U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-23-2015, 02:30 PM
 
24,757 posts, read 26,824,957 times
Reputation: 22776

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raysuxx View Post
Correct me with i'm wrong but the US is in a lot of debit, the most since WWII or something? Why then is it that they can't produce balanced or almost balanced budgets like other countries that have similar tax rates, far better and more extensive welfare systems, government funded health care, low unemployment and similar living standards? I thought military spending may have been a factor, but as % of GDP wise it isn't that significant I thought it's probably not...So what gives, surely with what I've outlined they would be running massive surpluses.
We're not in a lot of "debit" but we are in a lot of debt.

The reason why we don't balance the books is because everyone cherry picks the thing they don't like and say we should Cut X program (but don't cut mine) or we should raise someone else's taxes (but not mine).

Basically, most people are selfish--from the politicians right on down to the general public. Everyone notices these qualities of greed and selfishness in other people (usually the folks they disagree with) but never in themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-23-2015, 02:35 PM
 
24,757 posts, read 26,824,957 times
Reputation: 22776
Quote:
Originally Posted by el_marto View Post
Maybe because it's spending 0.7 trillion a year on a ridiculous military budget?
^^^^A perfect example of the simplistic cherry picking I noted in my previous post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2015, 02:37 PM
 
24,757 posts, read 26,824,957 times
Reputation: 22776
Quote:
Originally Posted by rapier7 View Post
Our debt-to-GDP ratio is in line with other developed countries. You're making assumptions based on a false premise.
No, not really. Just because everyone else's debt loads are going up (and this is the case in most developed countries) doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Many other developed countries are also having their credit ratings take a hit as well. France was the latest to be downgraded:

France downgraded by Moody's on weak growth - Telegraph
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2015, 02:42 PM
 
24,757 posts, read 26,824,957 times
Reputation: 22776
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordSquidworth View Post
It doesn't force you to run a persistent trade deficit. We have a choice whether we buy the cheap imports or not. I personally haven't stepped foot in Walmart in years, and this is a large reason why.
Until fairly recently, the biggest part of the trade deficit was actually in oil. Driving less and driving more fuel efficient cars would go a long way to fixing the trade deficit, as well as toward a healthier environment, not to mention lower health care costs (if people walk & bike more or at least have more time to exercise because of spending less time in traffic).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2015, 02:46 PM
 
24,757 posts, read 26,824,957 times
Reputation: 22776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnhw2 View Post
Balancing Its books won't fix our fiscal issues. Future Liabilities such as promised social security, Medicare and pension costs all in the future are not reflected in how the fed gov keeps its books. Trillions of additional liabilities unfunded. However if a for profit business kept its boos this way all hell from the Feds and shareholders would break out and it should. Double standard?
This is true.

There's widespread agreement from economists across the political spectrum that we must do something to control SS, & Medicare costs if we want to reduce or eliminate the budget deficit.

Honestly, if people just lived healthier lifestyles, I really think we could cut our healthcare costs in half. Problem is, no one wants to. People just want expensive pills to treat their obesity related health problems and they want 'em cheap or "free". It's not gonna happen, but most people don't want to hear that.

Forks Over Knives | Official Website
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2015, 09:07 AM
 
1,589 posts, read 881,081 times
Reputation: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk View Post
Wasn't that an on the books surplus but not a real surplus. I seem to remember claims that there was a deficit still those years but it was hidden with I think Social Security. The Clinton Surplus Myth
You can't cite Free Republic (or Craig Steiner) and expect any credibility. Receipts were in excess of outlays. The surpluses were used to buy back $363 billion worth of debt held by the public. That's even better than "balancing the books". But of course, Bush killed all that in a matter of months.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2015, 09:17 AM
 
1,589 posts, read 881,081 times
Reputation: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
There's widespread agreement from economists across the political spectrum that we must do something to control SS, & Medicare costs if we want to reduce or eliminate the budget deficit.
Both of these programs are in surplus and will continue to be for years to come. They are not contributing to deficits. That does not mean that the programs should not be shored up so as to more easily meet future demands. It does mean that claims that these should be the focus of budgetary reform are deceitful partisan nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2015, 12:42 PM
 
Location: Holly Springs, NC
252 posts, read 214,275 times
Reputation: 279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumf View Post
Here is very simple example as to why the USA cannot balance its books....

Say USA agrees to spends $100 on text books last year.
Next year they agree to spend $125 on text books.
They agreed that they spend too much, so they change it to be $115 for the books.
The USA spends that we have $10 spend less... but it's really $10 more...

They're spend more but explain less... and it keeps spending....
yup, the tricks of baseline budgeting that have everyone fooled
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2015, 01:06 PM
 
Location: USA
16,585 posts, read 16,255,698 times
Reputation: 12536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raysuxx View Post
Correct me with i'm wrong but the US is in a lot of debit, the most since WWII or something? Why then is it that they can't produce balanced or almost balanced budgets like other countries that have similar tax rates, far better and more extensive welfare systems, government funded health care, low unemployment and similar living standards? I thought military spending may have been a factor, but as % of GDP wise it isn't that significant I thought it's probably not...So what gives, surely with what I've outlined they would be running massive surpluses.
Almost every country is in debt, the level of debt compared to GDP is the main difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2015, 01:28 PM
 
3,530 posts, read 2,178,194 times
Reputation: 2636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raysuxx View Post
Correct me with i'm wrong but the US is in a lot of debit, the most since WWII or something? Why then is it that they can't produce balanced or almost balanced budgets like other countries that have similar tax rates, far better and more extensive welfare systems, government funded health care, low unemployment and similar living standards? I thought military spending may have been a factor, but as % of GDP wise it isn't that significant I thought it's probably not...So what gives, surely with what I've outlined they would be running massive surpluses.
Well, as Krugman is fond of saying, the US is basically an insurance company with a military. Socialsecuritymedicareandmedicaid + defense is the vast majority of US federal spending.

As for the existence of debt, well, what is national debt, and why is it bad?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top