• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Debt Could Double in 25 Years With Current Policies

I am quite sure that the U.S. national debt will double in far less then 25 years.

Both parties have shown they are completely incompetent when it comes to balancing the budget.

The national debt has risen 150% in just the last ten years - and the trend is getting worse, not better.

The days of American economic supremacy are numbered unless drastic action is taken - and it won't be (imo).
The politicians are too corrupt/economically stupid and the masses are too weak/economically stupid.

View attachment 67128857

Google Image Result for http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/The-National-Debt2.png

The only little problem with this moronic "borrow your way to prosperity" plan is that most gov't "investments" are NOT in areas that produce any real return. Liberals see even crack babies born into the slums as "good investments", on par with a highway bridge maintanence program. Rather than do any real cost benefit analysis, gov't is basically "keep it all going" collection of special interest morons that see "equality" as meaning either everything is cut or everything is increased "equaly"; the cowboy poetry festival, the NASA art program and social security are ALL gov't programs, they ALL have costs and they ALL have benefits. Of course, this is just plain insane, but if your are on the "help the crack babies" sub, sub, sub-committee then that is your JOB and your sworn duty is to fund that little pet project, as much as possible, hoping it will bloom into a massive success and get you promoted to the NASA art program sub, sub-committee to help those crack babies learn to use gov't crayons to color in outlines of Mars rovers.

How many times have we heard that "we" are going to go line by line, through the feaderal "budget" (do you remember when we last had one of those?) and cut "waste, fraud and abuse" or "programs that do not work for America"? The answer is both early and often in each election, all seem to run promising to "fix things" in DC, yet once they get that DC "dream job" the first order of business given them, is to take some "troubled" federal program and find a way to get it more funding by taking a slot on the "cowboy poetry festival" sub, sub, sub, sub-committee and being assured success there will move you up to "house speaker" or some other lofty post if you show that "can do" spirit, so vital to growing a fine and proper federal gov't to help ALL of the people in ALL areas of their lives.

In private business, the CEO that plans to borrow massively and expand even the left-handed smoke-shifter unit of the Wonder Widget division of the outdoor garden products section of the depratment of the "neat-stuff-that-may-actually-sell-one-day" branch, is FIRED and told to get clean and sober. Gov't budgets SHOULD start with "this is how much we get in taxes each year", NOT with "this is how much we borrowed and spent last year" now ADD 1.4% (or maybe a little more) and 'git-r-done'!
 
Last edited:
The FED is talking about buying bonds today. Translation...we are printing money again. Devaluing our dollar, and causing inflation. JOY.
 
That's impossible, Obama said we haven't spent very much during his term, so we're on the right tra...

debtiv.gif


OH SHI....
 
Last edited:
The only idiotic thing we can do right now is NOT borrow more. In real terms, we are presently able to borrow at negative interest rates. If we borrow and spend the money on sensible things like infrastructure improvements those projects generally net a positive return return of at least a percentage or two in direct revenue enhancement going forward and over the long haul. And that isn't even considering keynsian amplification effects, if you're in the group that doesn't believe in keynsian economics. In other words, by not borrowing we are literally giving away free money.
 
Austerity does work. That it is "hurting" Greece right now is because Greece dug hole that deep. But continue to increase debt so as to fund their lard-ass largesse is doomed. Spending what we ain't got is what created this mess. Spending more of what we ain't got will not fix it.

Here is true austerity. And it works. Estonia.

News Headlines
 
The only idiotic thing we can do right now is NOT borrow more. In real terms, we are presently able to borrow at negative interest rates. If we borrow and spend the money on sensible things like infrastructure improvements those projects generally net a positive return return of at least a percentage or two in direct revenue enhancement going forward and over the long haul. And that isn't even considering keynsian amplification effects, if you're in the group that doesn't believe in keynsian economics. In other words, by not borrowing we are literally giving away free money.

Hey. We gave Obama a trillion bucks. For all those shovel-ready infrastructure jobs. And he blew it.

Your assumption is that the government will spend the money wisely. Big fail. Proven fail. Massive mistake.

"Free money" ............. that's ****ed-up right there.
 
Austerity does work. That it is "hurting" Greece right now is because Greece dug hole that deep. But continue to increase debt so as to fund their lard-ass largesse is doomed. Spending what we ain't got is what created this mess. Spending more of what we ain't got will not fix it.

Here is true austerity. And it works. Estonia.

News Headlines

The "Estonian miracle" is a myth, unfortunately.

Destroying Estonia » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Macro Matters: Is Estonia the austerity crown jewel?
 
Hey. We gave Obama a trillion bucks. For all those shovel-ready infrastructure jobs. And he blew it.

Your assumption is that the government will spend the money wisely. Big fail. Proven fail. Massive mistake.

"Free money" ............. that's ****ed-up right there.

That's a silly statement. First, it wasn't a trillion dollars. Second, only a portion of the $800 billion was spent on infrastructure, with the biggest single portion going to payroll tax cuts (people keeping more of their money), and the second biggest portion going to states to bolster their flagging budgets. Only about 6% of the stimulus was directed at infrastructure, and it was used to complete thousands of worthwhile projects. It's actually quite funny seeing all the anti-stimulus Republican legislators posing for pictures at ribbon cutting ceremonies for infrastructure projects opening in their districts as a result of stimulus spending. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/hanna.jpg
 
The only idiotic thing we can do right now is NOT borrow more. In real terms, we are presently able to borrow at negative interest rates. If we borrow and spend the money on sensible things like infrastructure improvements those projects generally net a positive return return of at least a percentage or two in direct revenue enhancement going forward and over the long haul. And that isn't even considering keynsian amplification effects, if you're in the group that doesn't believe in keynsian economics. In other words, by not borrowing we are literally giving away free money.

I am sure you know that currently, the buyer of most of our debt issuance is the Federal Reserve. So I guess you are saying that Obama should borrow more money from his buddy Bernanke. While it is true that we can borrow at low rates currently, as this debt you hope we incur will not be repaid, what will be the rate you want to impose on our children.

It is interesting that the administration lapdogs like Summers and now the post above are now advocating this same Obama pitch.

Nice try but I doubt people will be again fooled by another lousy "stimulus" deal.
 
I am sure you know that currently, the buyer of most of our debt issuance is the Federal Reserve. So I guess you are saying that Obama should borrow more money from his buddy Bernanke. While it is true that we can borrow at low rates currently, as this debt you hope we incur will not be repaid, what will be the rate you want to impose on our children.

It is interesting that the administration lapdogs like Summers and now the post above are now advocating this same Obama pitch.

Nice try but I doubt people will be again fooled by another lousy "stimulus" deal.

Oh I agree that people will not be "fooled" by reality, and thus we will be stuck in a lengthy, Japan-style economic slump. There are WAY too many stupid people in this country.
 

His article tries to excuse Estonia's numbers. Meanwhile, Estonia is doing well, and getting better.

All we have managed to do in accumulating debt, and as is far more evident in Greece, is to subsidize becoming non-competitive. And accumulate huge debt. Continuing to do what got us in this mess is not the solution. Austerity means belt tightening. And it will fix our broken foundation.
 
Last edited:
That's a silly statement. First, it wasn't a trillion dollars. Second, only a portion of the $800 billion was spent on infrastructure, with the biggest single portion going to payroll tax cuts (people keeping more of their money), and the second biggest portion going to states to bolster their flagging budgets. Only about 6% of the stimulus was directed at infrastructure, and it was used to complete thousands of worthwhile projects. It's actually quite funny seeing all the anti-stimulus Republican legislators posing for pictures at ribbon cutting ceremonies for infrastructure projects opening in their districts as a result of stimulus spending. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/hanna.jpg

Obama has averaged 1.3T per year in deficit. Were the Bush tax cuts repealed on Day One of his term, he still averages $ 1 trillion per year of deficit.

And we wallow in the same mud still.
 
I am sure you know that currently, the buyer of most of our debt issuance is the Federal Reserve. So I guess you are saying that Obama should borrow more money from his buddy Bernanke. While it is true that we can borrow at low rates currently, as this debt you hope we incur will not be repaid, what will be the rate you want to impose on our children.

It is interesting that the administration lapdogs like Summers and now the post above are now advocating this same Obama pitch.

Nice try but I doubt people will be again fooled by another lousy "stimulus" deal.

