• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

It's OK to Burden Our Children With an Enormous Debt

Puppycow

Penultimate Amazing
Puppycow
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
34,167
Location
Yokohama, Japan
People who worry about the national debt worry too much. It's really not that big a deal. Unless you expect progress in science and technology to come screeching to a halt sometime soon, standards of living and average purchasing power will continue to rise over time. The people of the future will be richer. The last time the government ran up a huge debt was WW2. Compared to the GDP at the time it was bigger than the current debt. Nonetheless, the postwar period saw rapid economic growth and rising standards of living and eventually the economy grew so big that those debts we easy to pay off.

This article explains more
 
Puppycow said:
The last time the government ran up a huge debt was WW2. Compared to the GDP at the time it was bigger than the current debt. Nonetheless, the postwar period saw rapid economic growth and rising standards of living and eventually the economy grew so big that those debts we easy to pay off.
Click to expand...

That was made possible because government expenditures were able to significantly shrink in the wake of WWII. But we face a situation completely different today. Spending on entitlement programs is projected to balloon in the future. Not only could this prevent us from shrinking the national debt, but it could very easily continue to expand. In fact, it's pretty much guaranteed to expand unless something is done to curb it.
 
Ziggurat said:
That was made possible because government expenditures were able to significantly shrink in the wake of WWII. But we face a situation completely different today. Spending on entitlement programs is projected to balloon in the future. Not only could this prevent us from shrinking the national debt, but it could very easily continue to expand. In fact, it's pretty much guaranteed to expand unless something is done to curb it.
Click to expand...
Good point. Let's raise taxes.
 
Dr Adequate said:
Good point. Let's raise taxes.
Click to expand...

It worked from 1942-1960. You could even say that it worked up until 1980. The famous Kennedy tax cuts also closed a lot of loop holes. (That is also why Reagan's tax cuts screwed the up budget. He made more loop holes.)
 
I wonder why "progressives" HATE the idea of people being able to keep the money they earn.
 
The irony, of course, is that the people who will pay the lion's share of that debt (or at least the interest on it), are the same people who pay the lion's share of the taxes today, that evil top 5% of income earners who about 60% of the income taxes in this country. So to put it another way, it's okay to burden the children of the very rich (and the children who will become very rich in future generations) with that enormous debt. Who feels sorry for rich kids?
 
Brainster said:
The irony, of course, is that the people who will pay the lion's share of that debt (or at least the interest on it), are the same people who pay the lion's share of the taxes today, that evil top 5% of income earners who about 60% of the income taxes in this country. So to put it another way, it's okay to burden the children of the very rich (and the children who will become very rich in future generations) with that enormous debt. Who feels sorry for rich kids?
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what is ironic in that. Are you agreeing with the OP or is that supposed to be sarcastic (or ironic)? BTW, it is not necessary to think of rich people as "evil" to think they should pay higher taxes. Warren Buffet thinks he should pay higher taxes.

True, the top x% pay more than everyone else, but their after-tax earnings are also much higher than everyone else.
 
Here's an article in the WSJ just out today.

While the last year has been an exception to the long-term trend due to the financial crisis, overall the top 1% have been getting the lion's share of the increases in income since the 1970s. In particular, click the Interactive Graphics and take a look at the long-term trend in CEO vs. worker comparison.
 
Puppycow said:
Warren Buffet thinks he should pay higher taxes.
Click to expand...
There's nothing stopping Warren Buffet from writing a big old check to the government, is there?

eta: and if this is the old "my secretary pays a higher % than Warren does" stuff bear in mind that the secretary puts none of her money at risk when she goes to work.
 
Last edited:
The most common figure I've seen for the thickness of a $1 bill, which is also the thickness of a $100 bill, is .0043 inches.

Therefore:

Ten thousand $100 bills would be worth a million dollars and would make a stack 43 inches high.

Ten million $100 bills would be worth a billion dollars and would make a stack 3,583 feet, 4 inches high.

Ten billion $100 bills would be worth a trillion dollars and would make a stack 678 2/3 miles high.

The current national debt is rising so fast that it's hard to post a figure that would remain accurate for long, but it has just recently surpassed a stack of $100 bills 8,000 miles high, which is greater than the diameter of the Earth.

National Debt Clock
debtiv.gif


Somehow, I don't think "enormous" quite says it.
 
Towlie said:
The most common figure I've seen for the thickness of a $1 bill, which is also the thickness of a $100 bill, is .0043 inches.

Therefore:

Ten thousand $100 bills would be worth a million dollars and would make a stack 43 inches high.

Ten million $100 bills would be worth a billion dollars and would make a stack 3,583 feet, 4 inches high.

Ten billion $100 bills would be worth a trillion dollars and would make a stack 678 2/3 miles high.

The current national debt is rising so fast that it's hard to post a figure that would remain accurate for long, but it has just recently surpassed a stack of $100 bills 8,000 miles high, which is greater than the diameter of the Earth.

National Debt Clock
[qimg]http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/debtiv.gif[/qimg]

Somehow, I don't think "enormous" quite says it.
Click to expand...

All of these absolute numbers are irrelevant. Ratios are what matter.

If I say I owe about 30 million yen to a bank (which I do) can you say whether that is a large debt or a small debt? Not until you know what my income is. BTW, this is roughly 5 times my annual income (although I'm afraid my income is going to be lower this year than last year). By comparison, the federal debt of the US is projected to rise to approximately 100% of GDP. Let's assume tax revenue of 25% of GDP. That would be a debt ratio of 4 times tax revenue. So compared to what I owe on my mortgage versus my income, the projected federal debt is reasonable in relative terms. Not to mention that the government has lower borrowing costs than an individual like me. Because I might lose my job, become disabled or die. Unless there's armageddon, the US government will be there to pay its debts, and if it isn't, the national debt will be the least of our worries.
 
WildCat said:
There's nothing stopping Warren Buffet from writing a big old check to the government, is there?
Click to expand...

This old chestnut. How 'bout we let the people who want the Iraq war pay for it with voluntary contributions? How 'bout we let the people who want prisons pay for it with voluntary contributions? Do you also agree with those positions?
 
Puppycow said:
This old chestnut. How 'bout we let the people who want the Iraq war pay for it with voluntary contributions? How 'bout we let the people who want prisons pay for it with voluntary contributions? Do you also agree with those positions?
Click to expand...
No, but I do expect Warren to lead by example. At the very least he could not claim any deductions, credits, etc. on his taxes.
 
WildCat said:
No, but I do expect Warren to lead by example. At the very least he could not claim any deductions, credits, etc. on his taxes.
Click to expand...

So, you don’t think Warren should have to pay, but can if he wants. I take that to mean you are volunteering to pay any tax he doesn’t.
 
lomiller said:
So, you don’t think Warren should have to pay, but can if he wants. I take that to mean you are volunteering to pay any tax he doesn’t.
Click to expand...
Huh? Warren's running around complaining that he isn't paying enough taxes. Now, if he really thinks that no law prevents him from paying more.

What kind of person complains that he's not required to do what he claims he wants to do but then doesn't do? A grandstanding jackass drama queen, that's who.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom