U.S. is on track to add $12 Trillion to national debt

[NinjaKnight]

Awesome job guys. MAGA.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u...9-unless-washington-changes-course-2019-01-28

Washington has been drowning in red ink for years and it’s only going to get a lot worse over the next decade, a fresh government estimate shows.

The U.S. is likely to add $12 trillion in public debt from 2020 to 2029 through a combination of higher government spending and slower economic growth, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That’s on top of the $16.6 trillion the government is expected to owe to the public at the end of 2019.

 

[Husk in butt]

Awesome job guys. MAGA.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u...9-unless-washington-changes-course-2019-01-28

Washington has been drowning in red ink for years and it’s only going to get a lot worse over the next decade, a fresh government estimate shows.

The U.S. is likely to add $12 trillion in public debt from 2020 to 2029 through a combination of higher government spending and slower economic growth, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That’s on top of the $16.6 trillion the government is expected to owe to the public at the end of 2019.

Maga? Seems like all the recent presidents were doing their share of this mess. Obama was also doing $1 trillion dollar deficits or was that blame bush right,?

 

[ChrisKnight06]

Maga? Seems like all the recent presidents were doing their share of this mess. Obama was also doing $1 trillion dollar deficits or was that blame bush right,?

Yes. Hence MAGA...

 

[Crazyhole]

Still not crisis level, but getting there. Probably another 25 years before the shit hits the fan at this rate, and thats assuming inflation doesnt take off like expected.

Either way, we will have a major event before then that resets the whole thing.

 

[firm_bizzle]

We’re bankrupting our kids!

 

[DaShuckster]

I thought conservatives had decided after the Bush & Obama bank bailouts over a decade ago that the federal deficit had to be addressed? Did I just dream it? What happened to it when we had a Republican President and a Republican Congress?

Anyone want to bet me if Republicans will get serious about it again — once a new Democrat President is elected.

 

[goodknightfl]

Well think of all the things we spent that 12 Trillion on, and than realize that once hyper inflation kicks in ...12 Trillion will buy a Happy Meal at Mc Donalds.

 

[Husk in butt]

I thought conservatives had decided after the Bush & Obama bank bailouts over a decade ago that the federal deficit had to be addressed? Did I just dream it? What happened to it when we had a Republican President and a Republican Congress?

Anyone want to bet me if Republicans will get serious about it again — once a new Democrat President is elected.

Frankly I'm annoyed that neither party is addressing it. National debt doesn't win you brownie points.

 

[firm_bizzle]

I thought conservatives had decided after the Bush & Obama bank bailouts over a decade ago that the federal deficit had to be addressed? Did I just dream it? What happened to it when we had a Republican President and a Republican Congress?

Anyone want to bet me if Republicans will get serious about it again — once a new Democrat President is elected.

After more tax cuts.

 

[Crazyhole]

Its interesting that they are predicting slower growth. Granted, we have an aging population but as that population ages out and leaves their money to younger generations we will have increased consumer spending. They also arent taking into account the technological advances we've been experiencing over the last several years and how tech perpeutates itself. It seems the whole report really is just predicated on the expectation that the FED will continue to raise interest rates but other countries will not, particurly the EU and we will experience some level of deflation while other countries remain static.

 

[Knight_Classes_begin_7pm]

Awesome job guys. MAGA.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u...9-unless-washington-changes-course-2019-01-28

Washington has been drowning in red ink for years and it’s only going to get a lot worse over the next decade, a fresh government estimate shows.

The U.S. is likely to add $12 trillion in public debt from 2020 to 2029 through a combination of higher government spending and slower economic growth, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That’s on top of the $16.6 trillion the government is expected to owe to the public at the end of 2019.

Plunging into RED DEBT!!!...by the RED HATS!!! Just write checks and worry about paying for it later. Amazing.

 

[Knight_Classes_begin_7pm]

After more tax cuts.

Exactly.....give more wealthy corporations and americans HUGE tax breaks...hmmm. Red Hat logic

 

[Crazyhole]

This is an unpopular opinion in some conservative circles, but we really do need to address our aging population and lower birth rate by bringing in more immigrants. Ideally it would be a balanced approach that doesn't allow a mass influx from one ethnic background as opposed to another and those people would be forced to assimilate to western culture. Speaking english effectively as a first or second language is a must. Work ethic is also a must.

 

[Husk in butt]

Exactly.....give more wealthy corporations and americans HUGE tax breaks...hmmm. Red Hat logic

Our corporate tax rate is still too high. Need to get down to like 10% max.

Unpopular but we can't have half Americans paying no federal taxes. Everyone needs skin in the game and stop being a leech.

 

[chemmie]

Our corporate tax rate is still too high. Need to get down to like 10% max.

Unpopular but we can't have half Americans paying no federal taxes. Everyone needs skin in the game and stop being a leech.

 

[rediceknight]

Our corporate tax rate is still too high. Need to get down to like 10% max.

Unpopular but we can't have half Americans paying no federal taxes. Everyone needs skin in the game and stop being a leech.

One of these days I'm half expecting Democrats to propose a law that exempts all blm from paying income taxes. Even the billionaires.

 

[DaShuckster]

One of these days I'm half expecting Democrats to propose a law that exempts all blm from paying income taxes. Even the billionaires.

No racism here, right guys?

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

No racism here, right guys?

Numerous people have asked the feckless moderators @Brandon and @BG_Knightmare to ban him. They are perfectly content to have a racist and homophobe in here and have no intentions of kicking him out.

Don't look at the rest of us.

 

[rediceknight]

No racism here, right guys?

You should worry about apologizing to @fabknight

 

[Poolside Knight]

 

[NinjaKnight]

View embedded media

cue @UCFWayne "i"M sO tIrEd of WiNNinG"

 

[Crazyhole]

View embedded media

Not at all surprising, and quite honestly I think the whole "trade deficit" thing is mischaracterized. We traded paper for goods that enrich our lives at a clip of 600 billion dollars. By the time that paper comes back it may only be worth half as much. Either way, when it does happen it will mean that investing in US goods and companies will be better than investing in foreign goods and companies. Trade deficits arent a sign of a good or bad economy, its just a meaningless marker that people on both sides like to point at and make their political case.

 

[fried-chicken]

Not at all surprising, and quite honestly I think the whole "trade deficit" thing is mischaracterized. We traded paper for goods that enrich our lives at a clip of 600 billion dollars. By the time that paper comes back it may only be worth half as much. Either way, when it does happen it will mean that investing in US goods and companies will be better than investing in foreign goods and companies. Trade deficits arent a sign of a good or bad economy, its just a meaningless marker that people on both sides like to point at and make their political case.

Yeah I remember people on both sides pointing to trade deficits. Remember how hard Hillary went against trade deals in the 2016 election. Yeah it's defiantly both sides that use this meaningless stat and not one side and one side only.

 

[Crazyhole]

Yeah I remember people on both sides pointing to trade deficits. Remember how hard Hillary went against trade deals in the 2016 election. Yeah it's defiantly both sides that use this meaningless stat and not one side and one side only.

what's happening right now? a case is being made on whether or not trade deficits are good and it's coming from the left to prove a point about the economy

 

[fried-chicken]

what's happening right now? a case is being made on whether or not trade deficits are good and it's coming from the left to prove a point about the economy

No it's not. It's coming from the left to mock the right. Carry on.

 

[fried-chicken]

These are your own metrics of success. Trump campaigned on them, you all bought in. Now the metrics that were so important to you aren't important anymore.

Remember when Obama's unemployment numbers were fake for this or that reason? Now, all of the sudden, you all think they are real and we're just sitting back watching and shaking our heads at how the red hats will go to any lengths to twist reality.

Hope that helps.

 

[Crazyhole]

These are your own metrics of success. Trump campaigned on them, you all bought in. Now the metrics that were so important to you aren't important anymore.

Remember when Obama's unemployment numbers were fake for this or that reason? Now, all of the sudden, you all think they are real and we're just sitting back watching and shaking our heads at how the red hats will go to any lengths to twist reality.

