• 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!

National Debt Nears 20 Trillion Just in Time for Election

jonny5 said:
No, I am not. I am on here criticizing high levels of debt. Something liberals also do.
Click to expand...

OK, you're "criticizing" high levels of debt, but ultimately, what does the high level of debt mean? It doesn't mean a weaker economy, as that theory turned out to be a pack of lies. So what is your big concern about the debt other than the number of zeros?
 
Incisor said:
If you had a problem with debt, then you would have opposed the Bush Tax Cuts. From what I gather from your posts, you still think those tax cuts produced good things. They didn't. All they produced was higher household debt and record deficits that doubled the debt in 8 years when if Conservatives had done literally nothing to the tax code, the debt could have been paid off in 9 years.

Conservatives couldn't even do nothing right. That's why it's so hard to take you all seriously today. We know you're wrong. We're just waiting for you to catch up.
Click to expand...

You keep seeming to want to lump me with some group that Im not part of. Thats why its hard to take YOU seriously. You want to label everyone as part of some enemy group.
 
Incisor said:
OK, you're "criticizing" high levels of debt, but ultimately, what does the high level of debt mean? It doesn't mean a weaker economy, as that theory turned out to be a pack of lies. So what is your big concern about the debt other than the number of zeros?
Click to expand...

I posted it above. Maybe try reading the thread instead of jumping to assumptions and insults.
 
jonny5 said:
You keep seeming to want to lump me with some group that Im not part of. Thats why its hard to take YOU seriously. You want to label everyone as part of some enemy group.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the "I'm not a part of the things that I support and defend" defense. So you're willing to say here that the theory of trickle-down is bunk?
 
jonny5 said:
I posted it above. Maybe try reading the thread instead of jumping to assumptions and insults.
Click to expand...

You mentioned the interest on the debt. OK...and what is the big deal about that? Everyone pays interest on debt. You pay interest on your mortgage. You pay interest on your student loans. You pay interest on your credit card. So why is paying interest on the debt something that has your panties in a wad?
 
Incisor said:
Ah yes, the "I'm not a part of the things that I support and defend" defense. So you're willing to say here that the theory of trickle-down is bunk?
Click to expand...

Of course not. I dont pass off such blanket claims of opinion as fact.
 
jonny5 said:
I posted it above. Maybe try reading the thread instead of jumping to assumptions and insults.
Click to expand...

BTW - isn't the interest rate the government pays on its debt lower than the interest rate most consumers pay on their mortgages, credit cards, car and student loans? Who in the world doesn't pay interest on debt? I mean, other than Wall Street banks looking for a quick, behind-the-scenes bailout from the Fed?
 
jonny5 said:
Of course not. I dont pass off such blanket claims of opinion as fact.
Click to expand...

So you believe that cutting taxes for the rich will somehow translate to growth in the economy?
 
Incisor said:
You mentioned the interest on the debt. OK...and what is the big deal about that? Everyone pays interest on debt. You pay interest on your mortgage. You pay interest on your student loans. You pay interest on your credit card. So why is paying interest on the debt something that has your panties in a wad?
Click to expand...

I posted why above. READ THE THREAD.
 
Incisor said:
So you believe that cutting taxes for the rich will somehow translate to growth in the economy?
Click to expand...

I dont believe the economics is that simple or predictable. It might and it might not, depending on the circumstances.
 
jonny5 said:
I posted why above. READ THE THREAD.
Click to expand...

I did read your post. That is specifically what I'm asking you about because your explanation is not clear. You haven't said why paying interest on the debt is a bad thing or is something you oppose on principle. You just oppose it for the sake of opposing something. You can't seem to find a good reason why you are concerned about the debt; it doesn't affect growth, it doesn't affect the economy, it isn't affecting borrowing rates...so you make this about paying interest to lenders. Well, here's the bad news; the government has to borrow no matter what because revenues don't come in all at once at the beginning or end of the year. Government has to borrow in order to cover the shortfall between a time the service is paid to when revenues are collected. Screaming about the amount of interest we pay on the debt, and making that central to your "debt-is-bad" argument, rings hollow.
 
jonny5 said:
I dont believe the economics is that simple or predictable. It might and it might not, depending on the circumstances.
Click to expand...

It doesn't. We know it doesn't because we're living through it right now and have the last 35 years. So if it hasn't worked in 35 years, why would it start working now or ever?
 
Incisor said:
I did read your post. That is specifically what I'm asking you about because your explanation is not clear. You haven't said why paying interest on the debt is a bad thing or is something you oppose on principle. You just oppose it for the sake of opposing something. You can't seem to find a good reason why you are concerned about the debt; it doesn't affect growth, it doesn't affect the economy, it isn't affecting borrowing rates...so you make this about paying interest to lenders. Well, here's the bad news; the government has to borrow no matter what because revenues don't come in all at once at the beginning or end of the year. Government has to borrow in order to cover the shortfall between a time the service is paid to when revenues are collected. Screaming about the amount of interest we pay on the debt, and making that central to your "debt-is-bad" argument, rings hollow.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did. It wastes product, reduces savings and puts pressure on policy. The CBO has pages and pages of analysis to back this uyp. WHich would you like more clarification on?
 
jonny5 said:
Yes, I did. It wastes product, reduces savings and puts pressure on policy. The CBO has pages and pages of analysis to back this uyp. WHich would you like more clarification on?
Click to expand...

