Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: What does the increasing national debt mean for us?

  1. #21
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    7,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Tammy View Post
    At some point it will hit home that money is just numbers in paper. Then only those things with intrinsic value will matter. Precious metals mar or may not make the cut. It depends how hungry and thirsty we are.
    I've never had anyone turn down smoked salmon. Just sayin'....

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    I believe 49 states require a balanced budget either by statutory requirement or constitutional citation, with Vermont being the outlier.

    While a little leeway in times of war might be nice, I'd like to see it as a Federal requirement as well.
    Didn't trump say he would balance the federal budget as a campaign promise? I heard US debt is up by 27% since trump was elected.

  3. #23
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    6,394
    Quote Originally Posted by frugal-one View Post
    Didn't trump say he would balance the federal budget as a campaign promise? I heard US debt is up by 27% since trump was elected.
    I don't recall him saying that but I'll take your word for it. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see a balanced budget again because it will require less entitlement spending. We've reached a point politically where no one can survive that.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  4. #24
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    I don't recall him saying that but I'll take your word for it. Personally, I don't think we'll ever see a balanced budget again because it will require less entitlement spending. We've reached a point politically where no one can survive that.
    I think the GOP needs to get on top of that. Politifact says this is mostly true, although I'm sure it's not so simple.

    Reagan took the deficit from 70 billion to 175 billion.
    Bush 41 took it to 300 billion.
    Clinton got it to zero.
    Bush 43 took it from 0 to 1.2 trillion.
    Obama halved it to 600 billion.
    Trump’s got it back to a trillion.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,768
    If people hate debt why do they keep voting Republican?

  6. #26
    Simpleton Alan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    6,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Teacher Terry View Post
    If people hate debt why do they keep voting Republican?
    Because as Rogar suggests, it's not that simple.

    If you'll recall, the Reagan era budgets were used to rebuild the military which had been neglected during the Carter years. That effort was so successful it facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of East Germany and much of the rest of Eastern Europe.

    Clinton had the benefit of a Republican House filled with young idealists and led by Newt Gingrich and his Contract With America. The Senate was also securely under Republican control. Bill basically just had to stay out of their way and accept credit for the results.

    The Bush 43 numbers require a little sleight of hand. That 1.2 trillion number came in the 2009 fiscal year budget which made its way through Congress in 2008, the one Harry Reid held hostage until Obama took office and was actually signed by Obama, although it retains Bush's name. After that I believe there was only one formal budget completed during the Obama/Reed/Pelosi years as they decided it was easier to operate under continual spending resolutions. I'm embarrassed that Republicans took the path of least resistance and continued those.

    And Trump, well he's actually a Democrat, always has been.
    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    7,768
    Trump is not for either party. He’s just interested in himself.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Because as Rogar suggests, it's not that simple...
    It's probably still a little more complicated. If you add in 43's Iraqi war expenses I could start to see a connection between tax cuts, military spending, big deficit increases, and the GOP. I suppose we are stuck with our roll as global policeman as much as social security and medicare.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Because as Rogar suggests, it's not that simple.

    If you'll recall, the Reagan era budgets were used to rebuild the military which had been neglected during the Carter years. That effort was so successful it facilitated the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of East Germany and much of the rest of Eastern Europe.

    Clinton had the benefit of a Republican House filled with young idealists and led by Newt Gingrich and his Contract With America. The Senate was also securely under Republican control. Bill basically just had to stay out of their way and accept credit for the results.

    The Bush 43 numbers require a little sleight of hand. That 1.2 trillion number came in the 2009 fiscal year budget which made its way through Congress in 2008, the one Harry Reid held hostage until Obama took office and was actually signed by Obama, although it retains Bush's name. After that I believe there was only one formal budget completed during the Obama/Reed/Pelosi years as they decided it was easier to operate under continual spending resolutions. I'm embarrassed that Republicans took the path of least resistance and continued those.

    And Trump, well he's actually a Democrat, always has been.
    Trump just wants to build a stupid wall and build up entities that are self serving.

  10. #30
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Tammy View Post
    At some point it will hit home that money is just numbers in paper. Then only those things with intrinsic value will matter. Precious metals mar or may not make the cut. It depends how hungry and thirsty we are.
    We almost got to see that ten years ago. But the people with real amounts of money, and who also pull the levers of monetary policy and procedure got creative and preserved the fiction that paper assets not backed by anything ‘real’ have value.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •