toldailytopic: The national debt. How much longer can the US national debt rise in su

[rexlunae]

That's absurd.

No, it's not. Any money we take to pay off debts we have to raise by taxing money out of the economy, and not spending it on something else productive. It would be an anti-stimulus.

People like you have been pronouncing doom and gloom about government debt since the nation's founding, and have been proven wrong time and time again. Is government spending never something to worry about? No. But we could do a lot of harm to ourselves trying to pay off the debt or even reduce the deficit too much.

Yes it is. Social Security is a ponzi scheme that is destined for failure, it has been since the beginning. The sooner it is eliminated, the better.

A Ponzi scheme works by expanding its investor base in order to pay returns to the prior investors. Social security starts with all people who pay social security taxes as the investor base. How, exactly, do we expand that?

 

[BillyBob]

No, it's not. Any money we take to pay off debts we have to raise by taxing money out of the economy,

Not so.

and not spending it on something else productive.

Productive? Like what?

Welfare, social security, medicaid, Chevy Volts, Bank bailouts, auto bailouts, Wall Street bailouts, mandated socialized medicine, presidential vacations, extended wars.....????

It would be an anti-stimulus.

The way to stimulate the economy is to stop stealing money from Americans and let them spend it as they see fit. It's a concept known as 'Liberty'.

A Ponzi scheme works by expanding its investor base in order to pay returns to the prior investors. Social security starts with all people who pay social security taxes as the investor base. How, exactly, do we expand that?

I will maintain my patience with you because you are obviously misinformed and that possibly may not be your own fault. The liberal public school system has taught students to not do their own research, but instead just repeat whatever propaganda they are fed from their fascist government.

Tell you what, I'll start a thread specifically about the Ponzi Scheme also known as Social Security and we can discuss it there instead of derailing this thread. Give me a couple minutes.

 

[rocketman]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for February 17th, 2012 09:28 AM

toldailytopic: The national debt. How much longer can the US national debt rise in such dramatic fashion?

It appears until we run out of ink and rag to print it on.

 

[rocketman]

Huh? We're not stealing from ourselves. The government is stealing from us.

Barbie is one of those lefties that think it is all the governments money they are just going to humor you into thinking you work for yourself.

 

[rocketman]

Social security starts with all people who pay social security taxes as the investor base.

And it ends with corrupt politicians using it for a slush fund, it is not, nor has it ever been run as anything more than a Ponzi scheme.

 

[BillyBob]

And it ends with corrupt politicians using it for a slush fund, it is not, nor has it ever been run as anything more than a Ponzi scheme.

It ends in a much worse scenario than that. SS is already underfunded as it is. The Boomers who have paid into it all their adult lives are approaching retirement. The money they paid into the system is gone and, in typical Ponzi Scheme fashion, their returns are going to be paid by the current payers into SS. The problem is, there are fewer payers than there are recipients.

Sound like a Ponzi Scheme yet? Does it sound like it can go on much longer?

 

[rocketman]

It ends in a much worse scenario than that. SS is already underfunded as it is. The Boomers who have paid into it all their adult lives are approaching retirement. The money they paid into the system is gone and, in typical Ponzi Scheme fashion, their returns are going to be paid by the current payers into SS. The problem is, there are fewer payers than there are recipients.

Sound like a Ponzi Scheme yet? Does it sound like it can go on much longer?

Bernie Madoff would have been proud...

 

[rexlunae]

It ends in a much worse scenario than that. SS is already underfunded as it is. The Boomers who have paid into it all their adult lives are approaching retirement. The money they paid into the system is gone and, in typical Ponzi Scheme fashion, their returns are going to be paid by the current payers into SS. The problem is, there are fewer payers than there are recipients.

Sound like a Ponzi Scheme yet?

No, not really. It lacks the ever-increasing balances that cause Ponzi schemes to collapse.

Does it sound like it can go on much longer?

As long as the government remains solvent. Which, so far, it is.

 

[eameece]

It would help for the government to print/declare some money to pay off some of the debt. It would eventually cause inflation if kept up for long, but right now there is little inflation.

If we allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, the deficit will go down, and may reach zero in a decade or two. We need to allow all the Bush tax cuts to expire. That is the main reason for the deficit. Rates need to stay at the Clinton levels, and the Buffet tax needs to be enacted too. Obama should stop playing politics by promising a tax break for the "middle class."

