Biden's budget would bankrupt America, put national security at risk

[StillBallin75]

Biden's budget would bankrupt America, put national security at risk

Is America serious about survival in this increasingly dangerous world? President Joe Biden’s $5.8 trillion budget says no. So does the recent $1.5 trillion earmark-filled spending bill.

www.foxnews.com

Really? That idiot wants a $5,800,000,000! We only bring in about $3,000,000,000 in revenue, and less now that people got free money from the government. He is purposely trying to bankrupt us.

Where was all this concern for the deficit when Trump was giving away tax breaks for billionaires for no ****ing reason?

 

[Helix]

Faux propaganda.

 

[multivita-man]

How about

Tax the wealthy who haven't paid their fair share for decades to pay for it

They won't let you. They'll demand more military spending, subsidies, and tax breaks for their corporate ventures, but they won't pay for it. They'll just offshore their companies to some tax haven and move their own personal fortunes around so that tax agencies can't find it or tax it if they do.

Think Russia's the only country that has corrupt oligarchs?

 

[multivita-man]

Where was all this concern for the deficit when Trump was giving away tax breaks for billionaires for no ****ing reason?

Exactly. Capitalize profits, and socialize the losses. That's the Republican way since pretty much the beginning of time.

Party of fiscal and personal responsibility my ass.

 

[vegas giants]

Biden's budget would bankrupt America, put national security at risk

Is America serious about survival in this increasingly dangerous world? President Joe Biden’s $5.8 trillion budget says no. So does the recent $1.5 trillion earmark-filled spending bill.

www.foxnews.com

Really? That idiot wants a $5,800,000,000! We only bring in about $3,000,000,000 in revenue, and less now that people got free money from the government. He is purposely trying to bankrupt us.

I remember hearing that in the Reagan days.


40 years later....not a single problem caused by the debt

 

[Ug make hammer]

Faux propaganda.

Yes. As I pointed out on page 1, the whole proposal includes revenue increases which would actually reduce the deficit.

It is just the President's Budget though. It has all the force and effect of the week-old paper you use to line a bird cage.

 

[yankintx]

Biden's budget would bankrupt America, put national security at risk

Is America serious about survival in this increasingly dangerous world? President Joe Biden’s $5.8 trillion budget says no. So does the recent $1.5 trillion earmark-filled spending bill.

www.foxnews.com

Really? That idiot wants a $5,800,000,000! We only bring in about $3,000,000,000 in revenue, and less now that people got free money from the government. He is purposely trying to bankrupt us.

If only we had not let Trump cut rich folks and Corporations taxes.

 

[Indydave]

bankrupt America?......Reagan did that way back in the way back......we've been bankrupt ever since....

apparently it doesn't mean anything.....

 

[Indydave]

Well, for those of us who have been fighting these traitors for decades - you should know that the $30+ trillion debt is entirely intentional.

The Establishment is going to collapse the economy and use the "crisis" to get rid of the Constitution.

Once the Constitution is gone, they saddle us with a top-down, authoritarian, globalist control system.

They've been working toward this goal for 100 years.

as long as there is printed word somebody somewhere will have the Constitution available........that being said it does seem like Washington has something going to crash the economy.......repubs with the idea that a bankrupted nation would be grounds for eliminating welfare and social programs and dems with the idea that a bankrupted nation would impoverish millions with the result being a demand for more welfare and social programs

 

[mrjurrs]

Is it relevant? Assets are enormous, hence why interests rates are so low.

"Every American" owes $1,500 in interest payments per year, mostly to other Americans. It's not great, but for now it's sustainable.

Of course it is relevant. Comparing one set of imaginary figures (as if we all actually have that debt) without comparing it to the imaginary assets that we will never have access to creates a false picture imo.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Of course it is relevant. Comparing one set of imaginary figures (as if we all actually have that debt) without comparing it to the imaginary assets that we will never have access to creates a false picture imo.

"Imaginary assets" like the government's taxing power in the future?

If the US was a business, then it would never go bankrupt as long as there is a tax base. That's equivalent to having revenue indefinitely, and regardless of cost cutting. The terms of repayment might have to be extended, but there would be no need to declare bankruptcy and liquidate assets like military hardware or federal lands. There is clearly a LOT of slack in future taxation so "assets" don't enter into the picture.

Banks and financial institutions make most of the loans to the Federal government, since such safe and low-interest bonds aren't attractive to individuals. They have to bundled with riskier but higher reward debt to make a saleable product. My point is that none of the lenders are accepting such low rates in expectation of getting Federal assets from a default. And so assets really are rather irrelevant: they're strongly protected by taxation power.

