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.
~$3 TRILLION of your $16.8 TRILLION National Debt is the OASI, OADI and HI Trust Funds, however they are part of the governmental debt and not the public debt. As the Trust Funds are exhausted -- being converted to cash to pay benefits --- the public debt increases, but not the National Debt. As the public debt increases and your economic system remains unchanged, investors will start demanding higher interest rates, which will send you into the Austerity™ spiral.
Or not as our debt is valued in USD we can and probably will just hand them a check for the money. That would be the hyper inflation spiral.
Th Fed will just buy up the debt and have in on its books. But we will have that much more money in circulations.
Iceland, Estonia and Latvia all recovered using different flavors of "austerity".
The others, not really. Then again they are just borrowing from the IMF and squeezing their citizens dry and not really improving and then going back to the IMF for more money.
The US has their own IMF..the Federal Reserve.
And neither the Federal Reserve nor the IMF are talking too much about the success of those three countries.
If America had a policy of paying down it's debts in good years, it would have been in a much better position to spend our way out of this downturn, but that is not the case we borrow and spend like drunken fools in good times and bad thus leaving us in the positition were in right now.
bill
But the those cost might have made them not so good years. Even revenues can be a factor of spending in GDP for governamnts.The problem always is a mix of x consequences of taxig removing investment money;spending over what is taken it and even that depends o more than rates largely.The only way to solve spoendig is requiring a balanced busget .When you have fixed income and thinsg go up e then you have a deficit plain If you make more revnues then you can spend more but have to adjust when they are at shortfall.Once you start borrowig your taxing the future.
Better check the recent history books. Even into FY 2001 we had budget surpluses, and we were in fact paying down debt held by the public. Then Bush came along with different ideas. Those ideas proved disastrous. All of them. Requiring a balanced federal budget would be in the same class.
The study by Harvard Professors Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff that has been used as the basis for global austerity policies and Paul Ryans budget recommendations has been found "flawed" due to what can only be charitably called exclusion of contradictory data, and questionable weighting of the data. Even worse, if that is possible, neither Reinhart ofr Rogoff hadn't published their data until very recently which is the reason why it has taken so long for other researches like those at the University of Mass to find the flaws in their study.
All part of a larger pattern on the right. The similar work of Alberto Alesina and Sylvia Artagna also came apart at the seams once given closer scrutiny. Then there's Neumark and Wascher's ultimately unstable attempts to undermine Card and Krueger's findings that increasing the minimum wage did not result in measureable changes in unemployment. Then you can throw almost anything at all from the Heritage Foundation or the Mises Institute onto the pile. There seems to be a sizable chunk of the population out there that will accept either fact or fiction so long as it fits their partisan biases.
Wishes of USA or say wishes of top 1% bankers and Wall Street Corporates. They are doing very well in this economic downturn and poverty.
Diplomats dispatched by national governments comprise IMF bodies. Bankers and corporations have no representation at all. OWS had many good things to say, but naked hatred of the global financial system was not among them. That's simply an ignorant thing to carry on with.
It is of course quite true that the unconstrained capitalist greed of Wall Street was responsible for the Great Recession, and that such elements have served only to turn small problems into large ones in places such as Greece. But all that is a horse of a different color.
Yet today we hear that the new housinf appointment is a congrssamn who lwad the house housing committee that refused to look at Fannie. Talkabout the fox in the hen house.Nut really the balme goes fro mian street;to washington to wall street as to greed.Easy crdit allowing such a mess is truely a conspiracy of alot of people not want to believe the bubble can end.I can well remmber Barney frank sayig in not ai uditig Fnnaie that ih f need they could be bailed out.To the tune of 189 nas of now.
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.
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.