If the Democrats keep the White House, this may work, because then the chances of the US president starting unfunded wars will decrease, and military spending will be moderate. If we fixed medicare, that would help, but there's really only one way to do that; medicare for all and higher medicare taxes, as well as some fair decisions on what is covered. Social Security has no part in the debt.

I don't know if the debt could ever be paid off. I'm not sure if it matters though. It only hurts us when interest rates are high, so a priority should be to keep them low.

I think the debt will likely endure as long as there is a United States of America. It is just too big now, and there's no benefit to anyone (certainly not politically) to paying it off. There is some question whether this entity will make it much past the year 2025. A break-up between red and blue may be looming. That may lead to the debt being wiped out, and lots of people (Americans, Chinese and others) left holding the bag.

Republican presidents have the worst record on the debt, all excuses aside. So electing one is not the answer. Supply-side means more debt.

 

[eameece]

Reading this thread should be evidence enough that liberals should NEVER be in charge of running the economy.

Reading this thread should be evidence enough that conservatives should NEVER be in charge of running the economy.

 

[rocketman]

Reading this thread should be evidence enough that liberals should NEVER be in charge of running the economy.

Reading this thread should be evidence enough that conservatives should NEVER be in charge of running the economy.

That's the best you got?

I know you are but, what am I...:rotfl:

How original...:rotfl:

 

[eameece]

That's the best you got?

I know you are but, what am I...:rotfl:

How original...:rotfl:

I'm surprised you are clever enough to get it. :idea:

 

[The Barbarian]

It ends in a much worse scenario than that. SS is already underfunded as it is. The Boomers who have paid into it all their adult lives are approaching retirement. The money they paid into the system is gone and, in typical Ponzi Scheme fashion, their returns are going to be paid by the current payers into SS.

That is, they will if the U.S. goes into default; the money is in government bonds. If the government goes into default, we're in huge trouble anyway.

Otherwise, we're O.K. The present funding will be adequate to um...
2035. Then things might get hard, unless there are changes.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/index.html

 

[ccfromsc]

Points of interest

Points of interest

It seems here we have a lot of youth on here that do not know our history. The debt we have goes back to the start of the Federal Reserve, which is less than 100 years ago. From time to time the US government has started and allowed a "central" bank to exist to manage the monies of the USA. In the 19th century 1900's for you, there were at least 3 different central banks. Each one of them went bust. Broke. Bankrupt. In fact one of the failures led to the civil war. The Federal Reserve is a newer version of the central bank idea. It can go bankrupt. It is a corporation. I hope this hellps.

 

[ccfromsc]

Tax cuts

Tax cuts

A little history on then "Bush Tax Cuts" as they are called.

Under Clinton congress had planned step by step increases in taxes over the next 10 years (from 1999). All Bush and his congress did was delay or not go along with the planned tax increases. This was due to the post 9/11 effect on the stock market and economy. So it really is not a "tax cut" as the media would led you to believe.

Both the Federal Reserve and income taxes were started by President Woodrow Wilson, who later in life lamented and apologized for what he had done. Income taxes were declared unconstitutional by the courts and were done by an amendment to the constitution.

 

[rocketman]

I'm surprised you are clever enough to get it. :idea:

I am not surprised your not clever enough to have an original thought. :chuckle:

 

[eameece]

Obama ruining the economy? Who did what?

 

[eameece]

I am not surprised your not clever enough to have an original thought. :chuckle:

At least I can spell! :chuckle:

 

[The Barbarian]

Fact is, the public tends to hold a sitting president responsible for economic conditions, even if he didn't cause them. Obama would be out of luck, if it wasn't for the particularly weak bunch of candidates the Republicans have to choose from.

A strong leader with good ideas would win easily over Obama.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Fact is, the public tends to hold a sitting president responsible for economic conditions, even if he didn't cause them. Obama would be out of luck, if it wasn't for the particularly weak bunch of candidates the Republicans have to choose from.

A strong leader with good ideas would win easily over Obama.

The bottom line is that Republicans need to find a candidate that is passionate and driven. These old guys need to be put to the side. No more Bushes and McCains. The reason why Obama was voted into office is because McCain and Bush are virtually the same. It's time to step it up, that gambit is obviously not working.