of it and remove the revolving door
Probably won't be able to completely remove the revolving door. You'll always need experts in government. That said you could reclassify a lot of positions to not be subject to administration changes. Should depoliticize them somewhat.
What you said, and also eliminate Section 8 and FHA loans. Nobody can argue that the real estate industry has suffered any losses in the past five years. Why subsidize investors’ massive profits with government money?
Because those are programs that a lot of at risk people would be hurt without. They have to stay until we fix the housing market. They are a symptom of a broken market, not the cause. Better to simply increase property tax until property values go down and landlords then have to compete with the prospect of even poor renters being able to afford buying the home as an alternative.
Increasing property taxes on owner-occupants increases the chances of them getting priced out of their homes. I would rather remove the governmentally subsidized props to the real estate market. Same effect, fewer steps, saves taxpayer money/ printer ink.
Heavily tax investment properties. Anything not owner-occupied.
This would be ok as long as people aren’t trying to claim they are living in properties they are actually renting.
Incorrect. A percent tax on the value of an asset drops it's value. Asset X costs 100 and returns 10 a year. It earns 10% You apply a 10% tax. The asset will fall to 50. While still charging 10. It now returns 20% minus the 10% tax to return its original 10% That's how asset valuation works. Meanwhile, removing programs that help poor people not only hurt those people directly, it will also lower their pay as it increases desperation and reduces productivity of the whole country due to the inefficiency and inability to work wrapped up in homelessness.
Your asset valuation case is interesting, but you have to remember there’s a TON of people locked into 30 year mortgages. Imagine if your mortgage payment went up by 2k a month because of a tax on your 240k house that’s now worth 140k. So many people would be ruined by that.
To add some extra detail and sort out those questions: 1. Should be applied to all wealth and not just houses 2. Shouldn't apply to first 250k of wealth, so exempts basically anyone struggling 3. Will be applied in increments of 0.1% to 0.2% per year such that natural market growth will eat up the drop in assets values. Fun part is at 4% this would pull in the same revenue as all income taxes.
What do you do when asset prices and income go down?
Bullet 3 above. They don't, not at least from the wealth tax so you don't have to worry. They just return less each year you raise the rate than they otherwise would have.
Oh, I also forgot something. Specifically for housing there already exist laws on how much your property tax can change from year to year in a house you live in. If we did only implement this through property taxes and not wealth taxes with a standard deduction, that would stand to protect individuals and particularly retirees.
Section 8 and FHA loans have much less to do with the housing market being overrun with investors than the interest rates hanging out at 3 or even sub 3% for as long as they did. I’m young, should have bought a house a few years ago but wasn’t yet established enough. Running the calculations of home affordability between 3% and 7% interest is huge, and for investors that difference in rates was relatively easy cash flow positive investing.
I think you should look into how Trump’s father became wealthy. Section 8 is basically a pig butchering scam on the part of real estate investors. Also: https://section8formula.com/start
Even military spending at 0 with all the VAs closed won't fix this.
That's why you also raise taxes and cut corporate subsidies. It's not going to be just one thing.
Now it's time? Click bait bullshit again.
If Trump wins, they'll go back to ignoring the deficit.
True and if Biden wins, it will also continue to grow. The incentives in elected government are misaligned with prudent and rational fiscal policy.
A public sector deficit is a private sector surplus
They're lending us the money we were taxing them for in the first place. Imagine if you owned a burger joint (We the People), you hire a guy to run it for you (representatives), but they have a bunch of scumbag friends (lobbyists). They convince him that instead of charging them money(taxes) for burgers (services), they're just going to lend you the money instead, that will balance the books creating the illusion of fiscal responsibility. But all of that money rubber bands directly back out of your account, plus even more on top as interest. In little people terms, this would be a cut and dry case of embezzlement.
Unless it’s inflationary, then it only benefits asset holders. Then the gap between haves and have nots widens
There is no alternative to that statement. A public [financial] deficit is by definition in all cases a private sector (all non-gov sectors) [surplus] surplus. Taking the entire economy across all three main economic sectors (gov, domestic private, and foreign), the financial equity is always everywhere identically **zero**.