 

[Ug make hammer]

as long as there is printed word somebody somewhere will have the Constitution available........that being said it does seem like Washington has something going to crash the economy.......repubs with the idea that a bankrupted nation would be grounds for eliminating welfare and social programs and dems with the idea that a bankrupted nation would impoverish millions with the result being a demand for more welfare and social programs

Nice attempt to be even handed, but you can't disguise the cynical view that Democrats LIKE people living in poverty. The "plantation" theory.

It wouldn't work anyway. If the US somehow defaults on the debt AND the economy is ruined, there would be neither a sufficient tax base, nor opportunity to borrow, to fund greatly increased welfare. The gap between rich and poor would widen so far that revolution would be unavoidable, meaning at best millions of poor people slaughtered by the US military.

That only the Republican plan is workable fits rather well with the pattern of Republicans running up more debt than Democrats do. They both spend a lot but Republicans add tax cuts to that.

 

[Ug make hammer]

Feds: what would it take to get out from under our debt?
States: you mean default? It would take an Amendment!
Feds: and what would it take to get that Amendment?
People: FORTY ACRES AND A MULE!

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Only one line of the Constitution has to go, in order to dick creditors on the debt.

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 4: The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. ...

And what economic illiterates miss completely, is that inflation makes debt easier to repay.

Useless section in the constitution. Because it’s not always up to your own government whether to question your debt.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

So what? America just prints its own money. It cannot go bankrupt because it borrows from itself.

I mean, that’s the theory. There’s no reason to believe it’s true, because in actuality if the government ever actually tried to inflate the currency too fast to cover debts it would make the debt worthless and end future borrowing.

And as the I’ll advised sanctions on Russia have done, in 20 years the dollar will disappear as the reserve currency and once that happens then this game cannot go on.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Where was all this concern for the deficit when Trump was giving away tax breaks for billionaires for no ****ing reason?

more liberals who can only still complain about Trump while they guide the country down into the dirt

 

[Ug make hammer]

more liberals who can only still complain about Trump while they guide the country down into the dirt

The thread source is a piece (of shit) on FOX. It begins by complaining about the deficit but within two paragraphs admits that Biden's toy budget includes significant tax increases which would actually reduce the deficit year on year.

The only valid criticism is that Biden's budget doesn't mean anything more than any President's budget. It's advisory at best.

But why am I wasting my breath? If you had any interest in the thread subject besides unfounded attacks on "liberals" you would know all this already.

Just so you know, we liberals will still be "complaining about Trump" in the 2024 election campaign. You conservatives don't get to live down that blunder for a few years yet. You'd do us a huge favor in fact, if you were to pick him as the Republican nominee in 2024. Go on. Do it.

 

[Ug make hammer]

So what? America just prints its own money. It cannot go bankrupt because it borrows from itself.

It is entirely legal for Treasury to mint trillion dollar coins and pay off the debt with them. That would bankrupt many creditors, cause high inflation, and be generally disastrous ... but it's possible.

Well we might have to consider the Supreme Court's view. The 14th says the debt should not be "dishonored" and while it's obviously a fancy way of saying "shall be repayed" the Court might take a wider view of what is honorable and what is not. "Honorable" could be whatever the Congress swears is the most they can pay.

A more reasonable course would be to buy debt back at a fraction of its face value, as it comes due. Say 70% and then there is inflation which makes the remainder of the debt more manageable. Inflation is good for one thing, and that is marking down debts denominated in dollars.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The thread source is a piece (of shit) on FOX. It begins by complaining about the deficit but within two paragraphs admits that Biden's toy budget includes significant tax increases which would actually reduce the deficit year on year.

The only valid criticism is that Biden's budget doesn't mean anything more than any President's budget. It's advisory at best.

But why am I wasting my breath? If you had any interest in the thread subject besides unfounded attacks on "liberals" you would know all this already.

Just so you know, we liberals will still be "complaining about Trump" in the 2024 election campaign. You conservatives don't get to live down that blunder for a few years yet. You'd do us a huge favor in fact, if you were to pick him as the Republican nominee in 2024. Go on. Do it.

I don’t know why you, a Norwegian, has such a great interest in this, but maybe your media isn’t accurately reporting this, Trump literally beats Biden in head to head polls for 24 now and Kamala is even less popular. You’re making your last sentence as a dare, I don’t think you understand just how likely it is that bet will go against you.

The fact is, Trump was not really a blunder, Biden is. And the democrats are still trying to make Trump the focus of their media strategy, but all that will do is remind everyone how good things were under Trump.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It is entirely legal for Treasury to mint trillion dollar coins and pay off the debt with them.

No, it’s not. That’s a fad theory advanced by a professor, but it’s not accurate. The only way this can legally be done is with a specie coin made from platinum and the government would have to buy a trillion dollars of platinum in order to make the coin.

That would bankrupt many creditors, cause high inflation, and be generally disastrous ... but it's possible.

And it’s not realistically possible

Well we might have to consider the Supreme Court's view. The 14th says the debt should not be "dishonored" and while it's obviously a fancy way of saying "shall be repayed" the Court might take a wider view of what is honorable and what is not. "Honorable" could be whatever the Congress swears is the most they can pay.

A more reasonable course would be to buy debt back at a fraction of its face value, as it comes due. Say 70% and then there is inflation which makes the remainder of the debt more manageable. Inflation is good for one thing, and that is marking down debts denominated in dollars.

 

[rickc]

I don’t know why you, a Norwegian, has such a great interest in this, but maybe your media isn’t accurately reporting this, Trump literally beats Biden in head to head polls for 24 now and Kamala is even less popular. You’re making your last sentence as a dare, I don’t think you understand just how likely it is that bet will go against you.

The fact is, Trump was not really a blunder, Biden is. And the democrats are still trying to make Trump the focus of their media strategy, but all that will do is remind everyone how good things were under Trump.

remind everyone how good things were under Trump.

well that is certainly an example of right wing separate reality

 

[soylentgreen]

I mean, that’s the theory. There’s no reason to believe it’s true, because in actuality if the government ever actually tried to inflate the currency too fast to cover debts it would make the debt worthless and end future borrowing.

And as the I’ll advised sanctions on Russia have done, in 20 years the dollar will disappear as the reserve currency and once that happens then this game cannot go on.

A terrible situation to be in if you are a small country dependent on trade with other bigger countries. Not a concern at all if you happen to be one of the bigger countries.

There is a maxim that if you swap the words "you" for america , and "bank "for the world, would fit.

If you owe the bank one hundred dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank one hundred million dollars, the bank has a problem.

 

[soylentgreen]

It is entirely legal for Treasury to mint trillion dollar coins and pay off the debt with them. That would bankrupt many creditors, cause high inflation, and be generally disastrous ... but it's possible.

Well we might have to consider the Supreme Court's view. The 14th says the debt should not be "dishonored" and while it's obviously a fancy way of saying "shall be repayed" the Court might take a wider view of what is honorable and what is not. "Honorable" could be whatever the Congress swears is the most they can pay.

A more reasonable course would be to buy debt back at a fraction of its face value, as it comes due. Say 70% and then there is inflation which makes the remainder of the debt more manageable. Inflation is good for one thing, and that is marking down debts denominated in dollars.

Considering that countries like america, france and england have kept many an african nation in debt servitude for what's amounting to centuries now. I am not inclined to care about being more reasonable to americas debts.

https://www.tni.org/my/node/11348

Not of course that anyone can do anything about it. If the crap really hits the fan the americans will do what the chinese did and threaten to refuse to pay any debt until the debt is renegotiated.

 

[Ishm]

The left and right will continue to blame each other, but neither political party dares to cut the 'free stuff' because the American voter has become addicted to living beyond their means. The rights 'free stuff' is distributed via tax cuts and more benefits the wealthy. The lefts free stuff is distributed as grants aimed more at the poor. Same free stuff, just distributed to better fit each parties core voter base.

Where things are today, the economic ship is sinking and we have a left/right argument about who gets in the limited number of lifeboats. Instead of telling voters that they have to learn to live within their means to save the ship, the parties are touting that they each have nicer lifeboats that will fit your needs best. The problem however is mainly with the voters who have liitle interest in economic reality today if they can push the problem out to future generations. Couple that with a political system controlled by 'old guys' and no one thinks past a 4 year election window. Replace those old guys with 20 and 30 year olds who still have long lives to live, children to raise etc and maybe we could start worrying about the long term a bit more. Bottom line though is that the economic policies of both parties reflect the voters need for the instant gratification that has become ingrained in US culture..

In the 1980s I was living in a different country who were addicted to debt much like the US of today. A once in a generation govt said things had to change, and they did a massive economic reset focussed on the country living within it's means. Probably took 20 years for the economic reshaping to work, and 30 years to really see the benefits, but today they run one of the lowest national debt levels in the world, coupled with excellent economic growth. No US politician today would survive telling the voters that he/she had an economic plan to fix the future, but it requires 20 years of more frugal living for everyone. That's Americas real problem..

 

[Indydave]

Of course it is relevant. Comparing one set of imaginary figures (as if we all actually have that debt) without comparing it to the imaginary assets that we will never have access to creates a false picture imo.

it is a false picture......but it seems to work......there is no perfect anything......an imaginary reality?