U.S. Borrowed $10,855 Per Household in Fiscal 2012
According to the U.S. Treasury, the debt of the U.S. government climbed by a total of $1,275,901,078,828.74 in fiscal 2012, which ended yesterday.
That means the federal government borrowed approximately an additional $10,855 for each household in the United States just over the past twelve months.
The total debt of the United States now equals approximately $136,690 per household.
I think it’s about time that we publicly acknowledged something: we are never going to pay our national debt.
At $16 trillion, we owe over $50,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country. A sizable percentage of the population (though well under 47%) contribute nothing to the country whatsoever, and never will. They always be only takers. So that $50,000 number goes up for the rest of us.
Explain to me how we’re going to pay this off. The answer is simple: we won’t. We speak of passing along a debt to our children, but really, what we’re doing is passing along the consequences of a multi-trillion-dollar debt that will never be paid.
Watch what happens in Europe carefully. This is our future. And while it’s probably not very inspiring to say it in October of a presidential election year, this is our future regardless of who gets elected next month.
Ding!
509th Bob (bafbcb) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:24 amat least with Romney we have a chance to stop increasing the debt faster than the economy …
if we service the existing debt for a decade and don’t expand it there is a chance to start to pay it down, maybe not to zero but if it drops to 60-70% of the economy we’ll survive …
JeffC (488234) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:34 amWe will do what we have done before: destroy the value of the dollar.
BarSinister (664312) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:38 amA judge has halted implementation of the new Pennsylvania Voter ID law.
elissa (98fd68) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:14 amThis is a statistic that needs to appear in Romney’s debate performance on Wednesday.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:16 amA judge has halted implementation of the new Pennsylvania Voter ID law.
— Of course.
Icy (a8d089) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:20 amDefault, inflation, or taxation. Take your pick.
Diffus (48ae73) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:22 amI recall reading somewhere that, even if repaid, large national debts aren’t just passed along to our children; instead, they hurt the present by sucking capital out of the markets and making it harder for private organizations to raise money.
However, I don’t know enough about debt markets to know if this is true. Could someone help? If it is true, then it seems like the sort of thing deficit hawks should spend more time hammering, since “We’re being hurt now” is a more persuasive statement than “Other people will be hurt later”.
Cayley Graph (06cd31) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:23 amHow about reducing spending? Why don’t we try that? At least back to 2006 levels? In 2006, we were still able to fund NASA and the deficit was around $100 billion. We could find that to cut from a budget simply in duplicate programs. Then cut all conferences and use gotomeeting when necessary. Problem solved and deficit begins to be paid off. Then freeze all federal salaries until equitable to the private sector and deficit will eventually be wiped out. All without raising taxes… Dump Obama unaffordable Care. Dril now. ANWR now. Keystone now. Economy will boom, bringing in even more tax revenue and leasing revenue. Deficit paid off faster.
TexasMom2012 (cee89f) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:30 amPay off hell, I’m not sure we’d even be able to service our debt if interest rates weren’t being manipulated by Ben Bernanke.
Jim Breed (662006) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:01 amThanks George W. Bush.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:32 amIllman is a vile socialist imbecile.
JD (ab8eee) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:41 amP. Tillman,
Obama says it’s not a big deal to borrow the money, so if it’s not a big deal, then why would you blame Bush ?
You should be “thanking” Bush for kick-starting the Obama policy.
Seriously, your fake outrage is so, uh, well, fake. It’s not even lower-middle class people such as yourself who will have to pay for it.
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:41 amIn food stamp’s defense we’ll get to pay this all back with bernanke dollars, which aren’t the same as real money
happyfeet (b5795c) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:45 amDear P. Tillman,
Don’t take this the wrong way, but, you’re an idiot.
K_P_Brown (88bd1c) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:55 amWhat happens in Europe?
The early stages are occurring right now in CA, and it will only get worse as it spreads East.
There is a way to fix this, but it will require everyone to share the pain.