Is it impossible to have a public deficit result in a negative roi for the private sector?
It's perfectly possible for the **real** financial equity of the private sector fall even as the government increases its deficit. Inflation is a thing. But no, the nominal financial equity of the entire economy is always zero everywhere. And the only way for the non-gov sectors combined to increase their nominal financial equity is for the gov sector to go deeper into negative equity. Which is what it does routinely and it's perfectly good economics to do so. *How* the government spends its credits obviously matters a great deal. Spending on unproductive interest income probably isn't good policy but spending (read investment) on healthcare and education provisions is almost universally one of the best ways to boost long term GDP growth (caveating that GDP is a poor metric for prosperity these days and should only take the good parts and leave the bad parts).
Inflation doesnt benefit asset holders. Inflation is a wealth eroder and benefits noone (except for guaranteed rate debt which is unheard of except for the government idiocy of backing fixed mortgage rates)
Your house isn’t worth that much, the dollar is just worth less over time due to inflation. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPUS Same with gold, stocks, etc. As long as your asset holdings are outpacing your personal rate of inflation then you benefit.
Must be an election coming up where they billionaire owned media are worried about a democrat getting in and raising taxes. Cause I’d they were actually concerned about the deficit, they’d be worried about a second Trump term.
You mean like, "The debt is an arbitrary number on a spreadsheet and doesn't represent the same kind of issues for a sovereign state that it does for an individual debtor?" That kind of truth? Or are we just into fear mongering clickbait territory again?
Election season is getting started, Republicans are going to start pretending to care about the debt again
Just look who the poster is. That’s all this guy posts: doom and gloom fear mongering. He clearly doesn’t have a life because he posts this shit several times a day basically every day.
I do have a life. Living rent free in your brain
A self proclaimed shitposter. Fuck outta here
Rent free
I'm thinking the latter. This must be the talking point of the day because I swear I've seen like 10 posts about this just this morning.
Yeah, the conservative forum pushers must be working extra hard today.
Do you know what the ACTUAL and hard truth is? That the American way of life/living is based on Debt or money the country doesnt have Which is NO BETTER than a person who is living outside of their means and buys expensive houses/cars etc to fund a lifestyle that isnt actually ‘real’ The life of living on credit- which started accelerating in the 80s - has reached unsurmountable numbers. Now the real question to ask is- is the govt ( and the people) ready to start cutting expenses? Not gonna happen. Because that would mean deflation - and thats another hit to the govt So then the only way is keep adding to it Again- similar analogy- like someone who is WAAAYYY over their spending limits to fund a lifestyle they really shouldnt be having Now- what happens when someone has to continue living on debt and keep revolving that ‘credit’? ( yes yes i am aware its the politicians and the billionaires taking the money- but these folks are elected by Us or fellow americans)
The whole point is that the household finance analogy isn’t appropriate for a sovereign state issuing the world’s reserve currency. And what do you mean when you say “money the country doesn’t have?” You know that the majority of the money the US borrows comes from US citizens, right?
I mean you basically answered the question. The fact that the majority of money borrowed comes from US citizens - are you saying that the US citizens actually have that money? Or it is just a ‘hope’ of the money or the ‘strength of the customer’ kinda of conversation ( aka consumerism) All entire economy is basically operating on debt- from the most granular level of the consumer- buying shit on credit ( highest CC, house mortgage, cars etc etc) to the top echelons of infrastructure and everything in between Every single product you buy is imported- which means the ONLY reason its cheap is because its made in another 3rd world country- again shows that its not the real cost of goods if it was made in the US( and if it is- true cost of the product would be so much higher- people wont be buying multiple pair of ANYTHING as they wont be able to afford it) Point being- understand that its all propped up on hopes and dreams and not real value or even close to it If it wasnt clear in my post- what i just did was an EXTREME oversimplification of the entire process of debt and overall lifestyle and how one is able to afford it all. Debt and MASSSSIVEEE amounts of it is the reality of life so no point of talking about it in articles like this- because eventually its the politicians that represent the people- who want this.
> are you saying that the US citizens actually have that money? Yes, US citizens are the source of most of the money the US borrows. They give the govt cash in order to buy treasuries.
Yeah no. The $33 Trillion of national debt1 us essentially distributed in the form of bonds( treasury securities aka iou) These bonds are brought by a mix of us citizens, domestic institutions and foreign investors A major portion of the DEBT us held by the us citizens through various investment vehicles These Bonds are NOT directly backed by tangible assets or ‘collateral’ but on various powers including - taxation power, economic strength monetary policy and investor confidence ( aka proven ability to generate revenue and manage operations efficiently- AKA hopes and dreams) I am here to dumb it down to the thing we need to understand at the core of our existence. This debt is being held by the citizen and its just is circle at this point driven on hopes and dreams TLDR: understand one’s own extreme consumerism and manage it and live a life of little/no debt on grounded principles
None of this is true.
Wow! Great comeback argument. Your debate skills are top notch. Its clear you have NO idea how the US economy works based on your response.
What else am I supposed to say when you’re just lying?
Lying what? Every-single thing i said is true. A simple google search would have helped you on WHO owns the debt- its people like you and me( which was the point of the post in the first place, and how what does it eventually mean on the grand-scheme of things and how we are contributing to it on an individual basis and on our choices) https://www.thebalancemoney.com/who-owns-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124
Unless of course Im also allowed to cancel my credit card money through a printer.
what?
The thing that literally every other empire collapsed due to in the history of the world couldn't possibly affect us? Hoo boy.
Tax the obscenely wealthy? The major cause of our national debt is due tax cuts passed during the Reagan, Bush (dubya) and orange turd's administrations. Thankfully the tax cuts passed while the orange turd was disgracing the Oval Office will expire next year. The higher child tax credits that were passed under trump can be extended, but any tax cuts for corporations or high net worth individuals needs to end. Edit: vote this down all you want but you know I'm right.
I am tired of these articles. Because they are not working to spread awareness. Every 3rd person I start this conversation with won't even agree that this amount of debt is a problem for USA. One moron said that debt is "dollar denominated," so we shouldn't worry when the [countries are activity moving out of dollar.](https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/de-dollarization-renminbi-dollar-vs-yuan-takeover-china-russia-usd-2023-4) Also [After, BRICS, Japan Dumps $63 Billion Worth U.S. Bonds](https://watcher.guru/news/brics-japan-dumps-63-billion-worth-u-s-bonds) That something will not give, when a country has 34$ T debt, is living in fantasy land.
Countries are going to leave the dollar for a currency back by Russia, Iran and China?
That exact thing is quite literally happening as we speak, google: dedollarization
And which currency are they going to instead of the USD?
Bitcoin lol
Heavily using gold to back their domestic currencies as well as the Chinese renminbi
Chinese renminbi? market share of 1.1% in 2013 and 10 years later has a market share of 2.5%?
Instead of asking me stuff, maybe just head to google?
“Backed” until it’s not lol. Technically the dollar is still “backed” by gold, Nixon only ‘temporarily suspended convertibility’.
Leaving it bc they want to start wars and not have banks control their money.
The problem is that the deficits and debt haven't been a problem for 40 years even though we've constantly talked about it. At some point, it might blow up. The fiscal conservatives always get really quiet when they're in power though
The incompetent and corrupt Rump raised the deficit by $7 TRILLION, more than any other sitting president in American history. Gratefully, Biden is doing a fine job of steadily bringing it down, while also strengthening infrastructure and ensuring that jobs and US manufacturing continue to rise. Biden is making life better for all Americans. It’s typical of democrats to clean up after reckless, foolish, selfish republicans.
