• 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!

Is being in debt a good thing?

So long as you're making good on repaying it, yes.

The question is when do you start on repaying it the government that is . cause out here if you don't pay there will be consequences.:peace
 
The question is when do you start on repaying it the government that is . cause out here if you don't pay there will be consequences.:peace

The government making restitution? That's called taxes and inflation. They make sure you pay it one way or the other. They sure as hell aren't.
 
Wealth is not limited to cash , but ya gotta admit if you are a working person with a could paying job cash really comes in handy around when those bills come to your door and on April 15th.. That national park system is very beautiful just visited one myself , but no matter how beautiful it is it don't pay the rent.

Visitors to National Parks spent an estimated $18.2 billion in local gateway regions (defined as communities within 60 miles of a park). The contribution of this spending to the national economy was 306 thousand jobs, $11.9 billion in labor income, $20.3 billion in value added, and $35.8 billion in economic output.

In the 60's during the space race I could have discussed outer space with you , however today since they did cut NASA funding I guess I'll wait till another country goes to another planet. I say this not because I have anything against the U.S.A.. I love my country but where is the progress where are the risk takers of America today.

In the private sector, where they belong.

Without going on countering you indefinitely, you need to open your eyes to see.
 
It seems that your premise of "actual economist" asking the right questions neglected to ask a most unpopular question. Since I am at least I think so an individual nonconformist I will ask this unpopular question.
Since America is supposedly a Superpower why is it other nations and "not all bad nations" of the world have free Colleges paid for by the money the nation takes in.? These nations base intellectual education on the intelligence one has not the money one's parents has.

We have been on this action of College education for some time now where is America today debt wise educated wise?:peace

Apologies for the late reply, unsure how I missed this.

What other nations have done with the costs of higher education is another matter, those nations shifting the costs onto the taxpayer is their decision to make. There were benefits to those choices and probably consequences as well.

Our discussion seems to center on higher education debt.

What I am trying to say is while your points are valid, the fault is not just "predatory lenders" and these kids taking out these loans. It took a concerted effort to get to this point over a period of time, it is too simplistic and a bit political argument over substance that this can be changed rapidly.

Just to ensure I am straight, what are we really debating here?
 
in July 2013 I posted a thread called "America Land of Debt". I got some interesting responses on that thread some said being in debt is not bad , some said being in debt is just a way of doing business,.
I did not agree with these responses then neither do I agree with then today .
Well, I will likely say the same things you've heard before....

There is nothing wrong with debt, as long as:
1) You borrow for a useful purpose
2) You don't borrow more than you can pay back

Things haven't actually changed much since 2013. Post-secondary education has gotten a little more expensive, and that's pretty much it. Millennials have felt the bite for years now.

Yes, it impacts spending, but it would be rather ignorant to blame that primarily on credit. A bigger factor is that income inequality has increased for several decades now, as has our standard of living. Thus, it is extremely difficult to earn a middle-class income with only a high school degree, and college graduates are also feeling the strain. This drives demand for post-secondary degrees, which results in more people borrowing more money just to try and keep up.

The ability to borrow money to pay for a home, a car or an education is a huge benefit. The US would be much worse off without 30-year mortgages or college loans. The real issue is that the wealthy are reaping all the economic benefits of 40+ years of productivity gains, and that can't work forever.
 
The government making restitution? That's called taxes and inflation. They make sure you pay it one way or the other. They sure as hell aren't.

I could not debate that, I would lose.:peace
 
Visitors to National Parks spent an estimated $18.2 billion in local gateway regions (defined as communities within 60 miles of a park). The contribution of this spending to the national economy was 306 thousand jobs, $11.9 billion in labor income, $20.3 billion in value added, and $35.8 billion in economic output.



In the private sector, where they belong.

Without going on countering you indefinitely, you need to open your eyes to see.

First of all it is true the National parks is making money there are jobs just as long as they stay National parks, that is government land public land not private land.

As for my eyesight with the help of glasses I see quite well , everybody keeps saying America has all this money and is making more every year.
However, if that is true why did we have to cut certain services that the government did provide and why are we deeper in deb than last year or last decade.
Perhaps although being an optimistic
, I am also somewhat of a realistic as well. Fact; America is roughly $25 trillion in debt, Fact;America owes China 1.5 billion , So don't pop the champagne corps just yet.
As for the private sector what does the American taxpayer give to them Tax Cuts for paying tax cuts , research grants and a golden parachute called BAILOUT if they should run into some red ink.
What do the taxpayers get in return more jobs NO Higher wages NO, lower prices uhh NO, Now I'm not talking about the investors yeah they get a peice of taxpayer money , but not everybody out here in America owns stocks ,as a matter of fact if you research that you will find the majority of Americans don't own stocks .

In your post you said I should open my eyes , my eyes are open , to you I say take off the rose colored glasses and see the real America.:peace
 
Apologies for the late reply, unsure how I missed this.

What other nations have done with the costs of higher education is another matter, those nations shifting the costs onto the taxpayer is their decision to make. There were benefits to those choices and probably consequences as well.

Our discussion seems to center on higher education debt.

What I am trying to say is while your points are valid, the fault is not just "predatory lenders" and these kids taking out these loans. It took a concerted effort to get to this point over a period of time, it is too simplistic and a bit political argument over substance that this can be changed rapidly.

Just to ensure I am straight, what are we really debating here?

Frankly I do not know what we are debating about , I thought it was more of a discussion.

Basically I agree with most of you post but 1 point I would like to bring up.

You say in your post something about a higher education debt..t there are still problems with public education . After all if more of your money is going to education you should something out of it like smarter students a more intellectual generation so maybe there should be an investigation and there have been they investigate teachers , they investigate schools many teachers walked because of salary and bargaining rights taken away in Wisconsin 3 good schools were closed in Michigan to save money .
However the one entity that has not been investigated is the Board of Education at least not to my knowledge I could be wrong but I researched I could not find anything current the last I could find was the Spokes Darwin trial sometime back, and that was more of religion vs Darwinism:peace
 
Well, I will likely say the same things you've heard before....

There is nothing wrong with debt, as long as:
1) You borrow for a useful purpose
2) You don't borrow more than you can pay back

Things haven't actually changed much since 2013. Post-secondary education has gotten a little more expensive, and that's pretty much it. Millennials have felt the bite for years now.

Yes, it impacts spending, but it would be rather ignorant to blame that primarily on credit. A bigger factor is that income inequality has increased for several decades now, as has our standard of living. Thus, it is extremely difficult to earn a middle-class income with only a high school degree, and college graduates are also feeling the strain. This drives demand for post-secondary degrees, which results in more people borrowing more money just to try and keep up.

The ability to borrow money to pay for a home, a car or an education is a huge benefit. The US would be much worse off without 30-year mortgages or college loans. The real issue is that the wealthy are reaping all the economic benefits of 40+ years of productivity gains, and that can't work forever.

I agree with most of your post you do make some good points.
However, if you would glance at my code "Never take what you don't need , Never want what you can't have"
Most of people I know are on a very strict budget and everything they get is usually paid for in cash only loan is the mortgage and maybe $300 on an emergency credit card. These are my friends none of which lives as they say very expensive with big house new car, no most are just a 2 bedroom small house and a 9 maybe 10 yr old car.
However I am as one might say of the older generation I was keeping track of how the younger or middle age lived but after 2000 they kinda went all over the place I couldn't keep up.
However, after the dust settled it's pretty much the same deal some people were shouting at the average citizens in 2008 "don't live beyond your means " pull yourself up by your bootstings " and after that they same people say to the taxpayers some private corporations have some red ink they need 740 million dollars. lol

AsI said in another post I really don't understand nor agree with Millennials lifestyle but between the student loan , the competition in the workplace and living while you are trying to find a good job can't be easy they is also something else that they have to deal with as well as us in the retirement vicinity Property taxes some politicians may say no new taxes but they are wrong Ohio where I live just passed a tax of .18 cents a gallon on Gas our property taxes went up last year .
So balancing a budget in this day and age I would suggest a calculator or maybe even a slide rule .lol
 
Well, I will likely say the same things you've heard before....

There is nothing wrong with debt, as long as:
1) You borrow for a useful purpose
2) You don't borrow more than you can pay back

Things haven't actually changed much since 2013. Post-secondary education has gotten a little more expensive, and that's pretty much it. Millennials have felt the bite for years now.

Yes, it impacts spending, but it would be rather ignorant to blame that primarily on credit. A bigger factor is that income inequality has increased for several decades now, as has our standard of living. Thus, it is extremely difficult to earn a middle-class income with only a high school degree, and college graduates are also feeling the strain. This drives demand for post-secondary degrees, which results in more people borrowing more money just to try and keep up.

The ability to borrow money to pay for a home, a car or an education is a huge benefit. The US would be much worse off without 30-year mortgages or college loans. The real issue is that the wealthy are reaping all the economic benefits of 40+ years of productivity gains, and that can't work forever.

I agree with most of your post you do make some good points.
However, if you would glance at my code "Never take what you don't need , Never want what you can't have"
Most of people I know are on a very strict budget and everything they get is usually paid for in cash only loan is the mortgage and maybe $300 on an emergency credit card. These are my friends none of which lives as they say very expensive with big house new car, no most are just a 2 bedroom small house and a 9 maybe 10 yr old car.
However I am as one might say of the older generation I was keeping track of how the younger or middle age lived but after 2000 they kinda went all over the place I couldn't keep up.
However, after the dust settled it's pretty much the same deal some people were shouting at the average citizens in 2008 "don't live beyond your means " pull yourself up by your bootstings " and after that they same people say to the taxpayers some private corporations have some red ink they need 740 million dollars. lol

AsI said in another post I really don't understand nor agree with Millennials lifestyle but between the student loan , the competition in the workplace and living while you are trying to find a good job can't be easy they is also something else that they have to deal with as well as us in the retirement vicinity Property taxes some politicians may say no new taxes but they are wrong Ohio where I live just passed a tax of .18 cents a gallon on Gas our property taxes went up last year .
So balancing a budget in this day and age I would suggest a calculator or maybe even a slide rule .lol:peace
 
First of all it is true the National parks is making money there are jobs just as long as they stay National parks, that is government land public land not private land.

Like I said previously, I can easily disprove every one of your talking points just as I did with those about the Park system.

80% of American national debt is held by Americans or American entities.

There have been no service cuts by the Federal government, quite the contrary, with a forced tightening of waste and fraud.

All that you offer is political talking points for creating fear. Nothing of substance. Those of us who actually review the numbers know these talking points are BS.

Eventually, we will work things out with China, it is in the best interest of both nations to do so, despite the crap coming from hardliners with other agendas.

China has a population greater than 1.3 billion with only 300 million composing its middle class, approximately size of out entire population. Their middle class does not enjoy a quality of life enjoyed by our own. China is a capitalist nation, with fewer communists than Christians. They are not an enemy, they are a future partner. I trust China more than the back stabbing EU. Every nations acts in its own self perceived best interests. It is not in US interests to remain king of the hill, everyone else's scapegoat for attempting to police the world. That is BS for politicians, of no benefit to Americans.

Reality check, no rose colored glasses here, just open eyes.
 
80% of American government debt is held by Americans and American institutions, inclusive of pension funds, banks, investment banks, and so forth, mostly in bonds and
treasury notes, as well as US currency.

Were we to measure the value of American assets held by the American government, as we do for a business, the debt would proportionally be below 20% of the value of those assets, placing the security value of that debt within the top 5% of all American businesses. Considering that it is the goal of government to keep a 0 cash balance, the only wealthier nation is India with no debt. If you want to live with no debt, you can move to India. Of course you won't enjoy the basic standard of living enjoyed here, even by our most poor.

While most people cannot truly wrap their heads around a conceptual number like a trillion, ask yourselves, how does that trillion dollar debt effect my every day life? And then determine if it really matters to you?

It does by sucking up money that would otherwise be invested in private ventures. That does effect everyday life because there is less risk taking and less business growth, that is both a direct and tertiary effect.
 
It does by sucking up money that would otherwise be invested in private ventures. That does effect everyday life because there is less risk taking and less business growth, that is both a direct and tertiary effect.

Look at the net effect of bond issuance and deficit spending by the government:

Treasury issues bonds and sells them to the private sector. At this point, the private sector is down some money and up some bonds. And it is at this point that it looks like govt. debt might be crowding out investment.

BUT... the government spends those bond proceeds right back into the economy. Now, the private sector has exactly the same amount of dollars again; plus it is up some bonds, and it is up the aggregate demand from the govt. spending. (Plus knock-on effects of secondary spending.)

So what have they lost in the deal? Nothing. They have only gained.
 
It does by sucking up money that would otherwise be invested in private ventures. That does effect everyday life because there is less risk taking and less business growth, that is both a direct and tertiary effect.

If that were true, then no private company would hold debt. There is money to be made off both debits and credits. While many business startups commence with personal savings, many more enjoy financing. The risk is from the lending person(s) or entity. Every major tech company relied on angel investors and financiers. Today, Apple is floating bond issues (debt) because the borrowed money is cheaper than using their own.

In the business world, debt increase cash flow. Ask any farmer who factors prior to planting. Without debt to European investors our cattle industry would not exist. Thank the British, Germans, French and Belgians next time you enjoy a hamburger.
 
It does by sucking up money that would otherwise be invested in private ventures.

that might otherwise be invested in private ventures
 
Now, the private sector has exactly the same amount of dollars again; plus it is up some bonds, and it is up the aggregate demand from the govt. spending. (Plus knock-on effects of secondary spending.)

So what have they lost in the deal? Nothing. They have only gained.

Just like i told Pirate... maybe.

Do we sometimes need to trade a little productivity for a little more equality?
 
Response to OP title of thread -

I am of the opinion that debt is bad, generally speaking. In essence you are paying a premium (in interest) for something that you cannot afford to buy outright. The financial analysis of this is that you end up paying more for the same item when compared to a cash purchase. So considering that your income is finite over your life (you just don't know how much it is right now), you end up with less cash flow and lower purchasing power over time. The trade off is you have the item for use now.

This leads to a discussion about opportunity cost. If you purchase something, that means you lost out on buying something else. If you don't purchase something, you lost out on the use of the item. Thus, there is always a cost involved with whatever decision you make.

When you consider both points above I reach the conclusion that debt is only a good thing when purchasing an item that goes up in value. One must overcome the opportunity cost, the interest expense, and the risk factor in order to come out ahead financially (among other factors). A home located in a good neighborhood is a prime example of good debt, while just about any automobile or credit card expense are examples of bad debt.

The first item (a home) tends to go up in value and will likely double in value in about 15 to 20 years, so considering that you will pay twice the purchase price over a 30 year loan when factoring interest, the home loan begins to make financial sense in many (not all) situations. A $300k home may cost you about $600k over 30 years, but will probably end up being worth $750k at the end of a 30 year mortgage. So paying $600k for a $750K asset is more than worth it. Even if the home is only worth $600k at the end of the mortgage, you still came out ahead because you didn't have to pay rent for 30 years, and instead owned a viable asset at the end of it. In other words, your rent payment becomes equity for you instead of equity for your landlord.

The last items (like a car) are a massive financial hit for anyone. A brand new $35,000 car will only be worth $5k to $10k at end of a 5 year loan. So not only will you pay more than the purchase price over 5 years when factoring in interest, you will have lost 75% or more of the value of the car over that time. (and don't forget that the $600 a month payment has an opportunity cost associated with it). So when financing a vehicle, one could easily pay $40,000 for a $10,000 asset 5 years down the road. Sheer financial stupidity, yet the vast majority of Americans are guilty of this poor financial behavior.

Disclaimer - I am painting with very broad strokes with my numbers. I am not in any way suggesting that these numbers are abject facts in all situations.

Personally I only have 1 credit card that I exclusively use for utilities and monthly on line payments like health insurance. This bill get paid in full at the end of the month. I never do anything other than pay cash for a used car, and I always use my debit card to buy everything thing else I need (comes right out of my bank account). I also maintain a cash reserve. In other words - if I can't afford something, I don't buy it.

My only long term debt is my home, which has gone up in value every year that I have owned it according to the county assessor, and this debt will be retired in 15 years instead of 30 if I am able to stay on schedule. The ratios for this purchase will end up being around 1.5 times initial value paid for the asset, and 2 times (or more) initial value of worth in the open market at 15 years, meaning I will have made money on the debt purchase.

I have lived this way for over 10 years, and have gone from a negative net worth before I implemented these policies to a net worth of almost $175,000 today.
 
Response to OP title of thread -

I am of the opinion that debt is bad, generally speaking. In essence you are paying a premium (in interest) for something that you cannot afford to buy outright. The financial analysis of this is that you end up paying more for the same item when compared to a cash purchase. So considering that your income is finite over your life (you just don't know how much it is right now), you end up with less cash flow and lower purchasing power over time. The trade off is you have the item for use now.

This leads to a discussion about opportunity cost. If you purchase something, that means you lost out on buying something else. If you don't purchase something, you lost out on the use of the item. Thus, there is always a cost involved with whatever decision you make.

When you consider both points above I reach the conclusion that debt is only a good thing when purchasing an item that goes up in value. One must overcome the opportunity cost, the interest expense, and the risk factor in order to come out ahead financially (among other factors). A home located in a good neighborhood is a prime example of good debt, while just about any automobile or credit card expense are examples of bad debt.

The first item (a home) tends to go up in value and will likely double in value in about 15 to 20 years, so considering that you will pay twice the purchase price over a 30 year loan when factoring interest, the home loan begins to make financial sense in many (not all) situations. A $300k home may cost you about $600k over 30 years, but will probably end up being worth $750k at the end of a 30 year mortgage. So paying $600k for a $750K asset is more than worth it. Even if the home is only worth $600k at the end of the mortgage, you still came out ahead because you didn't have to pay rent for 30 years, and instead owned a viable asset at the end of it. In other words, your rent payment becomes equity for you instead of equity for your landlord.

The last items (like a car) are a massive financial hit for anyone. A brand new $35,000 car will only be worth $5k to $10k at end of a 5 year loan. So not only will you pay more than the purchase price over 5 years when factoring in interest, you will have lost 75% or more of the value of the car over that time. (and don't forget that the $600 a month payment has an opportunity cost associated with it). So when financing a vehicle, one could easily pay $40,000 for a $10,000 asset 5 years down the road. Sheer financial stupidity, yet the vast majority of Americans are guilty of this poor financial behavior.

Disclaimer - I am painting with very broad strokes with my numbers. I am not in any way suggesting that these numbers are abject facts in all situations.

Personally I only have 1 credit card that I exclusively use for utilities and monthly on line payments like health insurance. This bill get paid in full at the end of the month. I never do anything other than pay cash for a used car, and I always use my debit card to buy everything thing else I need (comes right out of my bank account). I also maintain a cash reserve. In other words - if I can't afford something, I don't buy it.

My only long term debt is my home, which has gone up in value every year that I have owned it according to the county assessor, and this debt will be retired in 15 years instead of 30 if I am able to stay on schedule. The ratios for this purchase will end up being around 1.5 times initial value paid for the asset, and 2 times (or more) initial value of worth in the open market at 15 years, meaning I will have made money on the debt purchase.

I have lived this way for over 10 years, and have gone from a negative net worth before I implemented these policies to a net worth of almost $175,000 today.

That's great for a person, but (most) governments aren't like households. They simply issue currency and spend it (bonds are operationally unnecessary). There is no need to extinguish government liabilities.

Furthermore, the government's deficit is our surplus. It's money they have spent into the economy that they have not bothered to tax away.
 
I got some interesting responses on that thread some said being in debt is not bad , some said being in debt is just a way of doing business

It's pretty simple really, if you can make a bigger profit off of your debt than what you're paying in interest then it makes sense to take on debt.

As much as paying off my student loans may suck the reality is that there is almost now way I'd be making 6 figures if I hadn't gotten a college degree. Within three years of leaving college I was already making more money than both my parents combined.
 
Like I said previously, I can easily disprove every one of your talking points just as I did with those about the Park system.

80% of American national debt is held by Americans or American entities.

There have been no service cuts by the Federal government, quite the contrary, with a forced tightening of waste and fraud.

All that you offer is political talking points for creating fear. Nothing of substance. Those of us who actually review the numbers know these talking points are BS.

Eventually, we will work things out with China, it is in the best interest of both nations to do so, despite the crap coming from hardliners with other agendas.

China has a population greater than 1.3 billion with only 300 million composing its middle class, approximately size of out entire population. Their middle class does not enjoy a quality of life enjoyed by our own. China is a capitalist nation, with fewer communists than Christians. They are not an enemy, they are a future partner. I trust China more than the back stabbing EU. Every nations acts in its own self perceived best interests. It is not in US interests to remain king of the hill, everyone else's scapegoat for attempting to police the world. That is BS for politicians, of no benefit to Americans.

Reality check, no rose colored glasses here, just open eyes.

So you are saying in Americas new budget there were or never has been in budget cuts on medicare , medicaid , veterans benefits , Food Stamps in the last 2 years ?
This is not politics this is money you say you have proof show it. if not take off the rose colored glasses . America has heard this before August 2008 America has a strong economy, September 2008 We support the bailouts due to America's economy so this aint the first time Americans were told don't worry "strong economy" a month later we just need to bailout some companies because of the sluggish economy "

As far as China is concerned , although you may state China is more of a capitalist country, China will remain a communist country run by the Communist party high officials , true they do trade and sell a lot , but China will do what's best for China and the communist party. The key point I have notice China will trade with just about anybody. If you think China isn't a communist country try going to Tenniman square and make a speech telling the Chinese people China is now a capitalist country.

When I was young we had a thing called the Cuban Missile crisis perhaps you've heard of it at that time we all held our breath because of fear of a nuclear war with Russia.

Today other people might look toward Iran , N. Korea or even Russia , as for me I keep my eyes on China . The reason is quite simple, while the rest of the world is talking about what they have in technology, military weapons China is kinda too quite . Personally it is my opinion I think China has a lot more than other nations think .
So lets just say my personal opinion nobody should butt into their personal business. or try telling them how to run their country.:peace
 
Response to OP title of thread -

I am of the opinion that debt is bad, generally speaking. In essence you are paying a premium (in interest) for something that you cannot afford to buy outright. The financial analysis of this is that you end up paying more for the same item when compared to a cash purchase. So considering that your income is finite over your life (you just don't know how much it is right now), you end up with less cash flow and lower purchasing power over time. The trade off is you have the item for use now.

This leads to a discussion about opportunity cost. If you purchase something, that means you lost out on buying something else. If you don't purchase something, you lost out on the use of the item. Thus, there is always a cost involved with whatever decision you make.

When you consider both points above I reach the conclusion that debt is only a good thing when purchasing an item that goes up in value. One must overcome the opportunity cost, the interest expense, and the risk factor in order to come out ahead financially (among other factors). A home located in a good neighborhood is a prime example of good debt, while just about any automobile or credit card expense are examples of bad debt.

The first item (a home) tends to go up in value and will likely double in value in about 15 to 20 years, so considering that you will pay twice the purchase price over a 30 year loan when factoring interest, the home loan begins to make financial sense in many (not all) situations. A $300k home may cost you about $600k over 30 years, but will probably end up being worth $750k at the end of a 30 year mortgage. So paying $600k for a $750K asset is more than worth it. Even if the home is only worth $600k at the end of the mortgage, you still came out ahead because you didn't have to pay rent for 30 years, and instead owned a viable asset at the end of it. In other words, your rent payment becomes equity for you instead of equity for your landlord.

The last items (like a car) are a massive financial hit for anyone. A brand new $35,000 car will only be worth $5k to $10k at end of a 5 year loan. So not only will you pay more than the purchase price over 5 years when factoring in interest, you will have lost 75% or more of the value of the car over that time. (and don't forget that the $600 a month payment has an opportunity cost associated with it). So when financing a vehicle, one could easily pay $40,000 for a $10,000 asset 5 years down the road. Sheer financial stupidity, yet the vast majority of Americans are guilty of this poor financial behavior.

Disclaimer - I am painting with very broad strokes with my numbers. I am not in any way suggesting that these numbers are abject facts in all situations.

Personally I only have 1 credit card that I exclusively use for utilities and monthly on line payments like health insurance. This bill get paid in full at the end of the month. I never do anything other than pay cash for a used car, and I always use my debit card to buy everything thing else I need (comes right out of my bank account). I also maintain a cash reserve. In other words - if I can't afford something, I don't buy it.

My only long term debt is my home, which has gone up in value every year that I have owned it according to the county assessor, and this debt will be retired in 15 years instead of 30 if I am able to stay on schedule. The ratios for this purchase will end up being around 1.5 times initial value paid for the asset, and 2 times (or more) initial value of worth in the open market at 15 years, meaning I will have made money on the debt purchase.

I have lived this way for over 10 years, and have gone from a negative net worth before I implemented these policies to a net worth of almost $175,000 today.

Sir I started this thread, I congratulate you on a good sound budget I lived that way even before my retirement working in the factories of Michigan I always remembered my Father's advice buy what you need save for what you want. pay all bills as soon as you get them.

There is one thing I have to question though ,it is my belief for awhile there in the early 2000's there were less opportunities for younger people coming out of High school because of the outsourcing but since America now has Honda and Toyota factories in America and other nations we are somewhat coming back to American labor in America.:peace
 
It's pretty simple really, if you can make a bigger profit off of your debt than what you're paying in interest then it makes sense to take on debt.

As much as paying off my student loans may suck the reality is that there is almost now way I'd be making 6 figures if I hadn't gotten a college degree. Within three years of leaving college I was already making more money than both my parents combined.

You misunderstand my post sir. It is my belief that America needs intellectual smart minds for in one way or the other they contribute the most to American decisions .

My question is there are other nations who furnish free College degrees why not America ?

I see your point getting a student loan to get a college degree to make 6 figures a year. within three years of leaving College.
My question is what is you didn't have a student loan to pay , would that be somewhat easier?

A long time ago Americans believed leave America better for the next generation, Kennedy once said "the torch is passed to a new generation" .
However in this day and age what has the old generation passed more debt, more climate problems and politicians that only talk to you during election time.
I must admit I am part of the older generation , grew up in the 50's and 60's. I look to the next generation , but alas I can only cheer you from the sidelines .
My days of marching for Civil rights , protesting the war, and a few presidents are past now.
To this new generation I say God speed and remember 3 words HUMAN ,AMERICAN, INDIVIDUAL:peace
 
When I was young we had a thing called the Cuban Missile crisis perhaps you've heard of it at that time we all held our breath because of fear of a nuclear war with Russia.

This says it all for you. JFK placed American missiles in Turkey and called ir the Cuban Missile crisis when the Russians gave him a taste of his own blustery bullying.

I didn't hold my breath or hide under a school desk, I laughed at the mutual idiocy. OMG! Kruschev banged his shoe on a desk at the UN, and visited Disneyland.

All hail the naysayers! :lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom