National Debt exceeds $12,000,000,000,000.00

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
And if thousands of little girls are trafficked out of SE asia and into Russia it doesnt affect me at all. But I still give a shit.

Great. I give a shit about the sun burning out and the fact that dark energy will one day overwhelm the force of gravity in the universe causing the unraveling of all matter.

But I'm not out preaching doom and gloom and trying make it into something that you and I need to be worried about right now. That's the difference my friend.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Why does everyone always look at the debt graphed by president? Why not by congressional majority?
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Great. I give a shit about the sun burning out and the fact that dark energy will one day overwhelm the force of gravity in the universe causing the unraveling of all matter.

But I'm not out preaching doom and gloom and trying make it into something that you and I need to be worried about right now. That's the difference my friend.

No, it's heat death. Now we can bicker about heat death versus dark energy. Destroy P&N!
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
Why does everyone always look at the debt graphed by president? Why not by congressional majority?

Because the chart wouldn't fit the agenda of the people making the chart nearly as well. Just like using the correct data doesn't work out as quite as well.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
You've got to remember that a significant portion of the country has been brainwashed to think that Republican debt = bad and Democratic debt = good.

Instead of debt = bad.

Many of these people have yet to work for a living and many that are working pay no federal taxes as has already been pointed out. It's easy to just plod along with blinders on waiting for the next round of government cheese to fall in their laps. They're getting promised plenty these days.

When the sun gets higher in the sky, they'll be showing up in droves explaining why monumental debt is meaningless. Be patient, because they don't like to get up until the sun is warm.

I think your comments are misguided - they lack any discussion of the real issues, the real distinctions between Republican dna Democrat, and instead just bash the poor.

We have a serious problem with debt - and you do what you can to misdirect from the issues about that debt.

The primary problem IMO is concentrated wealth, leeching off the rest of the society, sucking the wealth out of the US to leave the nation weakened and themselves enriched.

Democratic spending isn't perfect by any means, but in general it's aimed at a safety net and at investments in national propserity, not the 'class war' transfer of wealth to the top.

Republicans on the other hand are largely people who are happy to adopt the corporate agenda, and take the big bucks waiting for those who will make the rich richer, bucks which are fed to the policiatl campaign industry to sell the manufactured image of the candidate to get enough votes to win, and the politician then votes for those who paid for his election. This has gotten down to a science by the Bush administration when they appointed corporate representatives to oversee their own industries, and allowed those who donated enough to write the laws they wanted passed, and those who did not donate enough were not listened to, whether or not they had a valid position for the public interest. The Republican party is indeed the 'Fox' guarding the henhouse.

They keep their supporters in line by keeping them hating and afraid of the 'liberal enemy', be it gay rights, miinority rights, womens rights, socialism, terrorism, whatever works.

The important thing is keeping the people in office who will sell out the public for the interests of the rich, and that includes the skyrocketing debt.

That doesn't mean the government just writes checks to the rich, though that happens to an extent - private debt in the nation has exploded much worse even than the public debt this thread is about. Policies that lead to the transfer of wealth from most citizns to the top grow that private debt, which leads to increased demands for government assistance.

The problem to deal with is the political power of those with extremely concentrated wealth, to free money for the economy of the rest of the nation.

As long as there is an excess of concentrated wealth, there will be concentrated power that will fight and undermine democracy and the common good.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
People are saying that China is questioning Obama over the healthcare bill. I guess with over $2 trillion at stake, I would grill my clients too before I gave them another fix.

Lets face it there isn't a thing we can do to pay what we owe. If every person in the USA started handing the gov their entire paycheck each week it wouldn't pay it off.



http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2009/11/16/china-questions-costs-of-us-healthcare-reform/
Guess what? It turns out the Chinese are kind of curious about how President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform plans would impact America’s huge fiscal deficit. Government officials are using his Asian trip as an opportunity to ask the White House questions. Detailed questions.

Boilerplate assurances that America won’t default on its debt or inflate the shortfall away are apparently not cutting it. Nor should they, when one owns nearly $2 trillion in assets denominated in the currency of a country about to double its national debt over the next decade.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
People are saying that China is questioning Obama over the healthcare bill. I guess with over $2 trillion at stake, I would grill my clients too before I gave them another fix.

Lets face it there isn't a thing we can do to pay what we owe. If every person in the USA started handing the gov their entire paycheck each week it wouldn't pay it off.



http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2009/11/16/china-questions-costs-of-us-healthcare-reform/

nice Ass-Fact you pulled from that blog. You only missed it by 250%. Now, don't you feel silly?

There is a total of $3.497 trillion of estimated foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes as reported by the Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board on November 17, 2009. (Oh, my! That's today.)

It looks to me as if the US Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board claims China holds $798.9 billion fo US Gov't marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes.

I've got bad news, but please don't panic. China is dumping their holdings of US Gov't Securities.

It's down from $800.5 billion over 2 months, or roughly one-tenth of one percent per month. Better stock up on guns and ammo --- for February 17, 2094 --- when the real panic begins.

I got news for China. With that $18 billion/month trade surplus with the USA, I don't think they want to fuck with the financial well-being of the United States when our citizens decide to take their business elsewhere.

-
-
-
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,634
13,324
136
Why does everyone always look at the debt graphed by president? Why not by congressional majority?

also a good point, seeing as congress is the one who actually handles the money, and the president simply signs the budget.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Fiscal Year-Year Ending---National Debt------Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion


Sure looks like a steady rise to me. Although I do give Clinton a lot of credit for not spending like a complete drunken sailor, you are completely full of shit if you imply that one party is responsible for our borrowing habits.

