Morbid, but that likely takes care of itself over the next 10 years.
Boomers buying out will likely hurt the real estate market but it'll be a big drain off of services.
U.S. Debt Hits $40 Trillion
- Thread starter dorndawg
- Start date
Boomers buying out will likely hurt the real estate market but it'll be a big drain off of services.
Pretty sure the debt hasn’t declined at all in any year for a very long time, but it was growing pretty slowly in Clinton’s 2nd term.
A lot of it is owed to American citizens in the form of a wide variety of US debt instruments.
So, if we can all agree to just take the hit and hurt the country’s credit score, then yeah, write that **** off.
Social Security doesn't add to it. Social Security is self funded. Social Security has a trust fund that is held in treasury bills that have been issued by the government to finance its deficit spending.
In 2001, we were poised to have the debt eliminated by 2009. Then every Congress and president since then were unable to resist having money and not promising everyone the moon, so through bipartisan efforts at increasing spending, responding to recession, and cutting taxes, here we are 25 years later $40 trillion in the hole.
As an aside, the Social Security shortfall that is upcoming, is a different issue entirely.
There is no side there is one entity controlling the whole thing. I’m sorry if you feel different .your algorithms make you believe what they want you to believe.
Social Security is funded entirely through FICA tax. To speak of it as if it's part of the budget Congress passes each year misrepresents it. SS operates for the most part on the 1983 Social Security Act amendment which was the last time major changes were made to it. They pretty much changed it to have baby boomer pre financing their retirement. They didn't quite collect enough, and that gets us to the current projected shortfall.
I don’t have the energy or inclination to lay out all the wrongness in this post, but I feel certain someone here who does is (or will soon be) frantically tapping a keyboard.
Some do more than others and that's a key distinction. I drink beer once in a while. Some have several beers daily. We're not the same because we drink beer. President 45 is going to be responsible for $25% of our national debt. 1-44 can't claim that.
Fun fact: During the later years of the Clinton Presidency, the economy was really humming and the deficit was getting slashed to the point that people were starting to wonder what it was going to do to the bond market.
Not defending Trump, but you kinda have to judge based on the growth in debt at the time in office. Both Bush2 and Obama were in the neighborhood of overseeing doubling the national debt under their watch.
In other words, they all 17’n suck.
And the greatest market bubble in history (not counting this one) was expanding rapidly and about to explode all over our collective faces.
I thought he did it 2-3 years but looks like it was officially just the last year in office. I want to say the budget was balanced a small handful of years.
I dont know if the other poster's comments are all correct, partially correct, or basically totally wrong. Just gonna say that your response here is quite fair and and well worded.
You're not wrong but also the numbers show Clinton drastically reduced the deficit and slightly reduced the debt. Isn't that what we want more of?
I guess that's one way of copingYes, there hasn’t been a better Republican president since him
I honestly didn’t remember that. Damn, we are so far from anything resembling a budget surplus 25 years later.
He's a very special boy who can't be questioned lest you want a primary challenge or be labeled with TDS.
I guess that's one way of coping
I hated him at the time. Not afraid to admit it. But I did think he and the congress were getting good things done.
Had no way of knowing just how awful both parties could become in the 2000’s.
I'd like to point out how civil this conversation has remained while a certain poster on vacation isn't around to ruin it.
I know, @CochiseCowbell is just a real jackasss who ruins every single thread. ***
There really is no defense for this. You can’t run on a platform of cutting government spending and waste and have this happen. There is literally no argument that justifies this. And saying “the guys before him did it too” sure as hell doesn’t cut it.
the problem is that we as the American people just root for politicians like they are sports teams now. We keep supporting our side despite the fact that whatever side you choose has been as impressive as Mississippi state football has recently.
This is why I wish the Republicans would learn from the Socialists... they have it figured out. You say whatever you have to say to get elected, then you can do whatever you really wanted once you're in power.
You have to lie to get elected these days, so maybe they should try that.
Trump kinda sucks in a ton of ways, but that graph is flawed as hell. Every future president will look bad compared to previous as the number keeps growing. It’s just math.
Social security is not self funded in the sense that it can pay what it has "promised". Right now money is automatically drawn from teh general fund to top up social security taxes and pay benefits. That is the "trust fund". It's just an accounting mechanism, not actual funding. That funding comes from general taxes to the extent the social security tax receipts don't cover benefits paid. Social security taxes pay something like 78% of benefits I think. Or maybe that's what they're projected to pay when money can no longer be drawn from teh general fund without additional appropriations.
It's not really a different issue. It's all about whether we are going to pay our obligations. It is different in the sense that all we have to do is not address it and it takes care of itself in the form of benefit reductions, or we could even just pass legislation dropping benefits all the way to zero and it won't have the same financial implications of defaulting on bonds (or monetizing the debt, which is more likely since we still get to borrow in dollars). But at the end of the day, voters for a couple of decades have promised that some other, future tax payers are going to pay a **** ton of money to people, and all of those people expecting to get paid are likely to get some share of the screwing along with future tax payers.
That is quite literally what we are living through. You phrased your comment as if this isnt what has been happening.
There is no need to maybe try it...its happening constantly.
The line graph earlier showing the steady rise since Clinton is more of a representation of what’s happening than pinpointing one president. Biden’s looks pretty similar to Trumps given the same parameters.
That's true, but you kinda have to factor in that some of this stat is solely due to an era in time, or "progress" as some would call it. It's like saying Kevin Durant is a much better basketball player than Wilt Chamberlain because he scored more points. Some of that is just due to the eras they played in.
Do you honestly think the next President will magically stop this snowball from running down the hill and solve our debt issues? It's getting harder and harder as it picks up steam.
I'm not excusing any of it, but blaming 25% of all US historical debt on Trump is a little disingenuous too.
Trump is not good on the debt by any means, but 4 trillion of that 11.52 trillion was attributable to interest payments on the national debt.
Trump has exposed a lot of insanely rotten things in our government, but generally we have fiscally irresponsible republicans and fiscally insane democrats, and Trump is closer to the insane side than just the fiscally irresponsible side.
No one on either side really cares until something crashes or a core group of people are personally affected, like when Social Security begins to get cut or the qualifying age gets pushed out beyond the life expectancy of most people. Everyone is just content to "get theirs" and ride it down on the promise that they will be dead before it is a real problem and it will be someone else' problem in the future.
That's the projected 75 year shortfall that the 1983 amendment did not collect enough to cover.
Nope. Self-financed by law. The trust fund is what SS has in funds mostly treasury bills. Money from the general fund services debt that social security has financed. It's actually to opposite of what you are implying. SS is funding the general fund. Not the other way around.
It's a different issue in that it isn't part of the $40 T debt other than part of that $40 T was borrowed from Social Security. Eliminating the cap without giving those payers the benefit credit would cover about 70% of the shortfall. Eliminating the cap and giving those payers credit covers about 50%. Raising the FICA tax 1% covers roughly the other 50%. All of those things are more popular than cutting benefits to cover the shortfall.
It also makes you wonder how much of that market growth and inflation is really fueled by credit cards and other debt. If inflation is the result of more dollars chasing fewer goods. What if a large percentage of those dollars are debt dollars?
It's every president and Congress since 2001. ALL OF THEM.
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White
Amaree Williams all in on defensive transition at Mississippi State, wants to "impact the game on all levels"
-
02
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Edge Amaree Williams Q&A
-
03
Maroon and White
Mississippi State S Marcus Williams Q&A
-
04
Maroon and White
DJ Chester, Mississippi State OL "Speaking the same language"
-
05
Transfer Portal
College Basketball Transfer Portal Rankings: Top players entering after NCAA fifth-year eligibility ruling