As the ad says:
“You can pay me now, or you can pay me later!”
Either way, you’re going to pay.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 10:49 amWhat was per capita spending in 2006?
Michael Ejercito (2e0217) — 10/2/2012 @ 10:51 amComment by Jim Breed — 10/2/2012 @ 9:01 am
A 1-percent increase in interest rates on the National Debt would, all things being equal, entail an increase in service costs of $160 BILLION per year!
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:00 amhttp://gravitron5.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/real-federal-per-capita-spending.jpg
Roughly $7,000
John (6dcbda) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:16 amAD – Obama loves the poor so much, he just decided to create millions more.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:18 amYes, but the great thing about America was upward-mobility.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:23 amWhat they are doing now is to reverse the flow.
They decry Trickle-down Economics, and give us Trickle-up Poverty.
Ain’t Socialism grand?
Like the elites in other socialist systems, they are oblivious to the fact that eventually it always comes crashing down, and that the mob will not act kindly to their previous masters.
HOW’S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN’ OUT FOR YA? (CONT’D): Under Obama, Poor, Middle Class Incomes Fall Sharply.
Posted at 2:20 pm by Glenn Reynolds
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:24 amI was just thinking this morning that it wasn’t all that long ago that if one started saving money in the bank, when young, one could accumulate quite a bit over one’s lifetime with compounded interest. Now it seems one probably would just be throwing away purchasing power.
Heard just a blurb about the PA ID law ruling, something about they were going to be checking for ID’s but not preventing people from voting if they don’t have one. I’ll have to learn more, maybe think of ways to make a statement that will not necessitate an appeal for your collective services.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:41 amAverage income goes down, amount of debt goes up. That should fit on a nice little chart with the caption, “You want 4 more years of this?”
Someone out there has graphic artist skilz.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:43 am“Obama says it’s not a big deal to borrow the money, so if it’s not a big deal, then why would you blame Bush ?”
Uh, because I’m not Obama nitwit.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:46 am“Illman is a vile socialist imbecile.”
Gee, JD, now I can see why you’re one of the specially selected sycophants who’ve been given posting privileges on this esteemed site:
Your mad reasoning and debating skilz.
LOL.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:50 amLOL indeed.
elissa (0746e5) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:52 amPetey – Can you give us any reasons why we should vote for Obama, given his failed presidency?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/2/2012 @ 11:57 am_____________________________________________
we are never going to pay our national debt.
Yea, but we’ll all be helping do our share on January 2, 2013, when the tax rate on even modest-income filers will go from 10% to 15%. (I won’t say anything about those people who will be dinged for around $700 — with absolutely nothing in return — when Obamacare kicks in by 2014.)
Lucky us, lucky taxpayers, lucky Americans.
Don’t cry for us, Argentina.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:01 pmI wasn’t trying to reason, or debate with you. I was stating a fact. A fact you go to great lengths to prove, over and over and over and over again.
JD (ab8eee) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:02 pm“I wasn’t trying to reason…I was stating a fact.”
Vile: your opinion.
Socialist: completely ridiculous.
imbecile: compared to you I’m frickin Einstein, nitwit.
Good thing you weren’t “trying” to reason (although you should, even if it hurts) because you failed, on both counts.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:07 pm“Petey – Can you give us any reasons why we should vote for Obama, given his failed presidency?”
Because Romney/Ryan will be infinitely worse.
And his presidency is not “failed” by any stretch of the imagination, except in Wingnuttia. Sorry but the metrics alone don’t mean what you all think they do…ANY POTUS would be in the same position, maybe worse.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:09 pm==Because Romney/Ryan will be infinitely worse==
Now you’re cookin’! That’s a very helpful response to daley’s query, Tillman. Finally, a well thought out, specific and quite persuasive sales job from you on behalf of the president’s performance, and why he deserves a second chance. Well done!
elissa (0746e5) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:18 pm“Finally, a well thought out, specific and quite persuasive sales job from you on behalf of the president’s performance, and why he deserves a second chance. ”
I don’t see any value in attempting to explain basic math to a dog that isn’t housebroken, do you? I think the first step is to rub their nose in their mess.
P. Tillman (fcbc8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:26 pm“ANY POTUS would be in the same position, maybe worse.”
Petey – Thank you for that independently verifiable data.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:28 pm“And his presidency is not “failed” by any stretch of the imagination”
Petey – O Rly?
Can you list a few things you believe he did right?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:32 pmI totally disagree with the host. The debt could be paid if the Federal government was cut to necessities and a small surplus was included in the annual budget. It could be done. He may be correct that it never will be done, but it is not impossible in the budget sense.
The deficit does cause many immediate difficulties, but they are hard for people to see. However, the real problem is that debt is like driving at high speed toward a brick wall- you may be frightened as you see the wall getting closer, but you don’t suffer any injuries until you hit the wall. Europe has hit the wall, and the U.S. of A. will very soon. As we can see from the behavior of the ruling class in California and Illinois, denial will continue until the bitter end.
Rob Ives (e99a7c) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:48 pmi’m all for rubbing the SCAOMF’s nose in the mess, but i believe the SS would have a fit if someone were to try and do it.
i wonder if this is the same moronic p tillman that was a lousy DJ for years here in LA?
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:57 pmfortunately, i’m not at all concerned about the amount of debt i’m leaving my kids, because i don’t have to. 8)
redc1c4 (403dff) — 10/2/2012 @ 12:58 pmANY POTUS would be in the same position, maybe worse.
Comment by P. Tillman — 10/2/2012 @ 12:09 pm
That’s what dis-barred President Clinton said. But he was dis-barred for lying under oath, so his opinions are a bit questionable.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:00 pmIt is objectively vile to co-opt and appropriate the name of an actual hero in order to spew your hatred and bile. Socialist? You wanted successful people taxes at 50 and 75%. Imbecile? You have a body of work here, that on your best day, would make imbecile be a compliment.
JD (ab8eee) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:09 pmIt must be hard for Petey to reconcile his support for….
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:10 pmOBAMA: The competency of Carter, the integrity of Nixon!
I thought redistributing wealth, which the one clearly is in favor of, was more or less the essence of socialism. If it isn’t, then what is?
Socialism doesn’t have to be a dirty word, lots of people are proud to be socialists.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:12 pmHeh.
Slow Joe today: ” “This is deadly earnest, man….how they can justify raising taxes on the middle class that has been buried the last four years”
Romney spokeswoman today: “Vice President Biden made a stunning admission today and we couldn’t agree more: the middle class has been ‘buried’ under the last four years of this President’s policies,” said Romney campaign spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg. “Under President Obama, the middle class has suffered from crushing unemployment, rising prices and falling incomes. They can’t afford to be ‘buried’ for four more years.”
RNC today: “We agree, the middle class has been buried the past four years by Obama’s failed policies from higher taxes to more debt, which is why he doesn’t deserve another term in the White House to make it worse,” said Kirsten Kukowski, spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee.
(all from The Hill)
elissa (0746e5) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:16 pmComment by AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! — 10/2/2012 @ 1:10 pm
Hey, at least when Nixon was secretly dealing with the communists (China) he was doing it for US interests. Nixon believed in a strong national defense, did not try to abandon Israel, didn’t find nearly as many ways to bypass Congress, and I don’t think trafficked in illegal guns to criminal gangs in Mexico.
So maybe an apology to his family is in order.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:16 pmOops!
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:17 pmIt must have been Karl Rove Mind-Rays that made Sloe-Joe say that.
Other than the leftists, who is trying to raise taxes on the middle class? Can their point to one single solitary proposal advancing that idea?
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:18 pmComment by elissa — 10/2/2012 @ 1:16 pm
I heard last night on a replay of Dennis Miller somebody had made a list of Biden’s top 10 gaffs. Already out of date.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:18 pmComment by AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! — 10/2/2012 @ 1:17 pm
Jedis vote republican.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:19 pmNixon was pretty good when he was doing his President stuff (and I’m an old supporter – even walked a precinct for him in ’60, and I couldn’t even vote yet). It was when he was doing his politician stuff that he tended to erase a few lines, and that’s what I’m talking about.
Remember: Nobody died at the Watergate!
Everything that Obama/Holder touch ends up containing body-bags.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:21 pmSarcasm aside, the reasons not to re-elect are more overwhelming than the original ones not to elect in the first place (inexperience, Ayers, pro-infanticide, Rezko, Rev. Wright, inexperience, voting present).
I think it is over at PJMedia they have an article how the US has already fallen to a coup by the media. Elected officials come and go, journalists are the new politburo or central committee, jostling one another for position.
The main problem with coups is that they are prone to counter coups and eventually everything just gets real ugly until normalcy creeps back in, if it ever does.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 1:25 pmWell, the media haven’t hired a Robespierre, yet – though that silly twit Martin Bashir comes real close.
In the Spirit of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité, we should consider where would be the ideal site for the erection of the guillotine.
AD-Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (b8ab92) — 10/2/2012 @ 2:46 pmP. Tillman,
Tough guy, I realize that lower-middle class people such as yourself are really hurting in the Obama economy, but confiscating more money from employers and investors is not the way to secure yourself a pay raise.
In fact, it’s more likely to spur you to the unemployment line.
If you assert that Obama’s expenditures and accrued national debt is no big deal, then shouldn’t you be applauding Bush for getting the ball rolling ?
Why are you condemning Bush for accruing debt, yet you’re applauding Obama for accruing more debt than Bush did ?
At some point, don’t you want to be a productive citizen with assets ? Don’t you get tired of living in your Aunt Janice’s basement, eating Chef Boy-ar-dee Spaghetti O’s, and clenching your fist everytime someone passes your old Ford Pinto on the highway in a slick new V-8 sports car ?
You don’t have to answer. Just call me names again if that’ll make you feel better.
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 3:47 pmdetails, those annoying details;
http://freebeacon.com/nyt-ignores-ties-to-obama-in-romney-hit-piece/
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/2/2012 @ 4:37 pm“Comment by P. Tillman — 10/2/2012 @ 9:32 am”
Obama had two years of complete control of Congress and twits like P.Tillman still want to blame Bush for the fact that Obama’s deficits are twice as high as Bush’s.
That’s the kind of stupidity it takes to be an Obama voter.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 5:22 pmNational Journal has poll of likies, “Rate your interest in the election 1-10”, with a D+7 surfeit, and race all tied.
Romany leads Indies by 8, own party support virtually identical.
Don’t step off the stage, especially backwards, Willard.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/2/2012 @ 6:44 pmI don’t trust Politico to be fair and unbiased, but this view of a pollster under oath is what it is:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/10/a-pollster-under-oath-137100.html
Nobody is content to report the news or report the opinions, everyone wants a hand in surreptitiously affecting them.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/2/2012 @ 6:54 pmEven at 2011 GDP of 15 or so Trillion, that’s a lower debt per GDP than we’ve had in the past. We’ve paid that down to lower levels before. It can be done again.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 6:55 pmNonsense, unskew, there are no attempts to return our Federal budget to less than $1 trillion plus deficits in the foreseeable future.
The Democrats refuse to even adopt a budget at all.
And you give us this silly toss off?
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:00 pmPropose a return to the revenue policies of the early post war period and watch the wingnuts wild out.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:04 pmunskew, Obama and the Democrats could have implemented that for two years and did not.
You are a clown.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:10 pmNo, I beg to differ… he’s a buffoon, SPQR.
Colonel Haiku (97505b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:16 pmunskew,
Consider changing that handle to “unreal.”
