Do you care about our Nation's ballooning National debt?
- Thread starter JEDI
- Start date
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 53,779
- 48,467
- 136
It is a concern but not one to go all Chicken Little over.
Our debt level is actually isn't all that alarming yet, not to say spending shouldn't be cut back. Our trade defict will likely come back our way somewhat as energy and some natural resources become more economical to exploit domestically or develop native altenatives for.
Our debt level is actually isn't all that alarming yet, not to say spending shouldn't be cut back. Our trade defict will likely come back our way somewhat as energy and some natural resources become more economical to exploit domestically or develop native altenatives for.
As much as Bush and the GOP have screwed it up, it's actually not that bad. Our Debt/GDP ratio has gone up under Bush, but it's still fairly low compared to many other developed countries. I'm more concerned about Iraq, but I don't want to get this thread off topic 
The word you want is DISGUST, and you're a fool if you don't think you'll be paying higher prices for everything and seeing a reduction in quality of your own lifestyle during your lifetime as a direct result of Bush's hairbrained adventures in office.
I find it funny the left in this country suddenly cares about deficit spending and national debt. I guess they hate Bush so much they will turn a back on their own ideology of spend spend spend to bash him.
As for my personaly belief, I think it would be better if we controlled spending to reduce the deficit than increase taxes. The deficit % is not much higher than it has been in the past, our debt\gdp ratio hasnt sky rocketed either.
The simply fact is our country is pushing over 13 trillion dollar economy. When you take the %s we are dealing with the raw dollar amount is getting huge. But in 100 years when our economy is 50+ trillion or more do you think a 400 billion dollar deficit will be anything?
Just like we think the 10 billion dollar deficit they ran in the 1930s is small. The secret is keeping it under control and within a % parameter. The sad fact is the adventure in Iraq and the war on terror has made our deficit higher than it would be during peace times. I could see us at a sub 200 billion dollar deficit without the above. 200 billion on 13 trillion = 1.5% or very small.
As for my personaly belief, I think it would be better if we controlled spending to reduce the deficit than increase taxes. The deficit % is not much higher than it has been in the past, our debt\gdp ratio hasnt sky rocketed either.
The simply fact is our country is pushing over 13 trillion dollar economy. When you take the %s we are dealing with the raw dollar amount is getting huge. But in 100 years when our economy is 50+ trillion or more do you think a 400 billion dollar deficit will be anything?
Just like we think the 10 billion dollar deficit they ran in the 1930s is small. The secret is keeping it under control and within a % parameter. The sad fact is the adventure in Iraq and the war on terror has made our deficit higher than it would be during peace times. I could see us at a sub 200 billion dollar deficit without the above. 200 billion on 13 trillion = 1.5% or very small.
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,196
- 4,868
- 126
Our current debt is not great, but not awful, so I give it a barely acceptable rating. However, the debt level is getting worse at a time when the economy is doing fairly well. I don't like that trend. What will happen when the economy turn sour? Then the debt level will go through the roof!
In times of decent economies, debt should be going down. That way you can keep spending if needed and keep taxes low when the economy is doing poorly.
In times of decent economies, debt should be going down. That way you can keep spending if needed and keep taxes low when the economy is doing poorly.
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,196
- 4,868
- 126
For decades the democrats have voted and compaigned for more spending on healthcare, education, and welfare but less spending on everything else. I think you are looking at only half of the picture and ignoring their wish for less spending in many, many areas. History of the last half century shows that debt per GDP goes up under Republican presidents and down under Democrat presidents. And it is the president who has final say over the budget. He can veto the spending bills. So to say it is a Democrat's ideology to spend is being ignorant of the facts.
I agree with that personal belief. There are plenty of places where money is being wasted. I support a tax increase ONLY as a last resort. The first resort should always be to cut wasteful spending - in all areas (even areas that democrats and/or republicans hold dear).
The debt as a percent of GDP is high compared to most years in the past. Yes, it was higher in two short periods, but compared to most years we are now worse. And we are going in the wrong direction. It is one thing to be high and dropping, but we are semi-high and rising.
That is why I always use figures as percent of GDP. Using that measurement we aren't heading in the right direction.
The sadder fact is that many people pretended this adventure would be cheap. Yes, defending ourselves is expensive. But I think we have gone far and above the spending necessary to simply defend ourselves.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
I used to think like you, Jedi, that the problems wouldn't hit til I was dead and buried.
However, the interest we are now paying yearly, just on Bush deficits, could pay for the Iraq war ever year.
And we are in a very low interest rate period.
Just like a homeowner with an adjustable rate mortgage, a small move in the interest rate has a huge influence on how much we pay in interest on such a large amount of money.
I have since come to realization that just like oil, any interruption in our supply of borrowed money will cause a massive increase in our interest rate.
And I see a country like China as the primary possibility for such an interruption.
If for any reason, political instability or war, China were to stop buying our notes we will have a crisis immediately not in 20 years.
However, the interest we are now paying yearly, just on Bush deficits, could pay for the Iraq war ever year.
And we are in a very low interest rate period.
Just like a homeowner with an adjustable rate mortgage, a small move in the interest rate has a huge influence on how much we pay in interest on such a large amount of money.
I have since come to realization that just like oil, any interruption in our supply of borrowed money will cause a massive increase in our interest rate.
And I see a country like China as the primary possibility for such an interruption.
If for any reason, political instability or war, China were to stop buying our notes we will have a crisis immediately not in 20 years.
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,196
- 4,868
- 126
Techs, I know it has been said before, but I have to say it again. You have some very valid and important points, but they way you type without paragraphs is so unprofessional and so disturbing to read that people think our side is full of idiots. Your posts end up working against you time after time after time. The more you post like that the more you make Bush look brilliant. Please stop giving the other side ammuntion and write in a legible fashion. Do it for yourself. Do it for Anandtech. Do it for America. Thanks.
