US DEBT NOW EXCEEDS 100% OF GDP, REPUBLICANS SUDDENLY DON’T CARE

[John Stone]

According to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) long -term budget outlook, the U.S. national debt in 25 years is projected to reach 160 percent of GDP. 

Mandatory spending is being targeted............. Social  Security bennies could be reduced as much as 35 percent by 2034. 

 

[CdnFox]

45 minutes ago, John Stone said:

According to the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) long -term budget outlook, the U.S. national debt in 25 years is projected to reach 160 percent of GDP. 

Mandatory spending is being targeted............. Social  Security bennies could be reduced as much as 35 percent by 2034. 

 

Well the other option is to grow the economy. If the economy is growing substantially faster than the population, then government revenue increases appropriately. It reduces the need for cuts

The problem is I don't really see either party putting forward genius ideas right now. The democrats were absolutely horrible at substantially growing the economy in the way that it needed. I have little faith that trump's tariff plan will result in substantial growth either, and as of the moment the best you can say is that it's not tanking the economy the way some thought it would or might.  It's producing 'ok' or 'decent' growth, but not what's needed given the deficit. Of course it's still early days and the full benefits if any will take a few years to show up. 

But that really has to be the focus. If Americans want to keep the benefits they have without being taxed into oblivion like Venezuela then they need to focus on improving the economy and the output and production and wages it generates.

[User]

Same old stupid partisan BS. 

You only care about debt and deficit spending as long as you can use them for cheap political rhetoric. 

It is you @BeaverFever and others who ignored the spending and defended it or lied about it when Biden and the Democrats were spending trillions. 

As I have continued to point out, this is an issue with the establishment from both parties not caring and then leftists like you not caring. The only ones who really care are a minority of Republicans, who are Conservatives. They never have enough power or sway to make a real difference and when they do have enough to leverage a shut down, folks like you and the media scream about the shut down and attack them. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, User said:

You only care about debt and deficit spending as long as you can use them for cheap political rhetoric.

That is certainly true.  The sheer volume of crocodile tears would be enough to open a boot factory.  But no surprise there, we've seen often enough that the left is fine with something while they do it yet scream and gnash teeth and rend garments the moment someone else does it. 

[John Stone]

18 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well the other option is to grow the economy. If the economy is growing substantially faster than the population, then government revenue increases appropriately. It reduces the need for cuts

The problem is I don't really see either party putting forward genius ideas right now. The democrats were absolutely horrible at substantially growing the economy in the way that it needed. I have little faith that trump's tariff plan will result in substantial growth either, and as of the moment the best you can say is that it's not tanking the economy the way some thought it would or might.  It's producing 'ok' or 'decent' growth, but not what's needed given the deficit. Of course it's still early days and the full benefits if any will take a few years to show up. 

But that really has to be the focus. If Americans want to keep the benefits they have without being taxed into oblivion like Venezuela then they need to focus on improving the economy and the output and production and wages it generates.

 

Just before the collapse of the USSR, the apparatchik's rhetoric  was loudly proclaiming that the economy was undergoing a readjustment?

They weren't lying ........... it collapsed........ and left the (then) Russia with 25 years of debt to amortize. 

Many reasons for the collapse ...... but likely attempting to keep up to the West in terms of defense spending played a large part. 

National debt is a threat to National Security of course.............  but it is also a threat to the next generations economic security.......

Indeed, grow the economy, entitlement cuts and of course raise taxes............................. or punt? 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

 

Just before the collapse of the USSR, the apparatchik's rhetoric  was loudly proclaiming that the economy was undergoing a readjustment?

 

You mean it had ruptured and they needed a new 'order' to fix it?  Seems i've heard something like that recently   

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

They weren't lying ........... it collapsed........ and left the (then) Russia with 25 years of debt to amortize. 

Many reasons for the collapse ...... but likely attempting to keep up to the West in terms of defense spending played a large part. 

National debt is a threat to National Security of course.............  but it is also a threat to the next generations economic security.......

Indeed, grow the economy, entitlement cuts and of course raise taxes............................. or punt? 

Joking aside that's very true.  and the 'grow, raise or punt" question is one that's come up many times in our history, and we' haven't always answered it well. 

we seem to be going with punt this time, and i'm not happy about what that's going to mean for the next gen. 

[John Stone]

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You mean it had ruptured and they needed a new 'order' to fix it?  Seems i've heard something like that recently   

Joking aside that's very true.  and the 'grow, raise or punt" question is one that's come up many times in our history, and we' haven't always answered it well. 

we seem to be going with punt this time, and i'm not happy about what that's going to mean for the next gen. 

.........................reduced economic initiatives, increased taxes ...........by extension,  overall reduced quality of life. 

Universal Health Care, Defense are good examples of punting. 

 

[CdnFox]

Just now, John Stone said:

.........................reduced economic initiatives, increased taxes ...........by extension,  overall reduced quality of life. 

Universal Health Care, Defense are good examples of punting. 

 

Well they can be, but they don't have to be.

But one way or another the driving philosophy has to be clear in the mind of the government taking action And they should be clear with the public as to what their intent is. Randomly switching back and forth between the three is the worst of all possible options