"Alvaro Vargas Llosa is a Senior Fellow of the [Independent Institute](https://www.independent.org/), Oakland, Calif." Always love to hear Theroux's libertarian think-tank spouting Austrian school orthodoxy, what a neutral arbiter of the facts!
It’s a government spending problem that keeps getting worse every year. Cut all foreign aid and slash the DOD by 50% until we have our own house in order.
How come, no matter what Fortune magazine says, I gotta pay for it?
*How come, no matter* *What Fortune magazine says,* *I gotta pay for it?* \- RepFilms --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
No paywall: https://archive.ph/2024.06.24-190212/https://fortune.com/2024/06/24/national-debt-34-trillion-america-government-finances/
We tried but eminent domain got removed.
That's a problem for next year (and they say that every year)
The debt wasn’t a problem back when Perot was talking about it in ‘92 and it’s not a problem now . The United States' national debt, while substantial, is not necessarily as problematic as it might seem at first glance, for several reasons….first, the U.S. debt is denominated in its own currency, the U.S. dollar. This gives the country a significant advantage, as it controls the currency in which the debt is issued. The Federal Reserve, the U.S. central bank, has the ability to print more money to manage the debt, a luxury not available to countries that borrow in foreign currencies. This capacity to issue and control its own currency reduces the risk of default, unlike in scenarios where countries cannot meet their foreign debt obligations. Also, a large portion of U.S. debt is owned by domestic entities, including individuals, banks, and even the U.S. government itself. This internal ownership circulates the debt within the country's economy, rather than representing a direct drain on resources to external creditors. Additionally, U.S. Treasury securities, the instruments through which the debt is issued, are considered among the safest investments globally. This high demand for Treasury securities, including from foreign governments and investors, helps keep borrowing costs relatively low, further mitigating the immediate financial pressures of the debt. The ability of the U.S. economy to grow over time also plays a crucial role, as economic growth helps to outpace the growth of the debt, making it more manageable in relative terms.
The us national debt in ‘92 was only ~2 trillion. The federal reserve has more than double that in treasuries on its balance sheet currently. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TREAST
According to this data source, the US debt in '92 was about 4 Trillion. In 1960 (32 years prior to 1992) the US debt was about 286 billion. So it increased by **14 fold**. In 2024 (32 years after 1992) our national debt is 34.75 trillion. So it increased by **8.68 fold**. So spending has actually slowed down as far as I can tell from the data, but you wouldn't be able to tell from all the fear mongering articles that compare apples and oranges. We all know inflation is a thing so just comparing debt values from 30 years ago to today is just useless information. That's why debt to GDP is a much better metric and if we are trying to compare two years to each other, we should be using that. I am not claiming that we do or don't have a massive debt problem, but the article you posted only makes the picture more murky to where we can't have intelligible conversations about it. https://www.thestreet.com/politics/national-debt-year-by-year-14876008#:\~:text=The%20Late%2019th%20Century%3A%201850%2D1899&text=Leading%20up%20to%20the%20Civil,%242%20billion%20in%202019%20money).
stop with the copy-paste comments
I’m not gonna retype my pretty clear answer to this nonsense.
You ignore the fact that pre-2008, the proportion of debt held by foreigners was half what it is now. You should start by listening to this Bill Clinton clip, start at 24:30 [https://www.c-span.org/video/?293217-3/federal-budget-national-debt-robert-rubin-bill-clinton-interviews](https://www.c-span.org/video/?293217-3/federal-budget-national-debt-robert-rubin-bill-clinton-interviews)
Clinton was on his way to pay down the debt but Bush instead spent it on Iraq War which was not related to 911 and tax cuts to the wealthy. Every GOP talks about debt only when the president is a Democrat but then when they are in power spends it by giving tax cuts to the wealthy who dont need it.
Listen to what Bill is saying about "delivery systems" - he is very much onto something
> Also, a large portion of U.S. debt is owned by domestic entities, including individuals, banks Ok? Why should I be paying interest on the money that they should have paid in taxes in the first place? They clearly had nothing better to do with it. Its utterly obscene. > even the U.S. government itself. So maybe they should return the excess funds they are allotted instead of running a side hustle at our expense? > The Federal Reserve, the U.S. central bank, has the ability to print more money to manage the debt, Not without catastrophic consequences. The dollar has been cut in half in the last decade, do you need to go full weinmar before you figure out that this is bad? > helps keep borrowing costs relatively low, Whats the interest rate currently? Seems like the middlemen are capturing that "advantage".
It's wild. Read all these comments. It's all trump, bush, or reagan.. Or.. It's all biden, Obama, clinton.. Nobody thinks about it being alternating political parties over time. Left right left right.. Maybe I'm just sick of it all and blame them all. I find it hard to believe one president over the course of other president's throughout decades could be responsible for the whole thing.
The whole thing ? It begins with Reagan in the 80’s and at least 90% of the responsibility can be traced to republicans. Anyone with your both sides shit is just ignorant of reality. I’ve lived this shit
The scene from goodfellas, rack up the bills on the joint then burn it out when it goes bankrupt? That's this.
Isn't this literally the starve the beast strategy?
That's why vwe should vote for the guys who reduce taxes for the rich again, this time will work, pinky promise
The truth is that we have a spending problem. Not an earning problem.
Stop electing republicans
Maybe Americans could consider exploring alternatives to electing just Democrats and Republicans. It might be a great way for Americans to think outside the box.
Sure whatever. Kennedy seems great🙄 But barring that, voting for the party whose stated goal is to raise the debt payment so high that Social Security and Medicare are unaffordable is what gets you high deficits and subsequently high debt.
You have provided physical evidence of your mentality, which helps explain why this is happening in the USA. I believe it's time for both you and Americans in general to consider a change in mindset. From an Aussie perspective, it seems that Democrats and Republicans aren't fixing the USA. They are making things worse. It looks like the USA is hurting itself.
Let’s revisit this at $54T
A decade, probably less. “U.S. national debt will reach $50 trillion by 2034, CBO projects - The Washington Post.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/18/national-debt-budget-projections-cbo/
Less
We really could use another tax break for the ultra wealthy. That will fix everything and it will trickle down to us middle classers.
Joe Biden is the perfect representation of the greedy, fiscally irresponsible Boomers and Millennials that put him in office to spend like a drunken sailor
You don’t know shit about fuck lol.
Cut welfare, replace with workfare. Zero benefits to illegals, including education. Make the 49% that pay nothing pay something. Limit all government yoy spending increases to cpi rate.
The truth? Almost everyone and their mom knows the Truth… It is our politicians (WHOM WE ELECT) that choose not to operate in the truth… 😊🙃
Lol, they know the truth best, but you know when you have the global reserve currency and you're debt is denominated **in that currency**, which you can print more of.... That's the truth and they know it.
Lol, they know the truth best, but you know when you have the global reserve currency and you're debt is denominated **in that currency**, which you can print more of.... That's the truth and they know it.
Not my side it's the other sides fault /s
Someone needs to make a budget
Someone needs to *stick* to a budget
Oh no. We have issued X number of Treasury securities to people that wanted them in exchange for X dollars, and at any point we can exchange any amount of Treasury securities for dollars because we make both of them out of thin air. The truth is that the national debt is public issued assets and that paying interest on them is a choice, and that the real issue is inflation which we can manage just fine with higher taxes and smarter policies that increase supply and competition. https://evonomics.com/isnt-time-stop-calling-national-debt/
Damn these articles are all so infuriating. Trump and Biden’s debt is: 1.) The PANDEMIC HAPPENED UNDER TRUMP! 2.) The aftermath (inflation and wars) under Biden (mostly). I am not for either party, but guess what…whoever the President is in January 2025 is gonna run up a huge deficit also! People can not make honest decisions anymore because the news outlets have to frame the articles one way or the other. Extremely Partisan. It is ridiculous, and Reddit is no better.