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.
You don't understand at all. There is no need to erase the debt. The US can only default on the debt by failing to pay the interest.
Or the principal (when a Treasury bill, note, or bond matures)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff
They can always do that by simply printing the $$$..
Sure, and you know what happened when Germany tried that in the early 1920's right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff
All the political BS is about increasing the size of the debt. The Reps are always extremely anti deficit spending and debt when a Dem is president. When a Rep is president, they love it. The reason is because deficit spending would stimulate our economy. Especially over the last 7 years we should have had a lot of it! The Reps want the economy to be poor so they can use it as a political tool to elect more Reps.
The last time we had a Republican president, it's not as though Republicans were trying to increase spending on much of anything - as always they go mainly for tax cuts, not spending increases.
I never said the debt would be monetized. I said it doesn't matter how big it gets. Opin_Yunated convinced me that the only negative effect of a high debt would be a reduction in the foreign exchange value. This is something we sorely need to increase domestic production and revive our economy that has been based on debt bubbles for 35 years.
Not so fast. The problem with too much debt is that it requires keeping interest rates low and/or inflation high so that we can afford it. This may cause other economic harms that we'd like to avoid. This is especially true when we talk about the portion that is not owed by the US to itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff
No one who understands money and the economy even a little bit would want a balanced budget. Fiscal conservatism is great when it's your own finances, but when it concerns national finances in a country that controls it's own currency, it's just plain stupid.
They are not worthless. They have value because the law says they have value. The U.S. dollar is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government.
Though the law does not mandate the minimum value of a dollar in terms of real assets such as land or gold (or even labor for that matter - there is no "maximum wage".) So in a very real sense there is no value of a dollar given to it solely on the basis of "the full faith and credit of the United States government".
Of course one can try to implement price controls, but if too much money is printed and the government attempts to legislate price caps, this also does not solve the problem, because what will in fact happen is that supply will dry up (i.e. shortages) of real resources (goods and services).
I feel sorry for Americans who had their tax dollars flushed down the toilet just to make the situation worse. Where the government is in trillions in debt.
Is there a point to your rant?
Nonsense like that belongs over on the POC Forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
Project Iraqi Freedom doubled American public debt.
And unwittingly saved your economy from a rapid decline into a major recession....
Too bad for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
Most people? I think you been Bush Co and Friends, when Clinton was in office there was a surplus.
Fail....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick538
1) There was NEVER a "surplus" during Clinton's eight fiscal years. Never. At no point did the federal government bring in more in tax revenue than it paid out. Don't believe me? Look at the debt under Clinton. It increased every single year. How does a surplus translate to higher debt levels? Answer-by robbing excess Social Security funds, Clinton was able to mask his deficits and claim that he had nearly balanced the budget, which was almost true for two years because......
Good job Nick538.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
Saudi Arabia, China and Japan own a lot of American bonds,...
Fail....
China, Mainland $1.239 TRILLION
Japan $1,238 TRILLION
OPEC: $290.8 Billion
Individually, Saudi Arabia owns less than $10.2 Billion.
Note that Vietnam holds $14 Billion which is more than Saudi Arabia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
.... they will use it as political leverage in the future.
No, they will use it as economic leverage to propel their economies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
The US government cut taxes so they needed money, therefore selling treasury security to foreign countries.
Fail....
The US government has been selling treasury securities to foreign States long before your parents were even born. Even before your grand-parents were born.
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemissrock
The American government will never "TAX THE RICH", since they own congress. The middle class is certainly screwed.
Maybe someone else can answer you perhaps a pre-school teacher, you should leave real discussion to adults.
So you couldn't answer the question.
Somehow, I just knew you wouldn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations
I'm sorry but the fact you can't address simple responses to the topic you brought up speaks volumes more towards your understanding and capability than it does to myself not being an adult
Indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations
Again how much of our total debt is owned by China and japan? Why did your mention Saudi Arabia,? And why doesn't japan and china own as much as they do?
The poster has no idea, and most of the rant is based on racial or ethnic bigotry.
But for the sake of knowledge:
China, Mainland $1.239 TRILLION
Japan $1,238 TRILLION
OPEC: $290.8 Billion
Individually, Saudi Arabia owns an unspecified amount that is less than $10.2 Billion.
Note that Vietnam holds $14 Billion which is more than Saudi Arabia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7
You might want to do your research, Clinton taxed the rich, and what happened when Clinton was president?
Surplus.
Nope..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick538
1) There was NEVER a "surplus" during Clinton's eight fiscal years. Never. At no point did the federal government bring in more in tax revenue than it paid out. Don't believe me? Look at the debt under Clinton. It increased every single year. How does a surplus translate to higher debt levels? Answer-by robbing excess Social Security funds, Clinton was able to mask his deficits and claim that he had nearly balanced the budget, which was almost true for two years because......
2) Congress controls spending and the Republicans controlled Congress and forced Clinton into a budget deal that, combined with no wars and a Dot.Com economy, smoothed things over.
3) The Bush "tax cuts for the rich" benefitted EVERYONE. I am not rich and I received a tax cut. They also did not add to the deficit. In fact, in 2007, after the tax cuts and right before Democrats took control of Congress and ramped up their spending, the deficit was down to $162 billion-or about two months' worth of Obama deficits.
Facts are inconvenient things.
One other inconvenient fact......the Republican Congress forced Clinton to cut the Capital Gains Tax, and that is what caused revenues to increase.
The optimal Capital Gains Tax Rate is somewhere around 10.8% to 11.5%.
At no time in history has a Capital Gains tax cut resulted in a loss of revenues.
Quite the contrary.....high Capital Gains tax rates have cost US taxpayers more than $1 TRILLION in lost revenues since 1990.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuptag
The public debt is owed mostly to foreigners;...
No.
As of 03/23/2015
Federal Debt $13,090,617,194,678.79
Trust Fund Debt $5,061,765,374,906.53
Total Debt $18,152,382,569,585.32
It won't. More nations are going to jump over to the BRICS nation block. The US dollar is going to be dropped as a standard currency. The education debt bubble is going to burst and the US is going to end up declaring bankruptcy.
It won't. More nations are going to jump over to the BRICS nation block. The US dollar is going to be dropped as a standard currency. The education debt bubble is going to burst and the US is going to end up declaring bankruptcy.
Nope.
The United States is monetarily sovereign. It has unlimited control over the U.S. dollar. Bankruptcy is impossible for the United States. It cannot be "dropped" as a currency without a breach of U.S. sovereignty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncole1
Sure, and you know what happened when Germany tried that in the early 1920's right?
Germany owed significant amounts of foreign debt in the form of war reparations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncole1
Though the law does not mandate the minimum value of a dollar in terms of real assets such as land or gold (or even labor for that matter - there is no "maximum wage".) So in a very real sense there is no value of a dollar given to it solely on the basis of "the full faith and credit of the United States government".
I'm referring mainly to the value on international markets. Money is just a point system medium of exchange. It represents the goods and services in the economy.
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.
The last time we had a Republican president, it's not as though Republicans were trying to increase spending on much of anything - as always they go mainly for tax cuts, not spending increases.
