Debates
07 Mar 08
10 Mar 08
Originally posted by whodeyOur debt has risen year to year since 1969. What did happen under Clinton was that the size of government deficits each year were reduced. In 1998, the US ran a budget surplus for the first time since 1969. Because of these government budget surpluses, national debt didn't grow very much during his administration.
Ok, I will give him his props. Clinton payed down a little bit of the debt, however, the key word here is a "little".
BTW you can see all this fantastic data (and more) at the following link to the U.S. Government Printing Office:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy07/hist.html
and here's the main link to their office:
http://www.gpo.gov/
If you don't have Excel, you can still view the data in .pdf for this topic at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/hist.pdf
Now try not to have too much fun. 😉
10 Mar 08
Originally posted by Mad RookOf course it is. But I'm taking it to Vegas anyway.
What many people don't realize is that the stimulus package is simply a government shell game - robbing Peter to pay Paul. The government doesn't produce anything, so the money is either going to come from taxpayers or from more government IOUs. So it really doesn't matter how we taxpayers use the money, it isn't going to successfully stimulate anything in the long run. Sadly, it's just election-year politics, not sound financial policy.
12 Mar 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungAs much as I hate to admit it, the Democrats are probably even more stupid about economics. I say that "on average" of course. Apparently there are a few economically competent Congressman in both camps.
GWB will be sad to hear that I just sent 400 hundred bucks to my credit cards. I guess I hate America 😞.
13 Mar 08
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungNo because the trend increasingly is to pay off debt with more debt and use whatever disposable income you have on consuming more and keeping the machine healthy.
I don't get it. Doesn't paying one's debt get the economy rolling? Why do we need to spend it on luxuries instead of our debts?
The economy will stay strong, not because people/businesses/corporations have reduced their level of debt, but because they have kept feeding the machine.
Do the math and see if the current credit squeeze/economic fallout talk of recession due to the sub prime jitters as loan providers for these low doc products are finding it increasingly difficult to fund their exposure, as the cost and availability of credit for them becomes an increasingly difficult proposition and you will see at every cycle the machine has to grow bigger to service almost exponential growth in underlying debt throughout the whole system.
I'm not sure if anyone knows how to get off this merry go round.
13 Mar 08
Originally posted by kmax87I don't get it. ATY is asking about using a tax return to pay off debt, not new debt to pay of old debt.
No because the trend increasingly is to pay off debt with more debt and use whatever disposable income you have on consuming more and keeping the machine healthy.
The economy will stay strong, not because people/businesses/corporations have reduced their level of debt, but because they have kept feeding the machine.
Do the math and see if the current cr ...[text shortened]... hroughout the whole system.
I'm not sure if anyone knows how to get off this merry go round.
13 Mar 08
3 edits
Originally posted by telerionThe system that makes it all work is dependent on goods being made and bought and sold. Consumerism! If instead of feeding this machine, people were to start paying off their debt, it doesn't help the system at all because the machine slows down and with that the whole market starts to suffer and before long you have an economic downturn. While you may personally carry less debt if the economy suffers, because you consumed less you may find it harder to keep your job as a failing economy starts to have flow on effects that lead to lay offs and other economic woes that may reduce your capacity to enjoy the fact that you have less debt to service.
I don't get it. ATY is asking about using a tax return to pay off debt, not new debt to pay of old debt.
The fact that you pay off your debt doesn't actually help your banks either, because most of the money they have leveraged against their operations are of a magnitude that dwarf the effects of you simply paying back your loans. The cost of money in a worsening market increases and the cycle spirals as banks and lending institutions scramble for the remaining credit to underwrite their operations as well as have money to invest and grow their own core business.
Your and everyones loans are on their books and there is an expected return that underpins the loans that that institution has raised. If those long term strategies are short circuited and the expected return on their money is reduced due to a mass of customers paying out their loans early, then they end up short.
And when that starts to happen, the one thing that buffers out any instability in your economy, is the volume and strength that comes with a strong robust economy. Which means that the consumption of goods cannot decrease, which means spend your tax cuts and keep your economy ticking over. Take that one anchor away from your economy ( ie steady consumption of its produce) and your whole market place will go into decline if you are lucky, or on the other hand simply collapse if you are unlucky.
13 Mar 08
Originally posted by kmax87Paying down debts is just a transfer from one person to another. Why should that transfer ruin "the system"?
The system that makes it all work is dependent on goods being made and bought and sold. Consumerism! If instead of feeding this machine, people were to start paying off their debt, it doesn't help the system at all because the machine slows down and with that the whole market starts to suffer and before long you have an economic downturn. While you may perso ...[text shortened]... ill go into decline if you are lucky, or on the other hand simply collapse if you are unlucky.
14 Mar 08
Originally posted by telerionIt tends to reduce consumption and the engine of capitalism needs to consume to be healthy. The fed has been reducing official rates to help stimulate demand and hopefully increase consumption and hopefully restore confidence in a market slding slowly into recession. The accepted wisdom seems you spend your way out of these situations. If you can describe why paying down debts can do the same thing then I am all ears.
Paying down debts is just a transfer from one person to another. Why should that transfer ruin "the system"?
14 Mar 08
Originally posted by kmax87I can, and I will. Later though, when I have a bit more time.
It tends to reduce consumption and the engine of capitalism needs to consume to be healthy. The fed has been reducing official rates to help stimulate demand and hopefully increase consumption and hopefully restore confidence in a market slding slowly into recession. The accepted wisdom seems you spend your way out of these situations. If you can describe why paying down debts can do the same thing then I am all ears.
14 Mar 08
Originally posted by kmax87Consumerism is NOT capitalism! Capitalism is investing money, consumerism is losing money for short term pleasure.
It tends to reduce consumption and the engine of capitalism needs to consume to be healthy. The fed has been reducing official rates to help stimulate demand and hopefully increase consumption and hopefully restore confidence in a market slding slowly into recession. The accepted wisdom seems you spend your way out of these situations. If you can describe why paying down debts can do the same thing then I am all ears.