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:17 pmUnskew/lemonwetgood/etal is consistently douchey.
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:18 pmColonel, SPQR,
I’ll jump in on the thesaurus game…he’s the court jester !
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:18 pmBut just doing nothing puts us in the CBO extended baseline, and that has debt going to about 50% of GDP — the equivalent of about 7.5 trillion using the 2011 GDP.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:26 pmMeanwhile, Obama’s policies are destroying the cost of living for the lower economic classes.
Four years of utter failure and the Obama trolls attempts to pretend its a success are so bizarre, I think I could get them committed to a 72 hour observation on the basis of their comments.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:31 pmIf spending were reduced to $7000 per capita, what would the deficit be?
Michael Ejercito (2e0217) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:32 pmSPQR – lemonwetgood/unskew/etc is nothing if nothing bone-jarringly stupid. Aggressively so.
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:35 pmAnd “doing nothing” means a large tax increase on the middle class that Democrats – dishonestly – claim to be worried about.
Because Democrats have been lying about their ability to “balance” the budget solely by raising taxes on those evil “rich” people.
Democrats refuse to do simple math. That’s why they’ve refused to adopt a budget for the last three years – to hide their failures to act as adults. For simple political advantage, Democrats have destroyed the most basic responsibility of our Federal institutions – the budget law. Destroyed.
And the trolls think its all good.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:37 pmJD, the troll repeats the most brazen lies and thinks its brilliant. Typical Obama supporter. Get him a free phone! Obama will pay his mortgage!
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:38 pmIt’s “good” only for those who care about deficits. The great recession is not a time to listen to the deficit ninnies.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:39 pmHow many names do you plan on using, “unskew”, “lemon.wet.good”?
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:42 pmAnd so unskew admits that higher taxation reduces economic growth.
Democratic policies actually intended to destroy our economy for purely ideological reasons. That’s the real extremism.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:44 pmDemocrats want massive tax increases. They just are dishonest about it. And trying to blame the GOP for their own ideological goals.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:45 pmI admit, I’ve heard of Keynes.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:54 pmI admit, unskew/lemonwetgood is a passive aggressive douchenozzle.
JD (318f81) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:56 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__L5DOxghD4
narciso (ee31f1) — 10/2/2012 @ 7:58 pm______________________________________________
That’s the kind of stupidity it takes to be an Obama voter.
And you’re not necessarily being flippant or purely sarcastic when you say that. That’s because I observe places like Detroit, southside Chicago or many sections of LA and New York City, and no matter how bad they are or become, a majority of people in those communities never change their political stripes. They blindly and nonsensically always favor the liberal/Democrat candidate or policy, with rare, rare, rare exceptions.
By contrast, I bet many voters on the right, if they were residing in a neighborhood that was ridiculously dysfunctional and full of failure, decade after decade, and — in a parallel universe — if it were also dominated by conservative/Republican politicians and policies, those voters would become exasperated enough with the ruling clique to change their voting habits. At least more than once every 50 years or per century.
Mark (6d5e0d) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:16 pmThey have two choices: Get rid of a whole bunch of federal government programs, or eventually default…and, everybody knows which one it’s going to be.
The Dems are going to keep on spending, and the GOP doesn’t have the stones to put a stop to it.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:20 pmunskew,
Why do you hate math ?
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:38 pmObviously the question to be asked of anyone talking about CBO extended baselines and debt/gdp ratios.
unskew (6181a3) — 10/2/2012 @ 8:56 pmWho started the wars? Why do we pay so much more for health care? The Bush tax cuts?
Do you really thing the democrats legislate spending more than republicans? You’re kidding me. And Ryan’s plan balloons the debt.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-07-26/news/30010325_1_bush-tax-spending-bills-fiscal-responsibility
sleeeepy (b5f718) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:16 pmsleeeeepy- time to get off your sister.
mg (44de53) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:18 pmI thing I know who started the wars. I thing I know why healthcare costs so much and I thing I know a bit about what needs to be done.