Its the classic them and us deal. We get to play Santa Claus and borrow and spend TODAY, but they have to play Grinch and pay for it TOMORROW. I would gladly buy the house a round if I could put that on your tab. All of the talk of gov't "investments" fails to include that the real investors are the taxpayers of TOMORROW. If we could borrow our way to prosperity it would have been done a hundred years ago. How long before someone wakes up and says I want a real return on investment? When Obama ends his "historic" and "unprecedented" next term we will have a national debt of at least $22 TRILLION. If Romney takes over that may only mean a 2016 national debt of $19 TRILLION (if all goes well). No they can't!
 
His article tries to excuse Estonia's numbers. Meanwhile, Estonia is doing well, and getting better.

All we have managed to do in accumulating debt, and as is far more evident in Greece, is to subsidize becoming non-competitive. And accumulate huge debt. Continuing to do what got us in this mess is not the solution. Austerity means belt tightening. And it will fix our broken foundation.

What they are saying is that Estonia is not comparable to Greece, or the US. Estonia is doing pretty well under its current policies. Would they be doing better if they had a more pro-growth policy? Very likely.
 
Its the classic them and us deal. We get to play Santa Claus and borrow and spend TODAY, but they have to play Grinch and pay for it TOMORROW.

It's the classic penny wise, pound foolish philosophy. We think we're being smart by pinching pennies now, but we are actually blowing a huge opportunity that will cost future generations more in the long run. See Herbert Hoover.
 
It's the classic penny wise, pound foolish philosophy. We think we're being smart by pinching pennies now, but we are actually blowing a huge opportunity that will cost future generations more in the long run. See Herbert Hoover.

Just what has the new $5T in federal debt done for us lately? Would doubling down be your call? Yes he did!
 
It's the classic penny wise, pound foolish philosophy. We think we're being smart by pinching pennies now, but we are actually blowing a huge opportunity that will cost future generations more in the long run. See Herbert Hoover.
The notion that Hoover was an Austrian Schooler is a false one.

He signed the protectionist Smoot-Hawley Act.

And he posted deficits every year he was POTUS.

In fact, in terms of deficit as a % of GDP (after fy 1931), Hoover ran much larger deficits then almost all of FDR's pre-WW2 budgets.

Federal Budget Receipts and Outlays
 
Just what has the new $5T in federal debt done for us lately? Would doubling down be your call? Yes he did!

Hmm, what has it done for us...? It's provided a national security, killed OBL and Qaddafi, provided food and sustenance to the unemployed and elderly, maintained our highways, kept the planes in the air, lowered unemployment, increased GDP....

Or was that a rhetorical question?
 
Hmm, what has it done for us...? It's provided a national security, killed OBL and Qaddafi, provided food and sustenance to the unemployed and elderly, maintained our highways, kept the planes in the air, lowered unemployment, increased GDP....

Or was that a rhetorical question?
And where is your unbiased, factual proof that these could not have been accomplished with a balanced budget?
 
And where is your unbiased, factual proof that these could not have been accomplished with a balanced budget?

If you have a lick of common sense you should be able to figure that one out.
 
If you have a lick of common sense you should be able to figure that one out.

In other words - you have presented NO unbiased, factual proof that these could not have been accomplished with a balanced budget.

Noted.
 
In other words - you have presented NO unbiased, factual proof that these could not have been accomplished with a balanced budget.

Noted.

Again, common sense. If we don't borrow money we can't PAY FOR $5 trillion worth of defense and discretionary spending, i.e. that spending has to be eliminated.
 
Oh I agree that people will not be "fooled" by reality, and thus we will be stuck in a lengthy, Japan-style economic slump. There are WAY too many stupid people in this country.


You do have a way with over the top rhetoric, I will grant you that. People are NOT stupid as you and Obama want to call them, however many are uneducated in finance. There is a material difference between being smart and educated. Learn the difference it is important, except to political hacks who care more about making a point that speaking the truth.
 
Again, common sense. If we don't borrow money we can't PAY FOR $5 trillion worth of defense and discretionary spending, i.e. that spending has to be eliminated.

You said: 'It's provided a national security, killed OBL and Qaddafi, provided food and sustenance to the unemployed and elderly, maintained our highways, kept the planes in the air, lowered unemployment, increased GDP'.

And now you cannot even prove that statement with unbiased facts.

So how about proving how just ONE of the examples on your list could not have been 'accomplished' with a balanced budget?
 
Back
Top Bottom