To Infinity And Beyond. A Look At The Future Of The Debt

[mrjarrell]

It's a gruesome picture and no-one in DC is really interested in doing a damned thing about the debt. Both wings of the Boot On Your Neck Party are too busy playing games with each other to actually address anything. Geithner and Obama haven't a clue. Neither do any of the candidates on the gop side, (with the exception of Paul who wants a solid trillion in cuts, to begin with). This country is screwed. Might want to start looking at other locales with a better outlook, if you want. You won't have enough preps to get past what this debacle will bring on.

To infinity and beyond! This is the debt chart Obama and Geithner should be ashamed of « The Enterprise Blog

 

[rambone]

Surely Romney's plan of increasing the military by 100,000 soldiers and starting a new war will be enough to keep the empire alive.

 

[mrjarrell]

Surely Romney's plan of increasing the military by 100,000 soldiers and starting a new war will be enough to keep the empire alive.

Sure it will. 100K soldiers won't cost us anything. And he can outfit them with magic underwear, too.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

It's a gruesome picture and no-one in DC is really interested in doing a damned thing about the debt. Both wings of the Boot On Your Neck Party are too busy playing games with each other to actually address anything. Geithner and Obama haven't a clue. Neither do any of the candidates on the gop side, (with the exception of Paul who wants a solid trillion in cuts, to begin with). This country is screwed. Might want to start looking at other locales with a better outlook, if you want. You won't have enough preps to get past what this debacle will bring on.

To infinity and beyond! This is the debt chart Obama and Geithner should be ashamed of « The Enterprise Blog

But wait mrjarrell, caring about this would mean that I maybe couldn't watch American Idol, or the Bachelor. It's so hard to understand!

More bread and circuses from the Establishment to keep people from taking the red pill and and escaping their reality...

 

[J_Wales]

But wait mrjarrell, caring about this would mean that I maybe couldn't watch American Idol, or the Bachelor. It's so hard to understand!

More bread and circuses from the Establishment to keep people from taking the red pill and and escaping their reality...

Why do you hate?

 

[J_Wales]

Virtually any attempt at reducing spending is met with firm resistance (by members in both parties I might add).

Others claim increasing taxes is all that is needed to decrease the debt. Never mind that increasing taxes is no different than adding overhead to production; it simply makes production less efficient thus reducing the effectiveness of the engine that is taxed. (another downward spin)

The numbers are so large that it is often difficult to put them into perspective. So, I put the attached together to provide some perspective. Note – This is not my creation. I heard it in an interview with an economist one day. I only put the attached together to see if what he was saying was accurate or exaggerated. His statements were not an exaggeration.

Here is the summary.

There are roughly 31,557,600 seconds in a year.

If you equate 1 second to one dollar, then $1 million is approximately .03 years.

$1 billion is approximately 31.69 years. So, if you were paying down $1 billion in debt at the rate of $1 per second, it would take approximately 31.69 years to retire the debt. Note, this is assuming no interest.

$100 billion is approximately 3,168.81 years. Thus, to have had a debt of $100 billion retired today, one would have had to begin paying off that debt at $1 per second roughly 1,169 years before Christ.

$1 trillion of debt, paid at the rate of $1 per second and assuming no interest, would take approximately $31,688 years to retire.

As I write this, the US National debt is approximately $15.4 trillion. I will let you do the math regarding how many years that equates to. (The number is increasing. Here is the US National Debt Clock http://www.usdebtclock.org/ )


By the way, it is also worth noting that the social security obligations and medicare and medicade obligations that garner so much attention are not included in these numbers.

Just something to think about next time some pin head politician is droning on about how much he or she wants to help you.

 

[ghunter]

Is it true that most of our debt is actually owed to ourselves via The Fed?

 

[dross]

You can't blame the politicians. They just do what the voters tell them.

The debt is the least of a politician's problem. No group is specifically affected by it negatively, but many groups are postitively benefitted in the short run by adding to it. Those groups fight tooth and nail at all real attempts to fix it. The best example is seniors and those soon to be seniors. They are the most political of the demographic, they have the most money, they are the most organized. Any serious attempt to break their soup bowl and that will flat out keep you from being elected.

Also, the debt was here before any politician got elected and will be here after they are gone. So while we blame "politicians" in general for it, when it comes down to a specific politician, they can't be blamed much.

Democrat voters for the most part don't care about the debt. They think it exists because we don't tax the rich enough or cut the defense budget.

Some Republican voters care about it, but not when it applies to their District.

Like most of these issues, it's a weakness of human nature that is very difficult to solve.

If we would severely cut spending as well as create a healthy environment for business, I think we could grow ourselves out of it as a significant figure, but there is so little understanding of that concept I don't have much hope for it.

The solution perplexes me. I don't see how to fix it, realistically. I used to talk about this stuff to friends and family, but I was beginning to become a bore, so I pulled back and try to teach here and there. One of the problems is that when you say things that go against common knowledge, people just refuse to believe you even if you can prove it.

I've told my family many times that you can cut the entire defense budget, which is impossible, and you only reduce the deficit by about half, which means you're adding to the debt to the tune of 20% of every dollar spent.

No matter how you slice it, SS and Medicare must be cut, and that isn't going to happen. It's politically impossible.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

So the only way out for them, dross - is to accomplish the same ends via inflation. Pay the SS and Medicare with worthless pesos errrr dollars.

I.E. pump and dump.

If you don't cut the deficit - it's only a matter of time before the other kicks in.

 

[mrjarrell]

Yes, dross. I can and do blame the politicians. My kids would eat cake all day long, if I permitted it. The fool politicians, who hold the blame, don't have the common sense to tell the voters no. So, blame DOES fall in their laps and they will bear ultimate responsibility for the debacle. All they had to do was say no. They refused and signed off on the debt, in most cases they crafted the projects that have consumed our wealth. Foisting the blame off onto greedy special interests and the voters doesn't cut it. Yes, they may have wanted cake, but it's ultimately the responsibility of the politician to say we cannot afford it and you can't have it.

 

[dross]

Yes, dross. I can and do blame the politicians. My kids would eat cake all day long, if I permitted it. The fool politicians, who hold the blame, don't have the common sense to tell the voters no. So, blame DOES fall in their laps and they will bear ultimate responsibility for the debacle. All they had to do was say no. They refused and signed off on the debt, in most cases they crafted the projects that have consumed our wealth. Foisting the blame off onto greedy special interests and the voters doesn't cut it. Yes, they may have wanted cake, but it's ultimately the responsibility of the politician to say we cannot afford it and you can't have it.

My point is that expecting politicians to be different than they are is silly.

I'm not saying don't blame them because I'm defending them, or feeling sorry for them, or think they aren't whores.

I'm saying that successful politicians are a certain kind of creature. Just like businessmen are a certain kind and artists are a certain kind. Sure, there are those who run against type, but basically you're going to get a certain kind of person. Winning the game means getting elected. We'll get any kind of politician we want. But then if the "we" you belong to is a different kind of person than what the majority is ever likely to be, then you're not going to get the kind of politicians you want.

At every point in history there have always been those who sit on the outskirts and talk about how the world should be different than it is.

You say they should tell the voters "No"? So as I've pointed out many times, the only politicians you like are the ones who will never be elected, or once elected will never be reelected and therefore never change anything.

Except there's an occasional district set up just so, and a Ron Paul gets elected multiple times, and it gives false hope that

"Gosh, golly gee, if we try ever so hard and care ever so much, everything might change one day and freedom would ring across the land and people would stop trying to get something from nothing and stop trying to take from other people and stop voting for people who pander to them and then we'll all live happily ever after."

I'll just go ahead and try to deal with the reality that exists, and not the pretty one I can dream up in my mind.

 

[mrjarrell]

And that's why we'll continue to be raped. You need to change your strategy. It's failing in a big way.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

With all due respect, the strategy of select one the PERFECT, HOLY, PURE candidate (albeit one that the country as a whole isn't quite ready to accept yet) , then blame the media, the conspiracy, and everything else when that one candidate isn't elected isn't working too hot either....

If a candidate is not elected - it's because we the people didn't elect them. And that is collectively our human failing if we choose poorly.

 

[John Galt]

And that's why we'll continue to be raped. You need to change your strategy. It's failing in a big way.

What's your strategy mrjarrell? I've read two responses from dross that were well presented in a logical, rational and honest fashion. I went to a Third House meeting in my town this morning and there were only 4 people there that weren't press/politician. It's almost like so many/too many don't care any more and we're on autopilot into the abyss. Almost half of Americans rely upon government for something nowadays and the entitlement mentality is becoming malignant. I am for individual liberty, limited/accountable government, free markets and Rule of Law as much as anyone, but I too (like dross explained earlier) am starting to look at things a little differently than what I did even 1 year ago. This, by no means, means that I have given up hope. I am fighting this insidious disease in my own ways and will continue to do so. However, honesty is completely void in the world of Liberalism and others that choose not to embrace it are going to be in for a huge surprise when the unsustainable becomes unsustainable. I feel it's going to take a MAJOR event, reckoning/re-awakening to turn this impending train wreck around.

 

[dross]

And that's why we'll continue to be raped. You need to change your strategy. It's failing in a big way.

I can appreciate your point. I've played competitive tennis for many years. An axiom of tennis is, "Always change a losing strategy."

The problem with that axiom is that it's often misunderstood. I've beaten lots of people because they took it to mean, "This guy's better than me, so my new strategy is to hit better shots than I've ever hit before." In other words, they change to a different strategy that can win if they pull it off, but since it doesn't conform to reality, they just lose faster. Their argument, and I've heard it made, is "I was going to lose anyway, but at least I gave myself a chance."

When I play, I come to the net. Sometimes I meet a guy who can pass me easily. I could change and stay back, but the reality is that anyone who can pass me when I'm at the net can wipe the floor with me if I stay back.

So what can I do? I can reduce my errors. I can increase my concentration and effort. I can pick better spots to come in. In some matches, I'll still lose, but who knows, if I stay in the match a little longer, keep it as close as possible, maybe something will change. Maybe the wind will pick up and throw him off, maybe he'll get tired, maybe he'll get injured.

I should definitely change a losing game, but it has to be within the bounds of reality.

To move it back to politics, your solution seems to be, "Try to make the world different than it ever has been anywhere in the history of the world, ever, 'cause if we do, all our problems will be solved."

Yep, and maybe I'll develop a killer baseline game for the first time ever, right in the middle of a tough match.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Originally Posted by mrjarrell
Yes, dross. I can and do blame the politicians. My kids would eat cake all day long, if I permitted it. The fool politicians, who hold the blame, don't have the common sense to tell the voters no.

Presidents, governors, senators, judges, etc. are not our parents: they are our employees, our representatives. They are also a reflection of us. As a country, we've sent these people to office to do exactly what they've done...no doubt we are to blame. Maybe not you or me specifically...

Every now and then we elect a person that "misrepresents" his/her true intentions. And when we dont like their performance, we fire them. But there a reason progressives keep getting re-elected: a majority of their constituents like what they're doing.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Presidents, governors, senators, judges, etc. are not our parents: they are our employees, our representatives. They are also a reflection of us. As a country, we've sent these people to office to do exactly what they've done...no doubt we are to blame. Maybe not you or me specifically...

Every now and then we elect a person that "misrepresents" his/her true intentions. And when we dont like their performance, we fire them. But there a reason progressives keep getting re-elected: a majority of their constituents like what they're doing.

I dont know, seems like they are the parents of about half the population that get some kind of freebie from the government. But unlike our kids their kids are allowed to vote for what they want.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I dont know, seems like they are the parents of about half the population that get some kind of freebie from the government. But unlike our kids their kids are allowed to vote for what they want.

No...no...no....

A sugar daddy Is not the same as a dad

 

[squirrelhntr]

John Kay the lead singer of a rock group named Steppenwolf from the 1960's said it prefectly in a song called "Monster" look it up on u-tube and listen closely to the lyrics. click the arrow then type in steppenwolf monster

http://youtu.be/SK3sURDS4lA

 

[J_Wales]

“From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.”