It’s not your solution, since you haven’t given one, and it may not be Ryan’s, but I do know that whatever is happening now is not a solution for anything except more of the same.
What’s odd is that you think this is a party thing. It’s not. It is a “well, Henry, the car isn’t in the ditch, it’s going over the cliff” thing.
When you come up with the Obama solution, please tell him.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 10/2/2012 @ 9:32 pmunskew,
You do realize the national debt is being held down by unusually low interest rates, right ? And that when the interest rates finally rise, so will our national debt, right ?
Maybe you don’t realize that.
Elephant Stone (65d289) — 10/2/2012 @ 10:08 pmWhat did numbers ever do to elicit your wrath ?Math hater !
Real treasury yields are negative out to something like 20 years. Do you hate those numbers? Because they make a pretty compelling case that we should be borrowing more, not less.
unskew (8c201f) — 10/3/2012 @ 4:05 amBecause they make a pretty compelling case that we should be borrowing more, not less.
Comment by unskew — 10/3/2012 @ 4:05 am
Oh my goodness, you must be on the Obama economics team or the DNC propaganda machine. By that advice, since I will have a negative long term result by putting money in the bank, I might as well go ahead and spend it now so I have more stuff when I go bankrupt.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/3/2012 @ 5:20 amMD – imdw can double your money on a used car too!
JD (ab8eee) — 10/3/2012 @ 5:49 am87. Here is what the borrowing is doing for us, sprout.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V?cid=32242
Velocity is turn, economic activity. Right now a dollar of Federal spending stimulates 42 cents of economic activity and that rate is declining.
You might want to take a class.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:12 amI hope you’re joking. We should only borrow if we have a real plan to pay it back. Stop screwing over the next generation of this country.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:20 amPatterico: I think it’s about time that we publicly acknowledged something: we are never going to pay our national debt.
That’s news to you?
Who ever said we would pay it back? I don’t think anybody ever said that in recent decades, except maybe for Bill Clinton. (and Alan Greenspan perhaps. He worried around the year 2000 that the debt might be all paid back)
Explain to me how we’re going to pay this off. The answer is simple: we won’t.
Even simpler: inflation. That’s how the U.S. World War II debt was diminished.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:22 amAt $16 trillion, we owe over $50,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country. A sizable percentage of the population (though well under 47%) contribute nothing to the country whatsoever, and never will. They always be only takers. So that $50,000 number goes up for the rest of us.
Debt per household is nonsensical statistic. Does everyone pay an identical dollar amount of taxes? Does anyone propose any kind of tax system like that?
The right statistic is debt as a percentage of GDP.
Now debt can increase by at least about 3% a year in good times withouit increasing that figure.
We speak of passing along a debt to our children, but really, what we’re doing is passing along the consequences of a multi-trillion-dollar debt that will never be paid.
The consequences are this: We may be using up some of our borrowing capacity. Interest should be ignored and just added to the debt.
If any group of polioticians pays down the debt, they’ll just make things easier for the next group of politicians who come along. It won’t be a permanent state. So there’s no sense in trying.
Watch what happens in Europe carefully. This is our future. And while it’s probably not very inspiring to say it in October of a presidential election year, this is our future regardless of who gets elected next month.
This can be put off if US population continues toi increase, but around the year 2060 or 2070, the world will be in danger of running out of people who can immigrate to the United States..
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:26 am91. Indeed, the Fed owns just under 30% of US Debt, something over 80% of debt maturing in 10 years and over.
So as unskew rightly surmises the Fed’s balance sheet at the end of Bennie’s term, notionally $5 Trillion, will be essentially worth pennies on the dollar.
I.e., we’re eating it. Why not spend like gangbusters when its just ‘funny’ money?
You see those two charts? Someday that Velocity curve will flatten and turn up.
