Debt to GDP. It's ugly

[donttread]

What is unsecured debt to government? The government claims it is not bankrupt because they can always sell off all our land. They don't even care who owns it.

Then they should use nationally held land as collateral or sell some of it. I am a huge fan of national parks but truth be told some of them are bigger than they need to be. Remember what happened to S&P when they downgraded the government's credit rating just a little bit. They were soon investigated and I believe audited.

[donttread]

Of course this will never happen but there should be a complete audit of the government every time they want to raise anyone's taxes. If they need money to fund one of their pet projects they should first see where they can save some of our hard earned money before they piss away more of our hard earned money.

So many places the feds could save money. Can't list them all but they include ( getting rid of tax loopholes and down sizing the IRS, combining our numerous federal police agencies and simply closing some, getting out of the welfare business and transitioning that to the states, ending all enforcement of drug policy within the states, leave the grants to the states as well, let foundations fund presidential libraries, charging the parties for security cost for campaigning purposes, no federal arts emdowments. I'm sure you can all add at least one if you wish. Not having to live within a budget never ends well.

[Daily Bread]

The sky is always falling for some. Meanwhile those who benefit most in our nation pay little or nothing to it. Trump is an example, he paid way less than the average wage earner barely getting by. And yet certain media tools tell the children 'debt oh debt it so bad'. What a joke.

"The top 1 percent of Americans now take in roughly one-fourth of America’s total income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income,... the top 1 percent now controls 40 percent of the total. This is new. Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent." Joseph Stiglitz

'The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973):


http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

And yet ,you've never commented on how well the middle class in America are doing . It sounds like your failure of an attitude has relinquished you into a dark space in your parents basement . If you've got the stamina (which apparently you don't ) than this country also gives you another right - work for it and become one of those 1% that you are insanely jealous of .
The key phrase here is "work for it "and that is something that never entered your dismal realm .

[donttread]

The sky is always falling for some. Meanwhile those who benefit most in our nation pay little or nothing to it. Trump is an example, he paid way less than the average wage earner barely getting by. And yet certain media tools tell the children 'debt oh debt it so bad'. What a joke.

"The top 1 percent of Americans now take in roughly one-fourth of America’s total income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income,... the top 1 percent now controls 40 percent of the total. This is new. Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent." Joseph Stiglitz

'The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973):


http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-taxgrowth.htm

I share some of your concerns. My info says that the wealth held by the top 1% was ridiculously high (50%) or so before the 1929/crash and subsequent depression and around 30% during the 50-60's boom years. I believe that the number can get too high and has grown under the lockdowns. Obviously if the top 1% own 1% you have a stagnant communist society. But that doesn't mean that 100% or even 50% would not be disasterous. I do not think capitalism is the problem but rather the influence for sale system.
Actually the top 1% aren't even the real issue. That just means you are 1 out of 100 and since 50 of that hundred don't make enough to even pay income tax it ain't that big a deal , especially later in life. My wife and I are close now but despite our "priviledge" we did not start out that way. We must have gotten in the wrong line when prosperity was being handed out.
The real number of intersst would probably be the top .1% the 1 in a thousand.

[countryboy]

They don’t care. I have long asked myself whether the politicians, both parties, are intentionally trying to destroy this country. We know this is bad for the country and for our future but yet here we are. I don’t get it. It will give them the opportunity to call for massive tax increases though

Which actually ends up reducing revenues. The only way out of this thing is to massively grow the economy, and cut out the spending. It doesn't seem that'll ever happen.

[Peter1469]

I share some of your concerns. My info says that the wealth held by the top 1% was ridiculously high (50%) or so before the 1929/crash and subsequent depression and around 30% during the 50-60's boom years. I believe that the number can get too high and has grown under the lockdowns. Obviously if the top 1% own 1% you have a stagnant communist society. But that doesn't mean that 100% or even 50% would not be disasterous. I do not think capitalism is the problem but rather the influence for sale system.
Actually the top 1% aren't even the real issue. That just means you are 1 out of 100 and since 50 of that hundred don't make enough to even pay income tax it ain't that big a deal , especially later in life. My wife and I are close now but despite our "priviledge" we did not start out that way. We must have gotten in the wrong line when prosperity was being handed out.
The real number of intersst would probably be the top .1% the 1 in a thousand.

The amount of money in the system is not a fixed pie because of fractional reserve banking. So worrying about how much the rich have is futile. Who cares?

Look at how well the middle class is doing. Look at how well the poor are doing. The poor in the US are largely doing very well due to our social welfare programs.

I would say the middle class is in dangerous territory now with the progressive policies coming out of Washington and the Blue states.

[carolina73]

Then they should use nationally held land as collateral or sell some of it. I am a huge fan of national parks but truth be told some of them are bigger than they need to be. Remember what happened to S&P when they downgraded the government's credit rating just a little bit. They were soon investigated and I believe audited.

Agree but why do I get the feeling that it would end up in the hands of politicians at rock bottom prices. Harry Reid's swindle comes to mind.

[donttread]

The amount of money in the system is not a fixed pie because of fractional reserve banking. So worrying about how much the rich have is futile. Who cares?

Look at how well the middle class is doing. Look at how well the poor are doing. The poor in the US are largely doing very well due to our social welfare programs.

I would say the middle class is in dangerous territory now with the progressive policies coming out of Washington and the Blue states.

I believe the poie is limited to the goods and services 7 billion people can produce for 7 billuion people. Obviously a world with the 1% owning 100% would not work and niether does a world where they own just 1%.
Based upon that logic I believe there is a sweet spot and that we are not at it.

[Captdon]

I see, got it, so some sexual assault is okay, but not others, right? Depends on the letter next to their name?

That's right. Pedophilia is alone among perverts. Why would you think otherwise?

[Captdon]

They’re both pretty disgusting.

That's true but you can't compare the two. At least I can't.