heres something else i came across randomly
[quote]milktruck wrote:
heres something else i came across randomly[/quote]
“adjusted for inflation”
Inflation is making that chart trend down.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.” [/quote]
Yes that is a bad thing, but why blame Obama by naming the thread after him? What do you have to say in the future when a republican president causes it to go to new record highs?[/quote]
Because he’s a failure as a President.
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.”
[/quote]
Who was the last president that was not a failure?[/quote]
Last two Presidents too balance a budget were Cinton and LBJ both Democrats and now you will see how it spins when a Democrat does somthing well 
The blame is not solely with the politicians (though I agree it largely lies with them). We should be holding them accountable as a populace and we don’t. What I think a lot of people miss as well is that there are many people in this country who want something for nothing. Like health care. I hear a lot of people who think we should implement a “free” health care system not realizing the taxes that would have to go along with that to make it even feasible.
The people who want those things are the first to bitch when the gov’t goes into their pocket to grab it. So combine poor fiscal policy by politicians of all stripes with a populace that has a lot of people who want European style socialist programs without the taxes that would inevitably come with them. That’s a big problem.
The problem with constantly quoting Europe, is that they do not spend so much of their money on their military.
Another thing about Europe, they use their tax revenue for what it is intended to do, which is mainly healthcare and education funding. Does anyone here think that our government would use this massive tax revenue to actually go to healthcare costs ?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.”
[/quote]
Remember this the next your politicians say they need to raise the debt ceiling again.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.” [/quote]
Yes that is a bad thing, but why blame Obama by naming the thread after him? What do you have to say in the future when a republican president causes it to go to new record highs?[/quote]
Because he’s a failure as a President.
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.”
[/quote]
Who was the last president that was not a failure?[/quote]
Last two Presidents too balance a budget were Cinton and LBJ both Democrats and now you will see how it spins when a Democrat does somthing well :)[/quote]
Clinton had a Republican Congress. Thanks for playing.
CS
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt.
Debt is not necessarily bad. Because of the European debt crisis people like to compare our economy to Europe’s. However, there really isn’t any point in comparing a country like Greece or Spain to America. Greece cannot print Euro, it can literally run out of its own currency. America however, is the monopoly issuer of US dollars, and can never run out. It is important to note that 100% of US debt is denominated in US dollars, which we have an endless supply of (we are no longer on the gold standard).
The issue is not balancing the budget, but printing enough money to stimulate the economy without triggering inflation.
It is also important to note that a public sector deficit is by definition a private sector surplus. That is, public debt is private wealth. Government deficits provide financial assets for the private sector which stimulate demand for goods and services and encourage growth. Knowing this, it is perhaps less surprising to find that all of America’s depressions have been preceded by a significant reduction of public sector debt.
Since 1776 there have been exactly seven periods of substantial budget surpluses and significant reduction of the debt. From 1817 to 1821 the national debt fell by 29 percent; from 1823 to 1836 it was eliminated (Jacksonâ??s efforts); from 1852 to 1857 it fell by 59 percent, from 1867 to 1873 by 27 percent, from 1880 to 1893 by more than 50 percent, and from 1920 to 1930 by about a third. Of course, the last time we ran a budget surplus was during the Clinton years.
The United States has also experienced six periods of depression. The depressions began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1929. Many economists link Clinton’s budget surplus to the 2008 financial crisis. Do you see a pattern?
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS [/quote]
Some blame could be the people who took out the loans too.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS [/quote]
Some blame could be the people who took out the loans too.[/quote]
You know what’s up. Good man.
CS
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.” [/quote]
Yes that is a bad thing, but why blame Obama by naming the thread after him? What do you have to say in the future when a republican president causes it to go to new record highs?[/quote]
Because he’s a failure as a President.
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.”
[/quote]
Who was the last president that was not a failure?[/quote]
Last two Presidents too balance a budget were Cinton and LBJ both Democrats and now you will see how it spins when a Democrat does somthing well :)[/quote]
This “statistic” is often quoted but never explained in context.
Clinton decimated the military. Forced base closings. Forced retirements. Etc.
This is one of the reasons for the ramp up in spending acquired during Bush’s terms. We had to spend huge to bring the military back up to size and speed for the Afghan and Iraq wars.
Not arguing justification of the wars themselves. Just pointing out that Clinton’s “surplus” was bought and paid for at the expense of the U.S. military.
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS [/quote]
I assure you my intention was to state there was no real fault, I just act like the Republicans are more evil than the Democrats because the Republicans want you to believe the Democrats are more evil than the Republicans .
[quote]laxccm wrote:
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt.
The issue is not balancing the budget, but printing enough money to stimulate the economy without triggering inflation.
[/quote]
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt either. The policy you state above has been used for many years now with zero, count it zero, affect on stopping us from going near the cliff edge by both parties. Name one time in history the numbers have been this bad (and I don’t mean raw numbers, I mean adjusted). I don’t believe it can be done.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS [/quote]
I assure you my intention was to state there was no real fault, I just act like the Republicans are more evil than the Democrats because the Republicans want you to believe the Democrats are more evil than the Republicans .
[/quote]
GO RON PAUL! Oh that’s right he failed like I said he would…never mind.
[quote]laxccm wrote:
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt.
Debt is not necessarily bad. Because of the European debt crisis people like to compare our economy to Europe’s. However, there really isn’t any point in comparing a country like Greece or Spain to America. Greece cannot print Euro, it can literally run out of its own currency. America however, is the monopoly issuer of US dollars, and can never run out. It is important to note that 100% of US debt is denominated in US dollars, which we have an endless supply of (we are no longer on the gold standard).
The issue is not balancing the budget, but printing enough money to stimulate the economy without triggering inflation.
It is also important to note that a public sector deficit is by definition a private sector surplus. That is, public debt is private wealth. Government deficits provide financial assets for the private sector which stimulate demand for goods and services and encourage growth. Knowing this, it is perhaps less surprising to find that all of America’s depressions have been preceded by a significant reduction of public sector debt.
Since 1776 there have been exactly seven periods of substantial budget surpluses and significant reduction of the debt. From 1817 to 1821 the national debt fell by 29 percent; from 1823 to 1836 it was eliminated (Jacksonâ??s efforts); from 1852 to 1857 it fell by 59 percent, from 1867 to 1873 by 27 percent, from 1880 to 1893 by more than 50 percent, and from 1920 to 1930 by about a third. Of course, the last time we ran a budget surplus was during the Clinton years.
The United States has also experienced six periods of depression. The depressions began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1929. Many economists link Clinton’s budget surplus to the 2008 financial crisis. Do you see a pattern? [/quote]
Aside from the point that cheap money can stimulate the economy instead of distorting it, which I vehemently disagree with, “printing enough money to stimulate the economy without triggering inflation” is pretty much impossible at this point.
Sure, Bernanke has assured us that he can and will pull on the reigns when inflation starts to happen, but how?
Increasing interest rates, thats how, and how are municipalities, states and the federal government going to deal with that if they cannot balance their budgets now?
And that does not even go into the fact that if US inflation statistics were not seriously being tampered with the official inflation rate would be much higher.
However, when even Joe Sixpack starts to question the official inflation story what do you think the Chinese and the Japanese really think about the prospects of loaning the US any more money?
So we have a Fed that would try simultaneously to keep government going and be it by monetizing debt, keep inflation at a reasonable rate and not to kill off the economy.
You can pick one, if you have a benevolent genius at the helm which Bernanke almost definitely is not maybe two.
But all three?
No way.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not Obama’s biggest fan but your equation does not consider that diminished tax revenue due to Bush running the economy in the ditch.
[/quote]
Here we go nice one should have known that. It’s STILL BUSH’S FAULT!
You never disappoint.
[/quote]
I think the real estate market crashed , if was a big hit , it was no one’s fault . There are few that have a grasp of the way our economy is truly working
[/quote]
The housing market crashed because the banks were giving out sub-prime mortgage loans at the lowest rates in history. Then, when the Fed raised the rates, everybody started to default on their loans, leading to foreclosures. Don’t blame the/a president for that, blame the mortgage companies.
CS [/quote]
I assure you my intention was to state there was no real fault, I just act like the Republicans are more evil than the Democrats because the Republicans want you to believe the Democrats are more evil than the Republicans .
[/quote]
GO RON PAUL! Oh that’s right he failed like I said he would…never mind.[/quote]
No, the American electorate failed, but it will pay a very high price for it.
I can even tell you right now who is going to win the election.
Goldman Sachs.
[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.” [/quote]
Yes that is a bad thing, but why blame Obama by naming the thread after him? What do you have to say in the future when a republican president causes it to go to new record highs?[/quote]
Because he’s a failure as a President.
“The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.”
[/quote]
Who was the last president that was not a failure?[/quote]
Last two Presidents too balance a budget were Cinton and LBJ both Democrats and now you will see how it spins when a Democrat does somthing well :)[/quote]
Clinton had a Republican Congress. Thanks for playing.
CS[/quote]
Thsi si what I was referring to , thanks for playing
now you will see how it spins when a Democrat does somthing well
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]laxccm wrote:
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt.
The issue is not balancing the budget, but printing enough money to stimulate the economy without triggering inflation.
[/quote]
I don’t think you understand the nature of American debt either. The policy you state above has been used for many years now with zero, count it zero, affect on stopping us from going near the cliff edge by both parties. Name one time in history the numbers have been this bad (and I don’t mean raw numbers, I mean adjusted). I don’t believe it can be done.
[/quote]
The policy I am advising is not monetizing the deficit. We all know how that has worked out in history. When the Fed decides to put more money into the economy, they are not directly using that money to pay off the deficit. As I said before, they use the money to buy financial assets and stimulate the economy.
Also, I am not saying debt doesn’t matter, it is extremely important. However, balancing the budget should never be viewed as an end in and of itself, as it can impose austerity lead to depression.
Perhaps Warren Buffett says it more succinctly than I do…: “The United States is not going to have a debt crisis as long as we keep issuing our debts in our own currency. The only thing we have to worry about is the printing press and inflation.” Warren Buffett: Failure to Raise Debt Limit Would Be 'Most Asinine Act' Ever By Congress