Look out Weimar.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:30 amI’m afraid not.
Cost of living is incorporated into the unfunded entitlement liabilities.
We have a spending problem. The solution is to cut spending and spend decades paying for the mistakes of the previous couple of generations. But to make that feasible, we need to fix education and news reporting so that people care and understand this debt.
We can’t get to the options stage until we have people on board with the goal and reality stages.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:31 amGary, I think that’s exactly what happened with the democrats since 2006.
Dustin (73fead) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:31 am95. The trolls like to point to Eisenhower era 90% top tax rate.
Inflation does reduce debt burdens, that is why the current stagflation is so insidious. CPI is fraudulently low, meaning savers are being robbed blind. Bank margins on our very cheap mortages are at an all time high.
But the real means to reducing debt is ballooning revenues. The end of the war, returning GIs and a newly emergent women’s labor force put GDP into orbit, and along with it, tax revenues to retire the debt.
Inflation normally kills expansion, but little could slow America in those days.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:49 amIn Greece 25% of bank loans are in default. Spain is in similar shape.
China officially puts their number at 10% but it is widely believed to be twice that, largely due to insane local government infrastructure borrowing.
Japan’s exports are off 25% and her cost of borrowing, at 1% or less for nearly 2 decades is about to take off because she can no longer self-finance.
China has already threatened to dump her $200 Billion of BOJ debt on the markets.
We are in the last days of Central Bank control over inflation. When Spain finally capitulates this month we’re off to the races.
Think of an Aerodrome bicycle race. Slow as molasses for the first 3/4.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/3/2012 @ 10:59 amOh, and about making money in the Market:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-03/about-money-sidelines-its-all
You’re too late.
gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 10/3/2012 @ 11:16 amSF: 95.Even simpler: inflation. That’s how the U.S. World War II debt was diminished.
Comment by Dustin — 10/3/2012 @ 10:31 am
I’m afraid not.
Cost of living is incorporated into the unfunded entitlement liabilities.
That’s correct, but that’s the deficit, not the accumulated debt.
With inflation, more continuing costs go up.
We have a spending problem. The solution is to cut spending and spend decades paying for the mistakes of the previous couple of generations.
What we have, to some degree, in an income problem, but not from undertaxing. There is too little growth. With regard to entitlements, we also have people who could be not engaged in income making pursuits. This is both outright entitlements and any job that doesn’t support itself – that doesn’t make sense.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 10/3/2012 @ 3:11 pm“By that advice, since I will have a negative long term result by putting money in the bank, I might as well go ahead and spend it now so I have more stuff when I go bankrupt.”
The logic is you should be doing something positive with it. From a public spending perspective, doing something with a positive yield or doing something you’ll have to do anyway with money that people are paying you to borrow improves your fiscal position.
“We should only borrow if we have a real plan to pay it back”
What do you think it means for yields to be negative?
unskew (fce22b) — 10/3/2012 @ 5:02 pmSammy, unfunded liabilities are neither deficit nor debt. You’ve confused yourself yet again.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/3/2012 @ 5:19 pmThe night the president was inaugurated, he had TOTAL control of Congress, with Democratic majorities.
Obama, Nancy and Harry were in the driver’s seat, and what did they do? SPEND SPEND SPEND SPEND! plus DEVALUE DEVALUE DEVALUE DEVALUE the US dollar, with QE1, QE2, and now QE3.
Decide for yourself if America can survive this.
THIS IS how fast Washington has added NEW US debt.
**** NEW DEBT ****
$103 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 112th Congress
$143 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 111th Congress
$63 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 110th Congress
$45 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 109th Congress
$48 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 108th Congress
$23 Billion – Average PER MONTH, 107th Congress
Source: US Treasury Debt to the Penny
What is a Fiscal Year? The US Treasury defines one year (FY) as Oct 1 thru Sept 30.
Bankrupt_R_Us (86c50a) — 10/4/2012 @ 4:20 pm