U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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)
View Poll Results: Would going over the fiscal Cliff be good or bad.
Yes it would be good for the country. 36 72.00%
No it would not be good for the country 14 28.00%
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-31-2012, 11:08 PM
 
13 posts, read 13,536 times
Reputation: 23

Advertisements

EugeneOnegin says "If we have a $17 trillion debt in 2022 we will likely be in pretty decent shape because the GDP then will likely be around $25 trillion. 17/25= ~70%."

These numbers are pure hallucination. Our debt is over 15 Trillion now!. Future unfunded liabilities have been extimated as anywhere from 77 to 120 TRILLION. (who knows exactly how much is anyone's guess.) Currently ALL federal revenues just cover defence ($800 Bill) SS outflows ($800 bill) and entitlements (Medicare, disability, unemployment extensions, food stamps, section 8 housing, gov pensions, etc. another $800 Bill.)
This does NOT include servicing the debt and INCREASES in SS as boomers like me and my ilk suck the life out of the budget.
Pal, this debt is going to GROW like a bonfire in a windstorm, and there ain't NO WAY OUT OF IT except to print money. That is why the Fed is not so much "out of bullets" as it cannot "stop shooting"!

Last edited by tgiradeaux; 12-31-2012 at 11:17 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-31-2012, 11:40 PM
 
48,508 posts, read 88,059,605 times
Reputation: 18187
The so called cliff is a political creation of Democrats and republicans in governamnt. the deficit spemding problem has been there sicne we made cuts under Clinton with the so called peace dividend after cold war. We immmediately the started spending again like crazy.Clinton tax increases really where a combianation with tax cuts in specific areas like capital agins to spur growth. Its often forgotten that Clinton came to a deal witrh congress lead byGingrich to balance the budget. Ont hing we do not have tho ispeace dividend to make huge cuts in defense now as its stayed right at 4% since.Cuts i war spendig will just eman lkess off budget borrowig not solve the deficit budget spending.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 02:35 AM
 
Location: Michigan
2,198 posts, read 2,384,600 times
Reputation: 2092
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgiradeaux View Post
EugeneOnegin says "If we have a $17 trillion debt in 2022 we will likely be in pretty decent shape because the GDP then will likely be around $25 trillion. 17/25= ~70%."

These numbers are pure hallucination. Our debt is over 15 Trillion now!. Future unfunded liabilities have been extimated as anywhere from 77 to 120 TRILLION. (who knows exactly how much is anyone's guess.) Currently ALL federal revenues just cover defence ($800 Bill) SS outflows ($800 bill) and entitlements (Medicare, disability, unemployment extensions, food stamps, section 8 housing, gov pensions, etc. another $800 Bill.)
This does NOT include servicing the debt and INCREASES in SS as boomers like me and my ilk suck the life out of the budget.
Pal, this debt is going to GROW like a bonfire in a windstorm, and there ain't NO WAY OUT OF IT except to print money. That is why the Fed is not so much "out of bullets" as it cannot "stop shooting"!
I wasn't suggesting that in 2022 the debt will be $17 trillion dollars, it most likely will be higher and will certainly grow higher in the short term, although that's not completely out of the realm of possibilities. The point I was making was that we don't need to pay down the debt/decrease the nominal debt value, if the debt were held constant the nominal value of the debt would become less problematic as the size of the economy grew. We need to reduce the deficit to a level of less than ~3% per year so that the debt increases more slowly than the GDP, and as a result, the debt as a percentage of GDP shrinks. If the debt increases by 1% per year and GDP increases by 2% per year then we're making progress. $17 trillion was not a prediction of what the debt will be in 2022, that's what it is now rounded up. But let's not let that get in the way of your dystopian fever dream.