BTW, you might wanna send whoever made that an email. You can only give W 8 years and since they gave him 01 (which is Clinton not Bus) that means Obama gets 09 and yall have been arguing (for the most part correctly) pretty hard against that. I know it looks better on the chart the way it is but I am not sure they want to cheat on this one given how bad it looks if you throw Obama on the chart for 2009.

I never claimed the D's were the fiscally responsible party. I'm only pointing out the hypocrisy with those who pretend the debt didn't rise quickly in the past. Yes, the debt rose 'steady' under Clinton but at what rate compared to those before and after him? Feel free to carry your figures from 2002-2009 so we can see how the modern day 'fiscally conservative' tea bagging republicans reigned in spending once they got in charge.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
He's uptight because he proved your previous post wrong?

Uptight because he acted like a jerk, a sure sign of someone who is so caught up in politics that it is all they can see. I find it hilarious really.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
I never claimed the D's were the fiscally responsible party. I'm only pointing out the hypocrisy with those who pretend the debt didn't rise quickly in the past. Yes, the debt rose 'steady' under Clinton but at what rate compared to those before and after him? Feel free to carry your figures from 2002-2009 so we can see how the modern day 'fiscally conservative' tea bagging republicans reigned in spending once they got in charge.

Now that you are absolutely correct on. Both parties love to use the great big federal credit card. Unfortunately, it isn't sustainable when either party do it for whatever reasons it may be. We are soon approaching a time when we will be forced to live within our means BY the people that are loaning us the money. Racking up huge deficits in the mean time only makes that day come sooner.

The bottom line is this: Tax receipts are through the floor and will continue to be horrible. At the same time .gov expenses are through the roof for the exact same reason. Those people who aren't paying taxes due to unemployment are now on social programs. We aren't going to be able to borrow money from SSI like we have in the past either. What we are currently doing and plan to do going forward isn't going to cut it.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,330
126
nice Ass-Fact you pulled from that blog. You only missed it by 250%. Now, don't you feel silly?

There is a total of $3.497 trillion of estimated foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes as reported by the Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board on November 17, 2009. (Oh, my! That's today.)

It looks to me as if the US Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board claims China holds $798.9 billion fo US Gov't marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes.

I've got bad news, but please don't panic. China is dumping their holdings of US Gov't Securities.

It's down from $800.5 billion over 2 months, or roughly one-tenth of one percent per month. Better stock up on guns and ammo --- for February 17, 2094 --- when the real panic begins.

I got news for China. With that $18 billion/month trade surplus with the USA, I don't think they want to fuck with the financial well-being of the United States when our citizens decide to take their business elsewhere.

-
-
-

I got just one question for you.... Who is going to fund our lifestyle going forward?

Not sure if you have been paying attention but most of the world doesn't have a whole lot of dough to spot us, the dollar isn't looking like the greatest investment atm, and we are soon going to run out of SSI money to "borrow". So... Who exactly is going to pick up the tab? (FYI: The evil rich bastards don't have nearly enough to cover it either)
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
Feel free to carry your figures from 2002-2009 so we can see how the modern day 'fiscally conservative' tea bagging republicans reigned in spending once they got in charge.


what makes you so sure that the ones at those rallys are the same dumbasses that thought a second term of GDub was a good idea, instead of maybe a not worse than the other idea?

and why again does the left consider calls for fiscal responsibility such a threat?
 

xaeniac

Golden Member
Feb 4, 2005
1,641
14
81
What are the proposed solutions here? Good discussions in this thread, but what are the solutions?
 
Last edited:

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
What are the proposed solutions here? Good discussions in this thread, but what are the solutions?

I don't think there is one. We let it get out of control for too long. When you have broke states like CA looking up if there are provisions in the constitution for a state to return its land to the government or how to declare bankruptcy, it is pretty bad. I really don't see things changing unless there is a major change in how the government decides on how to spend money. It is far too easy right now for money to be spent without much oversight. I really wish changes like health care required a national vote vs letting a senator decide.


The only fix I see is freeze spending for new bills. Cut back on what we already spend and get rid of the corruption. Of course none of that will ever happen.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
American rightwing ravers might be the lamest people on the planet.

Reagan, GHWB, and GWB ran enormous deficits during their tenures, even as they promised exactly the opposite.

Why? Because it concealed the effects of offshoring, of stripping the US economy of its productive capacity.

They promoted the Global Economy and taxcuts at the top, because it benefits the true Bush constituency, actually accelerates the process.

I figure we're approaching the endgame, because the measures required to feed the appetites for wealth and power at the top have depended on more and more deception to keep it going, more bubbles, less substance to what passes for "growth". It's become a wealth extraction and concentration process, with middle class Americans as the victims. The recent real estate bubble is the crowning glory- not only were the victims fleeced, many of them will be getting fleeced for the next 30 years, locked into mortgages far above the resale value of the property...
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
You do realize, of course, that Democrats are more than happy to preside over those economic bubbles, don't you? What did Clinton do stop the tech bubble? Why is Obama trying to reinflate the housing and auto bubbles? Stop being a partisan tool and realize that politicians are all in it for themselves and don't give a shit about you.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
maybe its because obama quadrupled it in a year.

as opposed to taking 8 years to 'rack it up'

You're right, I'd rather have a smaller debt and 15-20% unemployment.

no, wait, I'll take the debt.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
You're right, I'd rather have a smaller debt and 15-20% unemployment.

no, wait, I'll take the debt.
What happened to that 8% unemployment rate we were promised if we passed the stimulus package?

Where are those 4,000,000 jobs that would be saved or created?

And most everybody here has their panties in a bunch over Hannity "lying" by using some old video footage. Go figure.
 

totalnoob

Golden Member
Jul 17, 2009
1,389
1
81
What happened to that 8% unemployment rate we were promised if we passed the stimulus package?

stimulus-vs-unemployment-october-dots.gif


lol.