Hope that helps.

It doesn't. Then again, I have never looked at unemployment figures to be an accurate measure either. Laborforce participation stats have always and will always be a better measure of the economy than unemployment is. Nice try though.

 

[fried-chicken]

It doesn't. Then again, I have never looked at unemployment figures to be an accurate measure either. Laborforce participation stats have always and will always be a better measure of the economy than unemployment is. Nice try though.

This must be someone else trying to claim unemployment is a record lows then.

Spending 20 billion a year isn't a stretch but 6 billion is? Even if an extended wall only reaps a 5% ROR thats still a 6 year payback in this situation, which is pretty good. It just seems odd that democrats are concerned with adding a 1 time increase of 2% to the budget when we spend 6.6% of the budget each year for the same purpose. Heck, we add that much to welfare every year even when unemployment is at record lows.

 

[Crazyhole]

This must be someone else trying to claim unemployment is a record lows then.

Different metrics. Unemployment claims lead to benefits that the government pays on and that was the basis of that conversation. Very disingenuous point you are trying to make here. Unemployment IS at historically low levels. You fail to ask why that is, whether it's a good thing, if its beneficial to the budget, or whether you can even begin to understand what it means. Maybe take some time off to think about the subject freely before you chime in next time.

 

[NinjaKnight]

This must be someone else trying to claim unemployment is a record lows then.

Hello 911, I'd like to report a murder.

 

[fried-chicken]

Different metrics. Unemployment claims lead to benefits that the government pays on and that was the basis of that conversation. Very disingenuous point you are trying to make here. Unemployment IS at historically low levels. You fail to ask why that is, whether it's a good thing, if its beneficial to the budget, or whether you can even begin to understand what it means. Maybe take some time off to think about the subject freely before you chime in next time.

I know my stance on the unemployment number, maybe you should be the one to take some time thinking about the subject freely so you can decide your own stance. Yours seems to be a little more fluid at the moment.

 

[Poolside Knight]

what's happening right now? a case is being made on whether or not trade deficits are good and it's coming from the left to prove a point about the economy

the worry is if we are headed to another crash like what happened at the end of W Bush's term. Tax Cuts and still spend but not increasing revenues is a recipe for disaster.

Maybe the 2019 calendar year changes that

 

[Crazyhole]

the worry is if we are headed to another crash like what happened at the end of W Bush's term. Tax Cuts and still spend but not increasing revenues is a recipe for disaster.

Maybe the 2019 calendar year changes that

Possible but not likely in the short term. The FED is still totally fine with QE so nothing will collapse any time soon. The trade deficit issue was always just a stupid political ploy to make things appear negatively just to garner votes.

 

[Ucfmikes]

Yeah. The National debt only began growing in 2017. Never existed before.

How exactly has the National Debt ever affected me anyway??

Ugh....... it hasn’t.

 

[DaShuckster]

How exactly has the National Debt ever affected me anyway?? Ugh....... it hasn’t.

Ugh, really???

As a supposed "free-spending Liberal," it's ironic that I have to be the one to convince a supposed "Conservative" why a growing National debt is bad.

When a young couple goes crazy with their credit card spending, the consequences are brutal. From that point on, way too much of their family income goes to paying interest on their debt instead paying down the debt itself. In the case of our Federal debt, we taxpayers end up sending money to China who holds much of our debt instead of using it to address critical priorities at home. I love how some Conservatives like to rail against fraud in our food stamp program. We need to cut this kind of crap out of our federal spending, right? Well, we spend over $220 Billion annually on our Federal debt which is more than our entire food stamps program.

There are plenty of other reasons why a growing federal debt is bad and impacts all of us but that's the biggie.

Yeah. The National debt only began growing in 2017. Never existed before.

Actually, after our economic collapse in 2008, the Republicans were on the stump convincing everyone -- correctly IMHO -- that we needed to make a concerted effort to address our Federal deficit. In fact Trump claimed on the campaign trail that he was going to cut the federal deficit in half over the course of his eight years in office.