This talk of $87 trillion in "unfunded liabilities" is nothing more than an inane scare tactic predicated on the general public's ignorance. This is not part of the national debt, and it is i]not[/i] money that the US government owes. This is a projection of what things like SS and other programs will cost from now until 75 years in the future if nothing is changed. Changes have been and will be made to SS in the future to keep it solvent, e.g. raising the retirement age, changing how the CPI is calculated, raising the limit on taxable income, etc. Let's worry about 2013-2020 before we starting having conniption fits over misleading, scary-sounding projections, which will never come to fruition, of SS payments in in 2087. Social Security might not even exist by then.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 08:49 AM
 
Location: NJ
28,803 posts, read 33,530,544 times
Reputation: 21123
Quote:
Originally Posted by EugeneOnegin View Post
We don't have to cut the whole amount of the projected deficit though. As the economy continues to recover tax revenues will increase and a lot of the automatic spending increases due to the weak economy (welfare, unemployment insurance, etc.) will decrease. And as the GDP increases the high nominal debt number will become less of a problem as the ratio of debt/GDP decreases (hopefully). If we have a $17 trillion debt in 2022 we will likely be in pretty decent shape because the GDP then will likely be around $25 trillion. 17/25= ~70%.

Moderate cuts, limits on new spending, small tax increases, and a stronger economy can easily close the gap. We don't need to close it all with immediate spending cuts.
why would you even suggest that we might have $17 trillion in debt in 2022? we will have it in 2013. you should probably say something like $27-30 tirllion.

and i understand that tax revenue should grow and maybe welfare should be reduced, but our politicians always use numbers that are way too optomistic when forecasting and they really have no clue if we will have any growth or reduction in public assistance so id rather assume a very modest growth number.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 10:09 AM
 
4,246 posts, read 10,995,309 times
Reputation: 3135
We're doomed no matter what. Might as well hope you pay the least amount of taxes while you're alive. Because sooner than later other countries will want their money and that will be the demise of this country. You can't keep printing money and taking on more debt and think everything will be fine and dandy.


You need to cut the fat from this country and start bringing in more money than you give out.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 10:58 AM
 
19,254 posts, read 25,521,605 times
Reputation: 37257
I say we take a john deere bulldozer and push all of the politicians off the fiscal cliff.....replace them with people that dont get paid unless they balance the budget
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-01-2013, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Michigan
2,198 posts, read 2,384,600 times
Reputation: 2092
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
why would you even suggest that we might have $17 trillion in debt in 2022? we will have it in 2013. you should probably say something like $27-30 tirllion.

and i understand that tax revenue should grow and maybe welfare should be reduced, but our politicians always use numbers that are way too optomistic when forecasting and they really have no clue if we will have any growth or reduction in public assistance so id rather assume a very modest growth number.
I wasn't suggesting that at all, see the post right above this one.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 08:23 AM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,797 posts, read 6,602,580 times
Reputation: 5180
Quote:
Originally Posted by piyf View Post
We're doomed no matter what. Might as well hope you pay the least amount of taxes while you're alive. Because sooner than later other countries will want their money and that will be the demise of this country. You can't keep printing money and taking on more debt and think everything will be fine and dandy.


You need to cut the fat from this country and start bringing in more money than you give out.
Repaying other countries is not where the problem lies, we can, and will, continue to print money to pay debts, pay entitlements, and do whatever else we decide.
The problem is at some point in time the rest of the world will no longer be willing to support the burden of using the ever shrinking dollar for reserve currency and will rebel.
This leaves only two possibilities, either we voluntarily accept the end of world reserve currency dollar status, which would implode the economy turning the US into a third world economy, or we do everything possible to avoid that end. It is my guess we will do the latter.
At that point we will have to enforce our monetary policy with military action. Our monetary policy is leading us into the next world war.
The paradox of this is that those who do not understand this, are advocating cuts to military spending that may ironically be the final nails in America’s coffin.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 11:20 AM
 
19,304 posts, read 16,834,088 times
Reputation: 7502
Good for insiders to make money no matter which way it goes.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2013, 03:22 PM
 
Location: 3rd Rock fts
748 posts, read 1,001,975 times
Reputation: 304
Default We need to reset inflation downward!

Quote:
Originally Posted by EugeneOnegin
…The point I was making was that we don't need to pay down the debt/decrease the nominal debt value, if the debt were held constant the nominal value of the debt would become less problematic as the size of the economy grew.
The Banksters/Big Business?/Stock Market can’t profit if the debt is held constant. IOW, the amount of growth needed to keep the debt held constant is not healthy/legitimately possible IMHO!
Rate this post positively 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. The time now is 12:02 AM.

¬© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top