Rendered at 02:15:39 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
thelastgallon 24 minutes ago [-]
> Ten years ago, the debt level was at $19.4 trillion.
$80 trillion if it doubles again in 10 years.
skeledrew 52 minutes ago [-]
And who's going to hold the US responsible for repayment? Way I see it, US has the power to just tell any creditor that they won't be repaying, whether through structuring it as some economic package or just straight up saying go suck it. The former's been done before (1933); maybe eventually we'll see the latter, if a nation has the balls to ask. And talking about it is pretty pointless, like talking about how wet you'll get swimming in a pool.
voxic11 2 minutes ago [-]
[delayed]
rbanffy 5 hours ago [-]
I guess it’s time to elect a couple democrats to curb the deficit while solving the impending social collapse.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that will happen this time.
4 hours ago [-]
DoesntMatter22 4 hours ago [-]
I don't understand that at all. The deficit has been running rampant ever since Clinton left office. Both sides spent with reckless abandon.
3 hours ago [-]
epolanski 4 hours ago [-]
Trump, 1st term, added 24% of GDP worth of debt.
That's more or less the same number of Obama and Bush, but they served two terms each.
In his second term, he's already added 11% in a record 19 months.
3 hours ago [-]
DoesntMatter22 3 hours ago [-]
What's the difference? Everyone involved has been completely reckless with the debt. You think a democrat will somehow stop spending? Both parties are super happy to drive the car off the cliff
voxl 4 hours ago [-]
Don't bother, Republicans are the only ones that care about the debt and their ideology makes them incapable of realizing there very choice of candidates is the exact problem
3 hours ago [-]
newfriend 4 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
codeTired 3 hours ago [-]
So, I am assuming you are native?
indoorfish 3 hours ago [-]
I think they are commenting on the OP being in Ireland
3 hours ago [-]
copper-float 4 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
3 hours ago [-]
cyanydeez 4 hours ago [-]
the history has demonstrated these are Republican problems.
Democrats are shit for other things, but not for fisical stupidity like cutting taxes and rasing spending.
nomel 41 minutes ago [-]
Why does nobody post references anymore!? These are simple facts that nobody should be arguing about.
> Republican presidents added about $1.4 trillion per four-year term, compared to $1.2 trillion added by Democrats since 1913.
> Democratic presidents have added a total of $18 trillion to the national debt since 1913 (adjusted for inflation), while Republicans have added $17.3 trillion
So everyone downvoting and flagging people saying it's a problem with both parties should be ashamed. It is, clearly. Tribalism is stupid.
Georgelemental 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
seanmcdirmid 3 hours ago [-]
No, republicans have always raised spending more than democrats. They just have no impulse control, and only worry about the budget when a Democrat is in charge.
copper-float 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
thunderfork 3 hours ago [-]
this is a fact you can look up
3 hours ago [-]
bigstrat2003 4 hours ago [-]
Every single administration since the turn of the century, regardless of party, has run a deficit. It's clear that if we want fiscal responsibility (and I do, very much), we can't look to either of the major parties for it. Unfortunately the chances of that are low at best, and on top of that it's not actually very popular to do what is needed to balance the budget. The cold hard reality is that we will need to both raise taxes and cut spending to balance the budget, but lots of people are ideologically opposed to one or both of those things. And even if they aren't, there's no agreement on how to implement said tax hikes/budget cuts. It's a pretty grim situation.
porkpieshoe 3 hours ago [-]
It's helpful to avoid "both sides"-ing, or abandoning all hope.
Clinton through 2001 - ended with a 1.2% GDP surplus
Bush through 2009 - ended with a 9.8% GDP deficit
Obama through 2017 - ended with a 3.4% GDP deficit
Trump through 2021 - ended with a 12.3% GDP deficit
Biden through 2025 - ended with a 5.9% GDP deficit
Trump now - running even higher, though final data isn't yet available.
There's a clear pattern available, where one party reliably leaves makes the situation worse, and the other party reliably makes the situation better. The fact that Democrats cannot undo all of the massive damage done by each Republican administration does not mean "both sides" are the same.
If you want third parties to win, they realistically need to start with local elections, so they can gain momentum and take the spot of one of the majors. (also helpful to get rid of FTTP voting in as many elections as possible).