So what's he done since getting elected? He's added over a trillion dollars in new debt with his tax cut for the rich and is proposing a budget that will add over a trillion dollars in yet MORE debt this year to give the military a big boost and to help fund his border wall.

The bottom line is that it clearly doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican, the party in power LOVES to spend our money, the only difference is their spending priorities.

 

[Ucfmikes]

Ugh, really???

As a supposed "free-spending Liberal," it's ironic that I have to be the one to convince a supposed "Conservative" why a growing National debt is bad.

When a young couple goes crazy with their credit card spending, the consequences are brutal. From that point on, way too much of their family income goes to paying interest on their debt instead paying down the debt itself. In the case of our Federal debt, we taxpayers end up sending money to China who holds much of our debt instead of using it to address critical priorities at home. I love how some Conservatives like to rail against fraud in our food stamp program. We need to cut this kind of crap out of our federal spending, right? Well, we spend over $220 Billion annually on our Federal debt which is more than our entire food stamps program.

There are plenty of other reasons why a growing federal debt is bad and impacts all of us but that's the biggie.



Actually, after our economic collapse in 2008, the Republicans were on the stump convincing everyone -- correctly IMHO -- that we needed to make a concerted effort to address our Federal deficit. In fact Trump claimed on the campaign trail that he was going to cut the federal deficit in half over the course of his eight years in office.

So what's he done since getting elected? He's added over a trillion dollars in new debt with his tax cut for the rich and is proposing a budget that will add over a trillion dollars in yet MORE debt this year to give the military a big boost and to help fund his border wall.

The bottom line is that it clearly doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican, the party in power LOVES to spend our money, the only difference is their spending priorities.

There will NEVER be any president who can slow the growth of the National debt significantly, let alone shrink it. I’ve been hearing about national debts for 2-3 decades. It’s nice to talk about, but the relevancy is way overrated

I’m not a free spending liberal. I save my money. Yes.., China has been raping us for years and hopefully Trump will fix that along with all the money that is spent defending other countries. Let them make peace with their threats on their own and let us spend money only on our military.

 

[Ucfmikes]

So what's he done since getting elected? He's added over a trillion dollars in new debt with his tax cut for the rich and is proposing a budget that will add over a trillion dollars in yet MORE debt this year to give the military a big boost and to help fund his border wall.

Awesome! Can’t wait until 2020 to vote again

Everyone has benefited from the tax cuts and last I checked, the tax bracket for those earning $250,000 or more is still way higher than those earning $28,000

 

[DaShuckster]

There will NEVER be any president who can slow the growth of the National debt significantly, let alone shrink it.

Oh, so you're going with the "it can't be done so why even try" approach? Try Bill Clinton. When he was President in 1998 the Government finally recorded a surplus. There were also budget surpluses in 1999, 2000, and in 2001.

While the federal budget deficit isn't going away anytime soon, it would certainly help if the President and the Congress would agree on a balanced federal budget each year as a starting point. You don't need to be a CPA to know that whether you're talking about your personal budget or the federal budget, it's not healthy to be overspending your budget every year.

 

[goodknightfl]

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/...dit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html?pagewanted=1

Bill Clinton had a perfect storm, The Gov't bought tons of houses after the Carter Crash. Their version of the Bush crash, bank bail out. They sold off those houses during the Clinton years, you add to that a conservative republican house and senate, who actually did fight to control spending, we actually had a 2 year surplus. But Clinton also pushed banks to do sub prime loans to increase home sales.... see houses govt selling at top. Everyone wants to blame Bush, and or the banks for the last crash, but the ground work was laid by the Clinton admin.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/...dit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html?pagewanted=1

Bill Clinton had a perfect storm, The Gov't bought tons of houses after the Carter Crash. Their version of the Bush crash, bank bail out. They sold off those houses during the Clinton years, you add to that a conservative republican house and senate, who actually did fight to control spending, we actually had a 2 year surplus. But Clinton also pushed banks to do sub prime loans to increase home sales.... see houses govt selling at top. Everyone wants to blame Bush, and or the banks for the last crash, but the ground work was laid by the Clinton admin.

I agree.

I pray my post shows.