• 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!

Democrats propose free college tuition and debt forgiveness!

"Cannot be closed?" Maybe not, but what do you think of the claims from our border control agents who say border walls are a huge help in their efforts to slow down illegal entry into the US?

So it slows it down where the wall is, so what people will and always do find ways around walls as long as there are the incentives to come here.

We need tons of money to build, fund, and man a border wall - how exactly are we going to pay for that? Also need to take away American's land, how exactly are we going to accomplish that when we still are in court from the 2006 fence act?

Our infrastructure is falling apart, instead of building a stupid wall that will be breached, let's build some bridges, damns, and road first while tackling the incentive of why people come here.
 
What should not be complicated is the fact that if we do not do something about the exploding US debt our nation will go bankrupt and the world bankers, including wicked men like Soros, will own our nation to do what they please with our systems of laws, views, and values.

The governmental debt of the US government is large, though manageable. But I don't think all too many people disagree on the importance of managing the growth of this debt with respect to production. You probably can find a handful of cranks and that's about it.

We have got to stop the mad push by democrats to blow our economy all to hell with sheer stupid fiscal irresponsibility.

With regard to fiscal profligacy, there is a lot of blame to go around. It's really not just a story where programs pushed by Democrats and only Democrats happen to strain the balance sheet of the government.
 
So it slows it down where the wall is, so what people will and always do find ways around walls as long as there are the incentives to come here.

We need tons of money to build, fund, and man a border wall - how exactly are we going to pay for that? Also need to take away American's land, how exactly are we going to accomplish that when we still are in court from the 2006 fence act?

Our infrastructure is falling apart, instead of building a stupid wall that will be breached, let's build some bridges, damns, and road first while tackling the incentive of why people come here.

Dummass democrat plan: Don't waste billions on a border wall when we can send billions overseas to aid our enemies in building weapons of mass destruction and spend trillions on investing in democrat global warming research startup foundations, and blow tens of trillions on free healthcare coverage with plans to increase the spending as hundreds of thousands of new illegal immigrants are bused in from Mexico.
 
The governmental debt of the US government is large, though manageable. But I don't think all too many people disagree on the importance of managing the growth of this debt with respect to production. You probably can find a handful of cranks and that's about it.

The current US debt is well over $20 trillion with no hope ion sight of paying it down or slowing its growth. The debt is not manageable and will never be manageable until the federal deficit falls below zero and the US has surpluses with which to slowly begin to pay the debt down.

If the US never erases the deficit entirely then the debt will always continue to grow. Putting it in kindergarten terms, if a man has a debt of $2 million dollars and makes only $50 thousand a year with expenses always exceeding his income then he will never be able to pay off his debt without a miracle of some unnatural fiscally impossible kind
 
The current US debt is well over $20 trillion with no hope ion sight of paying it down or slowing its growth. The debt is not manageable and will never be manageable until the federal deficit falls below zero and the US has surpluses with which to slowly begin to pay the debt down.

If the US never erases the deficit entirely then the debt will always continue to grow. Putting it in kindergarten terms, if a man has a debt of $2 million dollars and makes only $50 thousand a year with expenses always exceeding his income then he will never be able to pay off his debt without a miracle of some unnatural fiscally impossible kind

So long as that man can demand $50K/year (always adjusted upwards for inflation) he will likely be content - those who die deep in debt win big. So long as congress critters can borrow and spend while enjoying a re-election rate of over 90% then they are content as well.
 
So long as that man can demand $50K/year (always adjusted upwards for inflation) he will likely be content - those who die deep in debt win big. So long as congress critters can borrow and spend while enjoying a re-election rate of over 90% then they are content as well.

I don't think the debtors the man owes $2 million to give a damn whether the thief is content or not to never pay them back. If it turns out American seniors will have to take deep cuts in their social security checks or firemen and policemen can no longer expect pension payments they were promised for decades, then there are going to be some very pissed Americans about how Congress has plunged the nation into unsustainable debt.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the debtors the man owes $2 million to give a damn whether the thief is content or not to never pay them back.

Rest assured that congress critters are not the least bit concerned that they borrowed in your name with no intention of ever paying the principle back - they simply demand that you fund the interest due and/or borrow more in your name.
 
Rest assured that congress critters are not the least bit concerned that they borrowed in your name with no intention of ever paying the principle back - they simply demand that you fund the interest due and/or borrow more in your name.