You are correct in that the debt does affect us. ~7% of federal spending is to pay interest on the debt and the interest is going to get much worse as rates have gone up. If we eliminated the debt, we could have ~7% less income taxes, ~7% less estate taxes, ~7% less social security, medicare, etc taxes. ~7% less corporate taxes. And so on. Wouldn't that be wonderful? Wouldn't you like your taxes to be permanently cut by that much? Year after year after year.
Sure, it'll be painful in the short term to eliminate the debt. But it can be done. I say we do it in parts whenever the economy is doing well. Slash spending, and fight the urge to cut taxes. Then we can reap the rewards for years to come.
You are correct in that the debt does affect us. ~7% of federal spending is to pay interest on the debt and the interest is going to get much worse as rates have gone up. If we eliminated the debt, we could have ~7% less income taxes, ~7% less estate taxes, ~7% less social security, medicare, etc taxes. ~7% less corporate taxes. And so on. Wouldn't that be wonderful? Wouldn't you like your taxes to be permanently cut by that much? Year after year after year.
Sure, it'll be painful in the short term to eliminate the debt. But it can be done. I say we do it in parts whenever the economy is doing well. Slash spending, and fight the urge to cut taxes. Then we can reap the rewards for years to come.
I am very concerned.
1. Interest payments are increasing and taking a large chunk of our wealth away. We are issuing debt to pay of interest, getting ourselves further in the hole.
2. Sovereign debt has increased 50% in 6 years and is expected to increase to 12T by 2012 if Bush's spending plans and tax cuts are kept in place.
3. Debt/GDP is only OK. If GDP falls, which it likely will considering the coming storms of housing crisis and other problems, then that ratio goes to the crapper. Furthermore, if GDP goes down then that means debt will go up more, compounding the situation.
4. Tax cuts are only a smaller portion of the problem. I believe that they should be removed and more taxes on the top-end should be instated. Furthermore, spending needs to be reigned in, in a big way. Considering that Iraq and other "emergency military spending" is ~33% of the delta between old debt level and new debt level, I'd say that our policies of fighting fear with money are losing.
We are borrowing money from our future without any promise or possibility to pay it back. Debt is a good thing, in moderation. It should be taken out when revenues can't pay for services, as in an economic down-cycle. However, it should be repaid when revenues come back up, this is not likely to happen soon under Bush, because he doesn't get it.
1. Interest payments are increasing and taking a large chunk of our wealth away. We are issuing debt to pay of interest, getting ourselves further in the hole.
2. Sovereign debt has increased 50% in 6 years and is expected to increase to 12T by 2012 if Bush's spending plans and tax cuts are kept in place.
3. Debt/GDP is only OK. If GDP falls, which it likely will considering the coming storms of housing crisis and other problems, then that ratio goes to the crapper. Furthermore, if GDP goes down then that means debt will go up more, compounding the situation.
4. Tax cuts are only a smaller portion of the problem. I believe that they should be removed and more taxes on the top-end should be instated. Furthermore, spending needs to be reigned in, in a big way. Considering that Iraq and other "emergency military spending" is ~33% of the delta between old debt level and new debt level, I'd say that our policies of fighting fear with money are losing.
We are borrowing money from our future without any promise or possibility to pay it back. Debt is a good thing, in moderation. It should be taken out when revenues can't pay for services, as in an economic down-cycle. However, it should be repaid when revenues come back up, this is not likely to happen soon under Bush, because he doesn't get it.
Our current debt is manageable. It's our liabilities that are not, and will require dramatic changes. THAT is what coincides with socialism
OrganizedChaos
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2002
- 4,524
- 0
- 0
Yes, I care about our national debt. It hurts our trade deficit and adds to inflation. Plus the money we spend on the interest for it could be better used elsewhere.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
Nope.
You are under the impression that we live in a world of free trade.
China fixes the exchange rate of their currency. Despite the US dollars fall the Chinese rate has moved just a little, the amount the Chinese dictators decided they could move it and still keep jobs flowing into the country.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
Here's a hint. Since their is no way to program a five space paragraph indentation whenever a new sentence starts on the next line it is a new paragraph.
btw my writing style has a name, though I can't remember what it is. A very famous author, Frank McCourt, (my high school English teacher) encouraged me to keep writing like I do. So I have done so.
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,196
- 4,868
- 126
Professional writing (journals, online communications, etc) does not use the five space paragraph indentation anymore. The world has transitioned to using blank lines between paragraphs. Get with the times. Your English teacher is not a good teacher if he said to write that way. You can be a great author and a bad teacher. I suspect Frank McCourt is getting well up in the years if he hasn't transitioned to teaching his students about the newer blank line format.
I don't mean to be rude, but way too many people ignore you because our eyes burn trying to read your posts. Until you change, you are just wasting your time and your good ideas. When you do change, you'll actually help everyone involved. I just want to help you get your point across.
TheSlamma
Diamond Member
- Sep 6, 2005
- 7,625
- 5
- 81
Yes it bugs me cause before my Dollar was worth 2.5 in the country I wanted to move to, now it's almost equal so I can't afford citizenship.
I want out of this country badly. And for all the pricks who say fine get out... I'm trying but you guys are the one's who screwed it up!!!
I wish this country had an "if you don't like it leave" fund so when people say that moronic line we can take em up on the deal.
I want out of this country badly. And for all the pricks who say fine get out... I'm trying but you guys are the one's who screwed it up!!!
I wish this country had an "if you don't like it leave" fund so when people say that moronic line we can take em up on the deal.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter