View Poll Results: Is it legal for govmnts to take on debt on bahalf of taxpayers without approval?

Voters
9. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, its illegal and absurd.

    0 0%
  • No, in a real democracy it should not be possible.

    2 22.22%
  • No, it should only be possible with popular approval, yet minimised and only in extreme situations.

    3 33.33%
  • No, but the west is not democracy.

    2 22.22%
  • It may be legal under some circumstances

    0 0%
  • It should be legal under some circumstances.

    1 11.11%
  • It should be like it is

    0 0%
  • I dont know

    0 0%
  • other opinion (specify in post)

    1 11.11%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

  1. #1
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Countries all over the west, who claim to be democratic, are taking on debt on behalf of the population. The result is that the population end up paying interest rates and costs to the banks and institutions who lent this money to the country.

    One of the biggest budget posts in western budgets these days is interest rates on debts.

    In a real democracy, is it democratically legal to take on government debt without the approval of the population who is taxed to pay for that debt and the interest on that debt. Especially in light of how elections works today and the fiscal promises politicians give to the population in order to be elected. Should it be illegal for governments to take on debt on behalf of the people without their actual approval?

    In a two party system or a coalition mutliparty system should the majority be allowed for force the minority to take on debt with them?

    In my opinion it is completely anti-democratic and politically ridiculous that politicians can take on debt to keep election promises. In a democracy this should not be possible. In a democracy, the people who take on the debt should be asked. And in most cases a state should rather build assets than take on liabilities on behalf of the population. Especially in light of the future promises the states have towards the population in for example things like pensions.

    Please vote your opinion.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  2. #2
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra View Post
    Countries all over the west, who claim to be democratic, are taking on debt on behalf of the population. The result is that the population end up paying interest rates and costs to the banks and institutions who lent this money to the country.

    One of the biggest budget posts in western budgets these days is interest rates on debts.

    In a real democracy, is it democratically legal to take on government debt without the approval of the population who is taxed to pay for that debt and the interest on that debt. Especially in light of how elections works today and the fiscal promises politicians give to the population in order to be elected. Should it be illegal for governments to take on debt on behalf of the people without their actual approval?

    In a two party system or a coalition mutliparty system should the majority be allowed for force the minority to take on debt with them?

    In my opinion it is completely anti-democratic and politically ridiculous that politicians can take on debt to keep election promises. In a democracy this should not be possible. In a democracy, the people who take on the debt should be asked. And in most cases a state should rather build assets than take on liabilities on behalf of the population. Especially in light of the future promises the states have towards the population in for example things like pensions.

    Please vote your opinion.
    What do you plan on doing with the data once you have it?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  3. #3
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    What you should be arguing is whether it is right or wrong. In terms of legality, it is legal if the laws allow for it and in most democratic countries, the laws do.

    Personally though, I would support a balanced budget amendment or debt up to the growth of GDP.
    Last edited by tacomancer; 04-13-11 at 08:46 AM.

  4. #4
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Why would it be illegal? The voters elected the politicians, and the politicians chose to take on more debt. If the voters don't like it, next election they can elect people who promise to balance the budget. The voters gave their approval when they elected those politicians.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #5
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    What do you plan on doing with the data once you have it?
    look at it?

    This forum is quite interesting, most people on it seem quite nationalist and unrealistic about their country.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  6. #6
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    What you should be arguing is whether it is right or wrong. In terms of legality, it is legal if the laws allow for it and in most democratic countries, the laws do.
    Do they, or is that only because there is a lack of law in this area?

    Even so, you avoided answering the question. Which, reformulated is. In a democratic society, is it really democratically legal for a government to take on debt on behalf of their people without their approval?



    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Personally though, I would support a balanced budget amendment or debt up to the growth of GDP.
    Why does rich western nations take on debt?

    Why should a nation be allowed to take on debt on behalf of the people, to make unbalanced budgets?
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  7. #7
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Why would it be illegal? The voters elected the politicians, and the politicians chose to take on more debt. If the voters don't like it, next election they can elect people who promise to balance the budget. The voters gave their approval when they elected those politicians.
    The problem is that both parties in the US have kept taking on debt. This means, the populace have no option, no choice. So no, they cannot elect a party who is not going to take on any debt, because no such thing exist.


    And in the age of circus elections where politicians pay of voters for their votes, more debt is sure to be taken on.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  8. #8
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra View Post
    The problem is that both parties in the US have kept taking on debt. This means, the populace have no option, no choice. So no, they cannot elect a party who is not going to take on any debt, because no such thing exist.
    The reason both parties support taking on more debt is because that's what the voters have wanted, up until now. It's not an immutable fact of nature that both parties nominate candidates that want more debt; those candidates had to win a primary election. The voters absolutely do have a choice. If the voters are adamantly opposed to debt increases, they can vote for a person in the primary election to represent their party who promises to balance the budget.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra
    And in the age of circus elections where politicians pay of voters for their votes, more debt is sure to be taken on.
    I've never heard of anything more than isolated incidents of vote-buying in any modern democracy, not anything systemic. Maybe it frequently happens in Nigeria, but not here.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 04-19-11 at 05:29 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  9. #9
    User
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    05-01-11 @ 04:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    65

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    I noted that you have several different types of blatant "No's" and really only at best a couple of "partial" yes answers with no outright "yes".

    Is it legal? Yes, it's legal.

    Do you like it? I'd guess based on your post and the poll options you gave the answer is a resounding "No".

    If your going to cultivate data then please make your post attempt to be unbiased. Simply state the question and give potential answers.

  10. #10
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: National/state/local political and budget debt, is it democratically legal?

    I certainly see both sides.

    I believe people have the responsibility to know whether or not their national budget can afford such promises and the people ought to be able to conclude if a debt is necessary to fund these promised which they will have to pay eventually. So by electing the politician who promises, they are in essence voting on the debt itself.

    The problem is that ALL of the people have to pay for the majority's vote... and as the case is, that majority in the US aren't the ones paying the majority of that debt back.

    So have the people voted on it? Yes. Should they be allowed to? No. Our country's current state (of 1/2 the income earners not paying taxes, but still voting) is the inevitable result of such a governmental system.
    Last edited by fredmertz; 04-19-11 at 05:41 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •