Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The US National Debt

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The US National Debt

    The national debt has increased by $2 trillion in the past two years:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...cid=spartandhp
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    The national debt has increased by $2 trillion in the past two years:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...cid=spartandhp
    And it grew by about $10 Trillion during Obama-nation's eight years as POTUS, which averages out to slightly more per annual. Basically doubled from @$10 trillion to @$20 trillion. Don't recall you bitching about your hero much back then.

    From the link;
    ...
    The national debt has been rising at an accelerated rate in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, when Congress and the Obama administration approved stimulus funding in order to keep the economy afloat. [Stimulus funding was mostly in effect through 2009]
    ....
    Asked about the rising debt on Thursday morning, Council of Economic Advisers chairman Kevin Hassett said Trump is "absolutely" concerned about it, which is why he demanded a 5% budget cut from each Cabinet agency for the coming budget cycle.

    "We can disagree about a lot of things but we can agree maybe now is the time to get serious about the deficit," Hassett said.
    ....
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...cid=spartandhp

    For a more extensive and detailed examination I recommend going here;
    http://www.usdebtclock.org/
    NOTE that holding your cursor over any given tally will show source, these are various guv'mint ones such as Treasury, OBM, etc.
    Also note the upper right where there is the "Debt Clock Time Machine" tab which will show certain years to select from, providing some gauge and scale over the recent years and last few decades. For example, here is this time in 2008;
    http://www.usdebtclock.org/2008.html
    Versus this time in 2016;
    http://www.usdebtclock.org/2016.html

    Farthest back this will go is to 1980 and as you'll see, we hadn't yet hit the first $trillion (though getting close);
    http://www.usdebtclock.org/1980.html
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

      And it grew by about $10 Trillion during Obama-nation's eight years as POTUS, which averages out to slightly more per annual. Basically doubled from @$10 trillion to @$20 trillion. Don't recall you bitching about your hero much back then.

      From the link;
      ...
      The national debt has been rising at an accelerated rate in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, when Congress and the Obama administration approved stimulus funding in order to keep the economy afloat. [Stimulus funding was mostly in effect through 2009]
      ....
      Asked about the rising debt on Thursday morning, Council of Economic Advisers chairman Kevin Hassett said Trump is "absolutely" concerned about it, which is why he demanded a 5% budget cut from each Cabinet agency for the coming budget cycle.

      "We can disagree about a lot of things but we can agree maybe now is the time to get serious about the deficit," Hassett said.
      ....
      https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...cid=spartandhp

      For a more extensive and detailed examination I recommend going here;
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/
      NOTE that holding your cursor over any given tally will show source, these are various guv'mint ones such as Treasury, OBM, etc.
      Also note the upper right where there is the "Debt Clock Time Machine" tab which will show certain years to select from, providing some gauge and scale over the recent years and last few decades. For example, here is this time in 2008;
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/2008.html
      Versus this time in 2016;
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/2016.html

      Farthest back this will go is to 1980 and as you'll see, we hadn't yet hit the first $trillion (though getting close);
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/1980.html
      But you cant use Obama metrics to compare to now. Just like I wouldn't compare Bush 2 spending to Obamas

      Different situations For example Obama had a war in Iraq for x part of it with more Troops stationed there than Trump. Obama had rescion to pull us out of which requires spending.

      On the other hand Trump got handed a good economy on its way to be debt neutral or close to it on a yearly basis. (Obama last one was 480b or so)

      You cant say your concerned about the debt and the first thing you do it pass a tax cut that does not look at your spending. Not saying the tax cut was a completely bad thing but the one they passed was.

      Comment


      • #4
        As of this moment the US has 122Trillion more in assets than debt. What's the big whoop?
        ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
        IN MARE IN COELO

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

          And it grew by about $10 Trillion during Obama-nation's eight years as POTUS
          How much of that emergency spending was needed to fix the republican great recession?
          Donald inherited a booming economy and still spends like crazy. See the recent spending bill.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
            As of this moment the US has 122Trillion more in assets than debt. What's the big whoop?
            Look towards the bottom of that Debt Clock link and notice that USA Unfunded Liabilities are close to $122 Trillion. This is what is "promised" in forms of Social Security, Medicare, Federal(and Veterans) pensions and employee benefits, Debt etc. Getting awfully close to the $149Trillion national asset figure shown there ... (not including state and local guv'mint debt, BTW).
            http://www.usdebtclock.org/
            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't care, one day its going to implode and everyone is going to go crazy and shoot each other over basics.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post

                How much of that emergency spending was needed to fix the republican great recession?
                How about you tell us since you know so much. ???

                Per this, that fix was done within a year or so and still the deficit and debt grew.
                http://www.usdebtclock.org/2012.html

                Originally posted by inevtiab1e View Post
                Donald inherited a booming economy and still spends like crazy. See the recent spending bill.
                You might start by learning more about what you are talking on.
                Each incoming administration inherits a Federal Fiscal Budget from the previous one. Though initial budget is proposed by POTUS, Congress usually adds to that.
                EXCERPT:
                ...

                The 2017 United States federal budget is the United States federal budget for fiscal year 2017, which lasted from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017. President Barack Obama submitted a budget proposal to the 114th Congress on February 9, 2016. The 2017 fiscal year overlaps the end of the Obama administration and the beginning of the Trump administration.

                The government was initially funded through a series of three temporary continuing resolutions. Funding for military construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs was enacted on September 29, 2016 as part of the Continuing Appropriations and Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017, and Zika Response and Preparedness Act. The remaining funding was passed as an omnibus spending bill, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017, enacted on May 5, 2017.
                ...
                The Obama administration's proposed budget for 2017 proposed spending $4.2 trillion and raising $3.6 trillion in tax revenue.[10] The administration's stated priorities are creating jobs, building 21st century transportation, investing in medical research, addressing climate change, and increased funding for national security.[11]

                Congress did not pass a regular budget resolution for the 2017 fiscal year during the 114th Congress,[12] but did so early in the 115th Congress, over three months after the fiscal year had actually begun.[13]
                ...
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_U...federal_budget

                IIRC, when it came time to sign for fiscal 2018 Trump was squawking about not signing off on such, but relented to avoid a guv'mint shutdown, with admonish to Congress to do a better reduced one next time(year). We are dealing ith the differences between POTUS and Congress currently.

                BTW; Deficit to GDP was at 9.7% in 2010, now down to 4.1%, so slight progress might be happening. But still a long way to go.
                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by craven View Post

                  But you cant use Obama metrics to compare to now. Just like I wouldn't compare Bush 2 spending to Obamas

                  Different situations For example Obama had a war in Iraq for x part of it with more Troops stationed there than Trump. Obama had rescion to pull us out of which requires spending.

                  On the other hand Trump got handed a good economy on its way to be debt neutral or close to it on a yearly basis. (Obama last one was 480b or so)

                  You cant say your concerned about the debt and the first thing you do it pass a tax cut that does not look at your spending. Not saying the tax cut was a completely bad thing but the one they passed was.
                  This is a history forum and we are constantly comparing present to past. Check the section for "largest budget items" on the Debt Clock for 2016 versus now and note the scale of increase in many. Some of this reflects the growing number of aging "boomers" and their impact on Medicare, Social Security, government pensions, etc. Obama did the same account tricks as Clinton did in his last year to give illusion of less deficit or a surplus; usually cuts on new hiring, hold off on new building or improvements, and especially to Defense where repair and maintenance is tapered, and stocking of spares and ammo is reduced, etc. This just pushes such off to next year budget and next Admin.

                  As mentioned, that recession didn't run for eight years and a large part of what the Fed spent was a boost to Unions more than business and industry. Within a year or so we were recovered, or such was song and dance back then.

                  Nominally a cut in tax rates spurs economic growth which eventually produces more revenue. There can be a lag time. But if one looks closer at the figures and data at the Debt Clock site, any current POTUS/Admin has issues of aging and retiring population versus decline in work force and those creating wealth versus those demanding a share of such redistributed. For decades (since New Deal) Guv'mint and especially Fed have made promises and commitments to future beneficiaries based on passing the Deficit and Debt onto the future workers and taxpayers. Consequences are starting to kick in.
                  TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                    This is a history forum and we are constantly comparing present to past. Check the section for "largest budget items" on the Debt Clock for 2016 versus now and note the scale of increase in many. Some of this reflects the growing number of aging "boomers" and their impact on Medicare, Social Security, government pensions, etc. Obama did the same account tricks as Clinton did in his last year to give illusion of less deficit or a surplus; usually cuts on new hiring, hold off on new building or improvements, and especially to Defense where repair and maintenance is tapered, and stocking of spares and ammo is reduced, etc. This just pushes such off to next year budget and next Admin.

                    As mentioned, that recession didn't run for eight years and a large part of what the Fed spent was a boost to Unions more than business and industry. Within a year or so we were recovered, or such was song and dance back then.

                    Nominally a cut in tax rates spurs economic growth which eventually produces more revenue. There can be a lag time. But if one looks closer at the figures and data at the Debt Clock site, any current POTUS/Admin has issues of aging and retiring population versus decline in work force and those creating wealth versus those demanding a share of such redistributed. For decades (since New Deal) Guv'mint and especially Fed have made promises and commitments to future beneficiaries based on passing the Deficit and Debt onto the future workers and taxpayers. Consequences are starting to kick in.
                    but we don't compare effectiveness of airplanes in WW2 to airballons in the Civil war. Typically you have to have similar circumstances or factor in changes for a comparison to be valid.

                    Correct it did not run for eight years but the years defeict was coming down unlike now.

                    But a normal rule is if the economy is running fairly a tax cut is not needed. Tax reform sure. Maybe a small tax cut for the working class.

                    A normal strategy most smart people follow is when the times are good pay your bills not spend more money than you got. Which is what Trump did.

                    Tax cut did generate more taxes but it failed to provide any bottom up long term relief. If you eliminate what the dems tossed into the budget you would still be running in the red.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                      How about you tell us since you know so much. ???
                      Here you go.

                      https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-b...ercent-3306296

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        U.S. payrolls rise 312,000, wages top estimates in jobs blowout

                        https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...z&ocid=msnbcrd
                        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The bottom line-
                          Payments on the interest cost more than the US Defense budget.

                          You would have to deliberately crash the entire economic system to get out of that trap, which may be the plan all along.

                          Meanwhile, who is getting the bulk of those interest payments?
                          My bet; the Federal Reserve, a PRIVATE enterprise.
                          "Why is the Rum gone?"

                          -Captain Jack

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                            U.S. payrolls rise 312,000, wages top estimates in jobs blowout

                            https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...z&ocid=msnbcrd
                            The question that needs to answered is why is that U6 number not moving. With the unemployment rates we have had for 4 years I would of expected that number to move with numbers like these coming in.

                            What I think needs to be added to that number is a break down on wages of those jobs. Back during the Obama years I keep saying ok we are recovering but income is not really improving.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by craven View Post

                              The question that needs to answered is why is that U6 number not moving. With the unemployment rates we have had for 4 years I would of expected that number to move with numbers like these coming in.

                              What I think needs to be added to that number is a break down on wages of those jobs. Back during the Obama years I keep saying ok we are recovering but income is not really improving.
                              I took screenshots of USDebtClock.org web site in January 2017. The U-6 number then was 14,763,781. Taking a screenshot today, the number is 12,311,188. So, in the last couple of years, it has dropped quite a bit.

                              Going back to Jan 2017, the Work Force had 152,326,844 people, today, it's 157,082,593. So, the labor force has also jumped. That means that the U-6 number as a percentage has come down.

                              I would suggest three possible reasons;

                              1. Counties in Ohio that had higher unemployment in 2017, still have the higher unemployment rates. Probably holds same for the U-6 in those counties. Just not as many full time jobs being created.

                              2. More people entering the labor force. Many of those people coming back and looking for jobs may have to start part time, thus making the U-6 look like it's not dropping much.

                              3. The U-6 counts both unemployed and under employed. I know a couple of people that have part time jobs, claim they want full time, but refuse to apply at any of the factories in the county that is hiring full time. They also have no skills or post high school education, so there are people like that keeping the number higher than what is should be.


                              As for wages, the Median income has jumped $2,300 in the last couple of years, per USDebtClock.org.

                              Here's a head scratcher. Why has the number of people living in poverty dropped by 4.6 million, but the amount we're paying for welfare has stayed the same. We were paying $7,081 per person in 2017, not we're paying $7618 per person. Shouldn't we be seeing a $20B cut in those numbers?


                              Matthew 25:14-30. Jesus tells that it is not sufficient merely to maintain things as they are. Those who await should make good use of the gifts that God has provided them.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X