Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Real Debt

Discussion in 'Legal' started by telomerase, Nov 1, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. telomerase

    telomerase Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,272
    Location:
    The bear-infested hills of Grafton NH
    http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st263/

    Let's keep this in mind whenever we feel the urge to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to "rebuild" the Middle East, the Halliburton corporation, or whatever our pet project is. We're broke.
     
  2. WonderNine

    WonderNine member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,331
    Location:
    always offline!
    No, we're way beyond being broke. Won't be long and we'll be $7 trillion dollars in debt.

    The Outstanding Public Debt as of 01 Nov 2003 at 07:36:46 PM GMT is:

    $6,856,379,556,504.69

    http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
     
  3. Fly320s

    Fly320s Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,828
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    I'll tell ya what I'm gonna do.

    I'll cover the $4.60.

    No, no thanks necessary. I'm feeling an early Christmas spirti.
     
  4. MeekandMild

    MeekandMild Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,877
    Yup, Lyndon Johnson sold us welfare hell in the 60's. Called it a hot tub. :evil:
     
  5. tyme

    tyme Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,550
    Location:
    Novalis
    Is there a figure somewhere of the total capital invested in all the worlds' markets, and the total capital invested in U.S. markets? I can guess the former is in the many trillions, but I don't know just how many trillions...

    The debt's gone up about a billion since wonder9 copied it. :(
     
  6. Chris Rhines

    Chris Rhines Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,773
    Location:
    Potomac, Maryland - Behind enemy lines!!
    Hey, if you could print your own money, borrow as much as you liked, any time you liked, and set your own repayment terms? Wouldn't you run up some major debt?

    Gov't out of the economy!

    - Chris
     
  7. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    One simple minded question:

    It the $7 trillion debt just funded liability or is it the combination of funded and unfunded liability?

    Reason I ask is I think the $7 trillion is the debt incurred when fed.gov actually borrows money to hand out. I don't think it includes future obligations have have yet come due.

    I think the total obligation is something on the order of $40 trillion.

    edit
    Just read the article. Looks like my estimate is not that far off.
     
  8. telomerase

    telomerase Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,272
    Location:
    The bear-infested hills of Grafton NH
    > I think the $7 trillion is the debt incurred when fed.gov actually borrows money to hand out. I don't think it includes future obligations have have yet come due.

    You're right (it's in the NCPA link in the first post...)
     
  9. Telperion

    Telperion Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,482
    Location:
    Oregon
    "Fire up the printing presses, boys!"

    Hey, it worked for the Weimar Republic; it must be good enough for us too!
     
  10. jsalcedo

    jsalcedo Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    3,683
    I read a theory a few years back stating it would be possible to void the
    debt. However many experts voiced concerns that it could destabilize the world economy.
     
  11. Don Galt

    Don Galt member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Messages:
    463
    We're FAR FAR more than $7 trillion in debt.

    See, the thing thats never talked about is that our money is actcually debt. Every dollar you have in your hand is a promisory note.

    What does it promise payment in, silver? gold? No. In Dollars.

    Which means that the whole financial system is a shell game built up on paper liabilities.

    If you look at the annural reports of your local federal reserve, you'll note that they have every dollar circulating in their area set as a liability, and they have a tiny amount of gold "certificates" and then a lot of treasury bonds on the assets side to balance it out.

    Now, the gold certificates do not represent real gold-- they are, just like FRNs, a promisory note from someone who sold the gold and promises to pay it back at some point.

    Our whole system is build up on promisory notes that promise to pay back in "dollars" which are themselves promisory notes. So whenever something needs to be paid, but they money isn't there, they can print more....

    They can do this forever, and have been doing it for 70 years.

    But the system seems to get by because we have a net import economy. We import more than we export, and have to pay for those exports. Which we do. In dollars. Well, the other countries keep those dollars in their central banks as a reserve currency, which undercuts their local currency a little bit, makes their exports cheaper, which makes it easier to export to the US, and keeps their economy going ok. But, that means that vast numbers of US dollars are sitting in banks in other countries doing nothing.

    Since they aren't circulating, they are not having the market effect they would on the economy.

    Imagine if the US produced 1 million new cars a year. IF you take half of them out and put them in storage elsewhere, then the value of a given car woudl be higher, than if all 1 million were on the market, all trying to be sold this very year.

    The free market affects the value of the dollar. As long as there is no major competitor for dollars, and people keep stockpiling them we can keep running the printing presses at an inflation rate of %8 a year and get away with it.

    But some things are changing. We're now inflating at %10 a year. The mainipulated consumer price index-- which most people think is "inflation" - it isn't-- is getting ignored because people are actually noticing that things really do cost more than they expet, and more than last year. They're starting to notice it in the gut, especially wit hthe sluggish economy.

    Oh, and one more thing, the Euro. The Euro is a decent currency, that is, like the dollar, backed by a fairly large economy. The euro is being considered for a reserve currency. Everybody sees the state of the US economy and the state of the dollar, and suddenly those vaults of US dollars are not looking like such a good reserve. So, supplanting a fraction of that reserve with the Euro seems wise.

    We're just on the cusp of them doing that. The euro is gaining credibility, and they are slowly adopting it.

    IF they supplant a fraction, %10, thoudh %20-%50 over time would be expected-- of the dollars with euros, the dollar plunges. We saw this this year, just with a recognition of the euro being useful the dollar plunged %20 against it... that was the echo of the crash that is about to come.

    They replace %10 of their reserves, and suddenly you have a massive number of dollars dumped onto the market all at once. That can cause a crash.

    But maybe they go super slow... in that case, you have the same crash as the dollar supply skyrockets-- but not fast enough for a panic-- and everything gets much more expensive because there are too many dollars out there.


    Either way, we're already in the wiemar republic. They cranked up the printing presses very fast... we've done it slower, but are living in the bubble created by exporting so many dollars that they didn't affect the inflation rate percieved. When they come back to roost ,they will be just like us cranking up the printing presses.... and as prices get higher we'll crank up the printing presses as well. Hell, we already are to pay for the war in Iraq.

    There's much more to all this, but don't take my word for it. Read "What has the government done with our money" by Murry Rothbard, which you can download free at www.mises.org. Or go read the Federal Reserves annual reports... they don't actually hide the fact that our money is debt backed by debt backed by a printing press.

    Its a shame dollars don't mean anything anymore... but as long as the sheeple keep trading them as if they do, the house of cards will build ever higher until gravity forces the resolution... a painful, resolution.
     
  12. HBK

    HBK member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    1,430
    Location:
    A liberal hellhole: Olympia, WA.
    If we build up our military enough, it won't matter how much we owe. :p
     
  13. telomerase

    telomerase Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,272
    Location:
    The bear-infested hills of Grafton NH
    Is that a quote from Stalin? Anyway, it does matter, because government spending comes out of your pocket whether they call it "taxes" or "inflation".
     
  14. tyme

    tyme Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,550
    Location:
    Novalis
    "I have ever been the enemy of banks, not of those discounting for cash, but of those foisting their own paper into circulation, and thus banishing our cash. My zeal against those institutions was so warm and open at the establishment of the Bank of the United States, that I was derided as a maniac by the tribe of bank-mongers, who were seeking to filch from the public their swindling and barren gains. . But the errors of that day cannot be recalled. The evils they have engendered are now upon us, and the question is how we are to get out of them ? Shall we build an altar to the old paper money of the Revolution, which ruined individuals but saved the republic, and burn on that all the bank charters, present and future, and their notes with them ? For these are to ruin both republic and individuals. This cannot be done. The mania is too strong. It has seized, by its delusions and corruptions, all the members of our governments, general, special and individual. Our circulating paper of the last year was estimated at two hundred millions of dollars." --T.J. to John Adams, Jan. 24, 1814

    "And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than. standing armies ; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." --T.J. to John Taylor, May 28, 1816

    "The bank mania is one of the most threatening of these imitations [of England by the U.S.]. It is raising up a moneyed aristocracy in our country which has already set the government at defiance, and although forced at length to yield a little on this first essay of their strength, their principles are unyielded and unyielding. These have taken deep root in the hearts of that class from which our legislators are drawn, and the sop to Cerberus from fable has become history. Their principles lay hold of the good, their pelf of the bad, and thus those whom the Constitution had placed as guards to its portals, are sophisticated or suborned from their duties. That paper money has some advantages, is admitted. But that its abuses also are inevitable, and, by breaking up the measure of value, makes a lottery of all private property, cannot be denied. Shall we ever be able to put a constitutional veto on it?" --T.J. to Josephus Stuart, May 10, 1817

    "The evils of this deluge of paper money are not to be removed, until our citizens are generally and radically instructed in their cause and consequences, and silence by their authority the interested clamors and sophistry of speculating, shaving, and banking institutions. Till then we must be content to return, quoad hoc, to the savage state, to recur to barter in the exchange of our property, for want of a stable, common measure of value, that now in use being less fixed than the beads and wampum of the Indian, and to deliver up our citizens, their property and their labor, passive victims to the swindling tricks of bankers and mountebankers." --T.J. to John Adams, March 21, 1819

    Jefferson goes into detail on banks and the economy in letters to John Eppes, June 24, 1813, and November 6, 1813, in the latter quoting Adam Smith as saying, "the commerce and industry of a country cannot be so secure when suspended on the Daedalian wings of paper money, as on the solid ground of gold and silver; and that in time of war, the insecurity is greatly increased, and great confusion possible where the circulation is for the greater part in paper."

    It's not difficult to see where Marx got some of his ideas. I'm sure neither Smith nor Jefferson could have imagined the consequences of paper money combined with two world wars and a 4-decade cold war.

    http://www.constitution.org/tj/jeff.html (mostly 13-15) or http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/mtjhtml/mtjser1.html
     
  15. w4rma

    w4rma member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    724
    Location:
    United States of America
    …per-capita numbers, to better show the debt's impact on each person:
    [​IMG]
    …we didn't carry much debt for the first 100 years of the country, then incurred massive amounts during the Civil War, World War I, World War II, and Reaganomics. Though we never actually pay off the debt, the debt per person seems to shrink by about a third as the population expands, before the country gets sucked into the next Big Thing.
    …
    http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/
     
  16. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    Lookit where that line begins to soar...

    Yessir!

    Durin' the reign of America's first socialist president.:D

    I wonder how we could ever get the giveamint back to pre-Roosevelt-the-Red's days?:confused:

    Wellsir, I reckon bankrupting that big giveamint might be worth a try;) .

    Sure to get folk's attention, anyhow:what:
     
  17. w4rma

    w4rma member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    724
    Location:
    United States of America
    Ronald Reagan.

    FDR fought WWII and also had to deal with Hoover's Great Depression, so he had an excuse, unlike Reagan. Also, Truman started paying down the WWII debt.

    As for allowing America to become more and more indebted to foreign bankers in order to try to bankrupt America. That seems like something that Osama bin Laden would hope for to weaken us economically which will in turn weaken us militarily. Research Argentina for an example.

    I suppose the government could renege on that debt. There'd be a backlash though…
     
  18. Don Galt

    Don Galt member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Messages:
    463
    The federal reserve was instituted in 1913, though it took a few years for it to have its impact. The IRS soon after.

    Between the two of them, with some external factors, they created the crash of 1929.

    Then in 1933, private ownership of gold was criminalized (going from memory on that date).

    And in 1968, Nixon reneged on the governments promise to pay gold to foriegn entities (long before domestic dollars stopped being backed by gold)

    The constitution is pretty clear on the issue, granting congress the power to coin money-- and by coin they didn't mean printing paper, they meant only money backed by actual metal.

    The great depression would have been much shorter if Roosevelt had moved the country back onto a gold standard and DONE NOTHING ELSE.

    All public works projects to try to stimulate the economy do far more damage to the economy than they do good. (Look up the Broken Window Fallacy if this doesn't immediately make sense.)
     
  19. jimpeel

    jimpeel Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,998
    Location:
    Kimball, NE
    Yep, that ol' Reagan guy just sat there all day long writin' checks.
     
  20. Don Galt

    Don Galt member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Messages:
    463
    Its worth noting that the chart only goes to 1999. Clinton did have some positive effect on the debt (well, with the help of Reagans boom economy in the late 90s.)

    But I suspect if we had the last couple years in there, it would be in the process of taking off again.

    Up another 87 Billion today!
     
  21. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    And, Reagan's spending......

    was instrumental in the downfall of the Soviet Union.:)

    All Roosevelt's policies did was empower them at the end of WWII:mad: .
     
  22. Hawkman

    Hawkman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    251
    Location:
    Atlanta
    In re the "Clinton surplus" years - there was no surplus. Federal debt continued increasing each of the years there was a "surplus".
     
  23. jimpeel

    jimpeel Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,998
    Location:
    Kimball, NE
    "Surplus" is newspeak for "overtaxation" like "gun safety" is newspeak for "gun control".
     
  24. w4rma

    w4rma member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    724
    Location:
    United States of America
    The "surplus" was to be used entirely to pay down the national debt (plus a tax cut for folks making less than half a million per year) by a Gore presidency.

    Instead, the national debt grows, the interest on the national debt grows, and more and more of the taxes we pay go to the foreign bankers who Bush is making us more and more indebted to.

    The national debt is a future tax hike, because there isn't any spending left to cut that wouldn't result in a huge political backlash. Social Security is **extremely** popular. Military spending is **extremely** popular. Medicare is **extremely** popular. Every thing else is already down to the bare bones: road maintanance, police, public education (which, also, is **extremely** popular).
     
  25. Hawkman

    Hawkman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    251
    Location:
    Atlanta
    There never was a surplus. All the excess revenue was social security tax receipts which were to go towards "shoring up social security". What nobody mentioned is that the Social Security administration is required to invest 'excess receipts' in treasury bonds (which is government debt). The politicians looked at the money the govt received from the sale of the bonds and said WOW! Surplus! Let's spend it! They just included those funds in the pool with regular income tax receipts and spent it as if it were tax revenues.

    Lying, cheating, self-serving politicians (regardless of party affiliation) will always spend every $ they get their hands on - it's called "buying votes". Gore would have done exactly the same thing. He is a politician.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page