We're seeing great success with local democratic socialists, who keep showing that government can be a force for good, it can be improved, and it can be done without blowing budgets. It's a promising start, and it's clearly threatening Dems and the GOP alike.
fragmede 4 hours ago [-]
I mean, there's fiscally responsible but the welfare department is never gonna make money at the end of the day spending is a political football. Trump's ICE got $10 billion, because what? So now in addition to DEA we have ICE and the TSA, and well, we can't un spend that money and shut them down so, well, shit.
pstuart 2 hours ago [-]
ICE got $75 billion, with $45 billion of that allocated for concentration camps. And somebody's got to build those camps and supply them, and their CEOs are all buddies with Trump.
b1gTekken 3 hours ago [-]
Financially ledger is just a social construct; the IOUs of the past are never paid off as they never mattered.
Finance shit just keeps innumerates and those ignorant of physics believing wild end of the universe theories.
For more look up Debt jubilee's; humans wiped the debt of the dead off the books and no black holes opened within the sun, no gods descended from Olympus and slaughtered the children
Fucking mesmerizing how its not just MAGA nutters obsessed with old spoken and written finance traditions; different semantics than religion but same goal of kowtowing the proletariat.
This site helps propagate such paranoias with the tilt it has towards startup funding and yada yada. Smartest engineers I have ever worked with earned PhDs designing experiments for Tevatron and working on NASA satellites. We often had a laugh at how such social hacks dupe so many wannabe smart and educated people.
On the contrary startup genius software engineers are easily duped by social hacks.
just_mc 3 hours ago [-]
US Treasuries happen to be a significant part of many peoples retirement savings. So I think your hot take is pretty uninformed.
b1gTekken 54 minutes ago [-]
"Oh yeah; whattabout this other social illusion. Checkmate atheists."
Ohentis 3 hours ago [-]
Occasionally countries do default on debt. It doesn't go well.
b1gTekken 1 hours ago [-]
Life is the leading cause of death
odyssey7 44 minutes ago [-]
What if we viewed national debt like CPI? It’s not that it’s ridiculously higher now, it’s that money works differently now.
What used do seem implausible is now accepted as normal, and tough luck if your income and wealth fell behind / didn’t keep pace.
TitaRusell 41 minutes ago [-]
And they spent it all on healthcare, public housing and high speed rail right?
1 hours ago [-]
lokar 2 hours ago [-]
The media should report the number that actually matters: debt to GDP ratio. It’s quite high as well, but it’s the more meaningful number.
They need to cut your taxes and raise everyone elses.
The US needs the binface party as a credible 3rd choice.
insane_dreamer 17 minutes ago [-]
brought to you by the "party of fiscal responsibility"
motbus3 4 hours ago [-]
I am ignorant. If they don't pay, who will charge it if the default?
GuB-42 3 hours ago [-]
If you are American, then it is you, for the most part.
Most of the US government debt is owed to institution and people in the US. All these retirement funds, social security, health insurance, etc... that own part of the government debt... well, you won't get what you paid for.
This is a simplistic and partial view, but I think that's the most personal way of thinking about it.
clickety_clack 1 hours ago [-]
That’s about it. You’re paying for roads and education and war with your retirement savings. There’s not really anyone else there to pick up the bill. There’d better be some kind of return on that investment so you can actually retire.
Printing more money devalues the currency your retirement is priced in, so that’s not an escape either.
xarwex 4 hours ago [-]
A country that controls its currency can always bail itself out of all debt by printing all that money. Now they would destroy their whole economy in the process because of inflation and countries being mad about a country doing that. If they don't pay and default they kind of also piss everyone off and that makes the curency rates fall as well. In that case they would repay as much as they want really, the price for not doing that is economy strengt. The dollar could lose the global currency status either way, fun!
2dddd 2 hours ago [-]
Inflation doesn't really capture what would happen.
Debasement is the appropriate term.
owebmaster 3 hours ago [-]
The US citizens hold the majority of the debt so if the government default the people's savings and pension funds evaporate.
epolanski 4 hours ago [-]
It's literally impossible to default as you can simply emit new money and buy back the debt or pay the interest with the minted money.
Of course this comes with its own set of gigantic issues, likely triple digit inflation and hardship to raise money for generations.
But US can't default really.
partloyaldemon 3 hours ago [-]
You’re the only one in the thread that gets any of this right. But: Monetizing the debt is replacing one asset (treasuries eg) that pays interest with a nominally equal asset that doesn’t (US dollar). How does that spur inflation? It’s a reduction in income over time. How does paying back our debt IN FULL hurt our credit worthiness?
SpicyLemonZest 2 hours ago [-]
Money is special because it’s the only asset that can be used to purchase goods and services. If I have a pile of 10 year Treasury bonds worth $500, and I want to buy a TV, I have to first convince someone with $500 in cash that they’d rather have my bonds than buy their own TV.
2dddd 2 hours ago [-]
No thats not true.
It operates under expectations - the more liquid the asset, the more likely you'll be OK with accepting it in the context of a trade. The discount is for illiquidity.
skeledrew 43 minutes ago [-]
> No thats not true.
I'd love to see someone buy a TV with those bonds.
2dddd 2 hours ago [-]
Ofc the US can default and it will most likely in the event.
Debasement is far more painful - the treasury will simply choose not to come good on the obligations.
kotaKat 3 hours ago [-]
> But US can't default really.
It could. We'd just reorganize and call the old debts part of "Old US". This is all "New US".
pstuart 2 hours ago [-]
And that New US Dollar as a global currency? Not likely.
$80 trillion if it doubles again in 10 years.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that will happen this time.
That's more or less the same number of Obama and Bush, but they served two terms each.
In his second term, he's already added 11% in a record 19 months.
Democrats are shit for other things, but not for fisical stupidity like cutting taxes and rasing spending.
https://www.investopedia.com/democrats-vs-republicans-who-ha...
> Republican presidents added about $1.4 trillion per four-year term, compared to $1.2 trillion added by Democrats since 1913.
> Democratic presidents have added a total of $18 trillion to the national debt since 1913 (adjusted for inflation), while Republicans have added $17.3 trillion
So everyone downvoting and flagging people saying it's a problem with both parties should be ashamed. It is, clearly. Tribalism is stupid.
Clinton through 2001 - ended with a 1.2% GDP surplus
Bush through 2009 - ended with a 9.8% GDP deficit
Obama through 2017 - ended with a 3.4% GDP deficit
Trump through 2021 - ended with a 12.3% GDP deficit
Biden through 2025 - ended with a 5.9% GDP deficit
Trump now - running even higher, though final data isn't yet available.
There's a clear pattern available, where one party reliably leaves makes the situation worse, and the other party reliably makes the situation better. The fact that Democrats cannot undo all of the massive damage done by each Republican administration does not mean "both sides" are the same.
If you want third parties to win, they realistically need to start with local elections, so they can gain momentum and take the spot of one of the majors. (also helpful to get rid of FTTP voting in as many elections as possible).
We're seeing great success with local democratic socialists, who keep showing that government can be a force for good, it can be improved, and it can be done without blowing budgets. It's a promising start, and it's clearly threatening Dems and the GOP alike.
Finance shit just keeps innumerates and those ignorant of physics believing wild end of the universe theories.
For more look up Debt jubilee's; humans wiped the debt of the dead off the books and no black holes opened within the sun, no gods descended from Olympus and slaughtered the children
Fucking mesmerizing how its not just MAGA nutters obsessed with old spoken and written finance traditions; different semantics than religion but same goal of kowtowing the proletariat.
This site helps propagate such paranoias with the tilt it has towards startup funding and yada yada. Smartest engineers I have ever worked with earned PhDs designing experiments for Tevatron and working on NASA satellites. We often had a laugh at how such social hacks dupe so many wannabe smart and educated people.
On the contrary startup genius software engineers are easily duped by social hacks.
What used do seem implausible is now accepted as normal, and tough luck if your income and wealth fell behind / didn’t keep pace.
The US needs the binface party as a credible 3rd choice.
Most of the US government debt is owed to institution and people in the US. All these retirement funds, social security, health insurance, etc... that own part of the government debt... well, you won't get what you paid for.
This is a simplistic and partial view, but I think that's the most personal way of thinking about it.
Printing more money devalues the currency your retirement is priced in, so that’s not an escape either.
Debasement is the appropriate term.
Of course this comes with its own set of gigantic issues, likely triple digit inflation and hardship to raise money for generations.
But US can't default really.
It operates under expectations - the more liquid the asset, the more likely you'll be OK with accepting it in the context of a trade. The discount is for illiquidity.
I'd love to see someone buy a TV with those bonds.
Debasement is far more painful - the treasury will simply choose not to come good on the obligations.
It could. We'd just reorganize and call the old debts part of "Old US". This is all "New US".