You may not know the whole story about it, vis a vis P&R. When many analysts thought the sequester (then the "fiscal cliff") might well push us back into recession, righties arond here said it was "another terrible Obama idea". Later, when it was clearly not that bad, and even good, as it lowered the deficit sharply, allowing government to pay down some debt for at least one quarter, suddenly it had been a rightie idea all along!
maybe reduce the deficit but I have never seen that debt clock start running backwards in my lifetime. I hear republicans saying the sequester is a disaster for the military. It's like a hot potato, just keep throwing it around until it gets so cool somebody can blame somebody else or take credit for it.You may not know the whole story about it, vis a vis P&R. When many analysts thought the sequester (then the "fiscal cliff") might well push us back into recession, righties arond here said it was "another terrible Obama idea". Later, when it was clearly not that bad, and even good, as it lowered the deficit sharply, allowing government to pay down some debt for at least one quarter, suddenly it had been a rightie idea all along!
Not sure how long you've been around, but we were paying down our debt from WWII until Reagan came along. (Much is owed to economic growth making the debt less relevant.)
Debt to GDP, what was the clock doing?Not sure how long you've been around, but we were paying down our debt from WWII until Reagan came along. (Much is owed to economic growth making the debt less relevant.)
You have to relate debt to ability to pay. If I say, "I'm in debt $1 million", how would you react? You might relate the number to your own ability to pay it, first, to judge how "big" it is. If it seems big to you, you probably next assume that my income is sufficient to pay it. Maybe you'd think it's long term debt, like a mortgage, so I'm simply in debt much like everyone else. A number without any reference to income is meaningless.
Nothing wrong with intelligent debt. But our country is not intelligent and can't predict future GDP and takes none of the risk if they are wrong so they have no business being in debt.
Not sure how long you've been around, but we were paying down our debt from WWII until Reagan came along. (Much is owed to economic growth making the debt less relevant.)
yes, I'm well aware of the routine, two wrongs make a right. We can't do the right thing because that would make one of the wrong things we did go away. So at every turn we do one more wrong thing to protect the wrong thing we did in the past. You do know if push comes to shove we still can blow all our competitors to smithereens. SAVE SIX (for pall bearers and customers.)It looks a little different when you factor in other debt.
Business, household and financial sector debt was plummeting while US debt was going up in the thirties. The overall debt burden was falling all the way until the fifties. When US gov debt peaked in 45, overall debt was still on a downward trajectory. Now all debt is parabolic.
It's not as easy as saying that we got out of it in the thirties so we can get out of it again.
This time there is a boatload more debt. And we can't leave out the fact that we were the low cost producer in the world economy in the forties. Not only low cost, but only major producer seeing as how europe was bombed to smithereens. Now we're not and we can't compete our way out of this debt.
As I read it, we've never been out of debt except for the year 1835. We've got a damn good track record for a country perpetually in debt.
oh yeah, debt is great when there is no limit.