Business is not continuing as usual as some might suppose. Cities and states across the country are struggling and sometimes losing their battles to keep funding America's credit rating was downgraded under Obama for the first time in history due to poor management of debt planning. The US cannot and will not be allowed to continue living on credit indefinitely. A major readjustment must come and will likely come soon and will not be pleasant or pretty.
 
Business is not continuing as usual as some might suppose. Cities and states across the country are struggling and sometimes losing their battles to keep funding America's credit rating was downgraded under Obama for the first time in history due to poor management of debt planning. The US cannot and will not be allowed to continue living on credit indefinitely. A major readjustment must come and will likely come soon and will not be pleasant or pretty.

Yep, when (not if) Austerity Day comes it will get ugly for sure.
 
Dummass democrat plan: Don't waste billions on a border wall when we can send billions overseas to aid our enemies in building weapons of mass destruction and spend trillions on investing in democrat global warming research startup foundations, and blow tens of trillions on free healthcare coverage with plans to increase the spending as hundreds of thousands of new illegal immigrants are bused in from Mexico.

What on earth are you on about? I said we could fix American bridges and you start ranting about overseas and global warming? :lol:
 
The current US debt is well over $20 trillion with no hope in sight of paying it down or slowing its growth. The debt is not manageable and will never be manageable until the federal deficit falls below zero and the US has surpluses with which to slowly begin to pay the debt down.

From a macroprudential perspective, the real issue concerns not so much that the US government is indebted, but the fact that its capacity to service its debt falls as production (and by extension, tax revenues) is outpaced by debt. My issue with all of this is not the apocalyptic scenario of the US becoming Greece 2.0. It's the considerably likelier scenario that one inconvenient structural change pushes interest rates up for a decade. You wouldn't need a very large swing for hikes in debt services to force the hands of Congress to take rash, very likely idiotic large scale action to redress its finances. The US government gets incredibly cheap "loans" by issuing fixed income instruments periodically, but suppose we enter a period where interest rates start rising back and the new normal is not one where the Feds Funds rate is basically pinned down to 0-2%, but more 4-5%... The yields on those bonds would follow suit, their prices would fall and, soon enough, those debt service payments would become a very serious problem, eating through the budget every year.

That part, I think, is a political, social and economic threat. At the economics level, rapid changes that take everyone by surprise aren't exactly the best way to handle changes. Ideally, you want people anticipating what will happen and move carefully toward new regulations, programs, reforms, etc. The last thing you want is people waking up one morning and learning large scale transfers of wealth just happened because program X was cut in a haste overnight. Regardless of what you think about the morality of program X, sudden cuts that take everyone by surprise might put a lot of people in a tough spot where they take surprisingly similar decisions all at once. Any problem in that kind of environment would not be isolated and personal. At the social and political level, having Congress being pushed against the wall by creditors is not exactly how you incentivize politicians to make choices aligned with the public interest. If you think they're bad now, imagine if any one group of people literally has all of them by the balls.
 
What on earth are you on about? I said we could fix American bridges and you start ranting about overseas and global warming? :lol:

A very serious case can be made on behalf of public infrastructure. For example, we know that infrastructure that is outmoded is costing you whatever productivity you could get out of better infrastructure. We also know that infrastructure that has been in place for decades might start to be very costly to maintain. At some point, replacing it might actually save you expenditures over the long run. Moreover, if you're bound to pay, the only question is timing and, right now, the US government can still borrow cheaply.

That is all nice and well, but it does not assuage concerns over the debt of the US government. Both of these things need to be addressed, especially, for example, if you wish that your grandchildren benefit from some public programs too down the road. On the federal budget, financially speaking, costly entries are entitlement programs and military expenditures. If you cut the former, you might cause some outrage, even if manage to find out ways to cut spending in places where programs are really bad at achieving their stated purpose. If you cut the later, you might cause some problems in the geopolitics of some regions which has moral, as well as security consequences.

Like it or not, the United States' military is the world's police. Despite all the crap thrown at Americans by the far left, the US military is an example of upstanding moral conduct when contrasted against the background of almost every other country and all of human history. You're more or less the only country that sends people overseas and foots the bill to get rid of dictators at the first chance you get to make it manageable. What is more, you invaded dozens of places in the 20th century and didn't keep any of them for yourselves. That's why protestors in Hong Kong show up wrapped in your flag: America isn't perfect, but it's the closest thing we all have to a champion of liberty. Millions of young Americans are taught about the (usually true) damning parts of American history without being told the good things Americans did for the world... By my lights, the good far outweighs the bad all things considered. I fear for humankind if you guys stop believing every people deserves a chance to be free.


The problem is that you cannot talk about budgeting without invoking some of those larges items in your cash flow statement and a lot of controversies revolve around those items. What is more, many people take considerably too radical positions on those issues. It's impossible to come to an understanding if one side tries to paint the US as an evil force and adopts near-pacifist ideals, just as it's impossible to come to an understanding if one side thinks all welfare is immoral. And you need a lot of political support to make big changes that will matter for the budget.
 
Last edited:
Like the prospect of a growing government, say throwing billions at the border, doesn't excite you? It's only this one, Americans getting educated, that grinds your gears - I mean spelling dumbass as dummass tells us exactly your stance on education. I don't support all the democrats 100% on all their proposals but something does need to be done. I hardly think making higher education affordable or close to free is not a bad investment for our nation.

It's not free for anyone paying taxes. Let's consider property taxes. If you own a home and pay about $10,000/year in taxes roughly 65% goes to education. Over a 30 year period that amounts to about $200,000.
 
Men have made simple truth complicated. College kids spend terns of thousands of dollars to be schooled in foolishness if they come out believing, like Pelosi, that increasing food stamp distribution will spark a widespread economic revival. We joke about such nonsense, but these people in politics are not joking. Keynesians wrongly imagine that economic prosperity rests in government control of business and economic matters. That is not the economic philosophy which made the US great in its earlier years.

Wealth is not created by the government. Wealth is created by "the sweat of the brow, according to Biblical principle, and "In all labor there is profit."

"Wealth is something greedy rich people wrongly accumulate if not controlled and/or confiscated by the government," democrats preach.

Wealth created by "the sweat of the brow"? Tell that to the Saudis. They sit on billions and billions of dollars of oil wealth, none of it created by the sweat of their brows.
 
Wealth created by "the sweat of the brow"? Tell that to the Saudis. They sit on billions and billions of dollars of oil wealth, none of it created by the sweat of their brows.

Should we consider Saudi wealth a crime against humanity, considering all the poor people in the world who remain poor because the Saudis selfishly hoard their money like millionaire democrat politicians?
 
It's not Democrats in general proposing this; only those on the far-left like Sanders and Warren.

Assistance should be made available based on need, and not only to those attending colleges and universities but also trade & technical schools. The country needs construction workers, auto mechanics, and plumbers more than it needs more people with Bachelor's degrees in the humanities who work at Burger King because they can't find a job in their chosen field.

But there's no freaking way Donald Trump's children and grandchildren deserve taxpayer-funded college education.

BTW, you might want to improve your spelling skills before you presume to pass judgement on others' intelligence.:lol:

The government should not pay for free college for anyone as long as it cannot begin to come even close to paying down on its dangerously escalating debt.
 
That would only make sense if Republicans were offering up immigration reform bills but since they don't they are just as to blame.

And our borders cannot be 100% 'closed' so your 'open' borders nonsense is just nonsense.

Cutting through all the smokescreen confusion crap, people are either for Trump trying to bring illegal immigration under control or they are opposed to what Trump is doing to slow down illegal immigrant crossings. If people criticize border agents for just doing their jobs by law then those people are democrats.
 
So it slows it down where the wall is, so what people will and always do find ways around walls as long as there are the incentives to come here.

We need tons of money to build, fund, and man a border wall - how exactly are we going to pay for that? Also need to take away American's land, how exactly are we going to accomplish that when we still are in court from the 2006 fence act?

Our infrastructure is falling apart, instead of building a stupid wall that will be breached, let's build some bridges, damns, and road first while tackling the incentive of why people come here.

My parents were forced to sell part of our land and move our house off the property that was sold, so a new highway loop could be built. That was not on the US border with Mexico, that was on the outskirts of Austin, Texas. Weenies need to stop whining as if they are being treated worse that any other American forced by eminent domain to give up land.
 
The governmental debt of the US government is large, though manageable. But I don't think all too many people disagree on the importance of managing the growth of this debt with respect to production. You probably can find a handful of cranks and that's about it.

The US debt may be 'manageable' but the fact that our government is failing to manage it resulted in the US credit rating being downgraded for the first time in US history in August 2011.

With regard to fiscal profligacy, there is a lot of blame to go around. It's really not just a story where programs pushed by Democrats and only Democrats happen to strain the balance sheet of the government.

Sure. I agree. There is plenty of blame to go around for our current fiscal woes worsened by the burden of our unsustainable debt.
 
So long as that man can demand $50K/year (always adjusted upwards for inflation) he will likely be content - those who die deep in debt win big. So long as congress critters can borrow and spend while enjoying a re-election rate of over 90% then they are content as well.

I think that is what drives the reckless abandon politicians have toward the US debt. They think that since the debt has been increasing for decades without destroying the economy they are free to spend, spend, spend and hope nothing bad happens as long as they are alive.
 
Rest assured that congress critters are not the least bit concerned that they borrowed in your name with no intention of ever paying the principle back - they simply demand that you fund the interest due and/or borrow more in your name.

I agree. Many politicians have been getting rich because of all the lucrative ways those in power can reap personal financial rewards from the government spending processes. The problem is that taxpayers end up bearing growing burdens from the increases in debt resulting from those 'exiting' movements of government money.
 
Yep, when (not if) Austerity Day comes it will get ugly for sure.

The fall of the US and the American dollar will likely rival that of the fall of Rome. Not to worry, however, because there are many very wicked and powerful barbarians in world finance and world politics who already stand ready to swoop in to 'rescue' America from the ashes, but at great cost to tens of millions of victims of the crash.
 
What on earth are you on about? I said we could fix American bridges and you start ranting about overseas and global warming? :lol:

My point is we need politicians who will stop screwing around spending money we do not have on things we should do without so we can begin to take care of the essentials like paying down our debt and fixing our deteriorating infrastructure.
 
From a macroprudential perspective, the real issue concerns not so much that the US government is indebted, but the fact that its capacity to service its debt falls as production (and by extension, tax revenues) is outpaced by debt. My issue with all of this is not the apocalyptic scenario of the US becoming Greece 2.0. It's the considerably likelier scenario that one inconvenient structural change pushes interest rates up for a decade. You wouldn't need a very large swing for hikes in debt services to force the hands of Congress to take rash, very likely idiotic large scale action to redress its finances. The US government gets incredibly cheap "loans" by issuing fixed income instruments periodically, but suppose we enter a period where interest rates start rising back and the new normal is not one where the Feds Funds rate is basically pinned down to 0-2%, but more 4-5%... The yields on those bonds would follow suit, their prices would fall and, soon enough, those debt service payments would become a very serious problem, eating through the budget every year.

That part, I think, is a political, social and economic threat. At the economics level, rapid changes that take everyone by surprise aren't exactly the best way to handle changes. Ideally, you want people anticipating what will happen and move carefully toward new regulations, programs, reforms, etc. The last thing you want is people waking up one morning and learning large scale transfers of wealth just happened because program X was cut in a haste overnight. Regardless of what you think about the morality of program X, sudden cuts that take everyone by surprise might put a lot of people in a tough spot where they take surprisingly similar decisions all at once. Any problem in that kind of environment would not be isolated and personal. At the social and political level, having Congress being pushed against the wall by creditors is not exactly how you incentivize politicians to make choices aligned with the public interest. If you think they're bad now, imagine if any one group of people literally has all of them by the balls.

There seems to be a sort of dreamy stupidity when it comes to the issue of the debt threat we face. I remember reading the minutes from a Federal Reserve meeting around 2005 or 2006. In that meeting the experts discussed the fact that a crash was coming due to many problems, the greatest coming from the very bad policies of bundling high risk mortgages into marketable securities in an effort to minimize the risks associated with the individual mortgages. The government had been encouraging lending institutions to lower credit standards and loan restrictions in order to increase home ownership by poor people and blacks. Banks lowered the standards and were allowed by new laws to encourage reckless mortgage buying, resulting in huge numbers of risky loans. When the priced of gas shot up and the delayed interest payments began to kick in people began to default on their loans and the end result was the 2008 collapse of Wall Street.

But, getting back to the Federal Reserve, those experts in that meeting knew a crash was coming. They predicted it. They even plotted how to minimize the impact by allowing for the initial shock to be buffered by more after shocks later. The Feds knew in advance what was going to happen, Barney Frank and the ignorant American public did not know. Those conservative economists who predicted the danger of collapse (due to bad fiscal policies surrounding low credit loans and risky mortgage backed securities) and who attempted to rein in the likes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were laughed to scorn by the stupid and ignorant.
 
The government should not pay for free college for anyone as long as it cannot begin to come even close to paying down on its dangerously escalating debt.

So I assume you disagreed when Dick Cheney said: "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter".
 
Back
Top Bottom