Maybe you should post those links. Because when devising the budget, Congress doesn't cut X amount from Medicare in order to pay X amount on interest from the debt.
 
jonny5 said:
Yes, I did. It wastes product, reduces savings and puts pressure on policy
Click to expand...

Reduces savings by whom? Not consumers. A Consumer doesn't save money depending on what the national debt is.

Wastes product? What do you mean? You pay interest whenever you borrow, and the rates for the government to borrow are lower than the rates you or I would get.
 
Incisor said:
It doesn't. We know it doesn't because we're living through it right now and have the last 35 years. So if it hasn't worked in 35 years, why would it start working now or ever?
Click to expand...

How are we living through it if the rich are paying more taxes, and a greater share of taxes than ever before? Thats the opposite of trickle down.
 
Incisor said:
Reduces savings by whom? Not consumers. A Consumer doesn't save money depending on what the national debt is.

Wastes product? What do you mean? You pay interest whenever you borrow, and the rates for the government to borrow are lower than the rates you or I would get.
Click to expand...

A consumer saves money by taking home more of their earnings and paying less on goods. Product is wasted when its sent overseas in interest. Same as when you spend money on interest on a loan instead of using that money to buy goods, save, or increase your standard of living.
 
jonny5 said:
How are we living through it if the rich are paying more taxes, and a greater share of taxes than ever before? Thats the opposite of trickle down.
Click to expand...

They are not paying more taxes. Their tax rate has been cut in half.

Before the tax cuts, the tax burden was more equitable. So how are you not complaining about a problem caused by the very thing you believe?
 
The backbone to all of this are loans. Loans expand the money supply, which allows The Fed to make the money that it does, allows the private sector to buy treasuries (the vast majority of national debt is owned by the private sector), which ultimately allows The Treasury to continue printing treasuries which are bought, which ultimately is deficit spent, putting money into the economy. This raises reserves, which allows for more lending, and the cycle continues.

The concern shouldn't be on whether or not your tax money is paying off debt. That isn't a big deal. You should be concerned where all of this spending is occurring. For example, we have spent 4 - 6 trillion dollars on the Middle East. We have spent 2 trillion dollars on a fleet, a single fleet of planes. Nearly 1 trillion dollars on a destroyer, not an aircraft carrier. Yet when Obama suggests a stimulus to fix our infrastructure, people are like he's an idiot. When he announces he could make University free for all, for 80 billion dollars over 10 years or 8 billion dollars a year! It makes no sense.

It isn't the interest you should be concerned about. It is how the powers at be are spending all of the deficit spending. It seems we like to kill people more than rather help people in this country.
 
American said:
Would $100T (today) be okay with you?
Click to expand...

If the interests rates are low enough I would be, so it depends on what rate we issued the debt at. For example if its 1% then why not? We're basically getting paid via inflation.
 
Sherman123 said:
If the interests rates are low enough I would be, so it depends on what rate we issued the debt at. For example if its 1% then why not? We're basically getting paid via inflation.
Click to expand...
Nope, you're stuck with interest rates as they are. So would you be okay with $100T or $1Q?
 
American said:
Nope, you're stuck with interest rates as they are. So would you be okay with $100T or $1Q?
Click to expand...

Isn't the FFR like .50% right now? So on the basis of sustainable management of the debt my answer is yes. On the basis of the colossal unmanaged increase on the money supply my answer is no.
 
Sherman123 said:
Isn't the FFR like .50% right now? So on the basis of sustainable management of the debt my answer is yes. On the basis of the colossal unmanaged increase on the money supply my answer is no.
Click to expand...

More like 2-2.5%.
 
jonny5 said:
A consumer saves money by taking home more of their earnings and paying less on goods
Click to expand...

OK, but the national debt has no bearing on that. Furthermore, saving harms an economy and leads to recessions. When Bush cut taxes, household debt skyrocketed even though consumers took "home more of their earnings". So this theory that if you cut taxes, it will somehow translate to growth is DOA based on the last 35 years of empirical evidence. If you're trying to equate household debt with government debt, you're going to set yourself up for a rhetorical failure. Government debt and household debt are not the same thing at all. I can see why some Conservatives want to make them the same; they don't understand the role or function of government debt. They only understand it as it relates to how they approach their own finances. You can't run a government budget like a household budget. For one, a government can print money and a person cannot. Also, a government can -at will- increase its collected revenues by raising the tax rate. You cannot raise your salary at will with your employer. The differences are so vast that it is incredulous someone would try to compare the two.


Product is wasted when its sent overseas in interest.
Click to expand...

OK, but we have to borrow in order to fund the government. So how do you propose not paying interest when we do borrow? Who would lend to us that way?


Same as when you spend money on interest on a loan instead of using that money to buy goods, save, or increase your standard of living.
Click to expand...

Ummm...a loan does increase your standard of living. You seem to want to be able to borrow and not pay any interest. I'd love to see how you managed to get a mortgage with a 0% interest rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom