Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

fred.stlouisfed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 233 posts

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#121

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

hvb2 wrote: post #116
citrin_ru wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a difficult tradeoff. By taxing more and more it's easy to send the economy into the death spiral so to grow the revenue without killing the economy you need economic growth. Cutting taxes will not give the growth aromatically but carefully designed tax system with low taxes where it helps should be a part of the strategy. In practice though tax cuts usually make rich richer without helping the economy to grow (…

> In practice though tax cuts usually make rich richer without helping the economy to grow (because of lobbying/corruption). This is being generous. It's much simpler. The poor don't pay any federal taxes at all so you can't give them a tax cut because they don't pay any. You can give them a credit at best. Edit: Some data > Another 60.3 million returns showed AGIs of less than $30,000. The average effective tax rate…

37% of personal returns below the standard deduction is way more than I would have expected.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#122

Post by dahart »

ericmay wrote: post #74
SoftTalker wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True that the government spends a lot on stuff that it shouldn't, but these examples don't make much of a case. Single-digit millions are not even pocket change here.

But they're still wastes of money, and based on the one-line description provided by the OP, they are rather absurd. A few others I can think of: Government insurance/funding for homes destroyed by natural disasters - why am I bailing out Florida homeowners when their home is destroyed by a hurricane? At best you get the first one free and then you're on your own after that. Billions for highway construction that is…

The broad point above by @bilsbie is wrong. Fake made up items completely undermine the point’s credibility, and science spending in the U.S. provides a return on investment, it’s not losing money. That is pure political propaganda and not truth. Your new items have a touch more validity than top comment, but you’re making vast assumptions and stating opinions not shared by all, and not accounting for the economic costs of the alternatives you’re suggesting.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#123

Post by SlightlyLeftPad »

win311fwg wrote: post #114
thenewnewguy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be clear and not do this both sides thing - by "they" we mean Republicans. You may not agree with their policies or what they want to spend money on, but Democrats (at least in aggregate) live in the real world where they acknowledge for the government to spend money they will have to raise taxes. Republicans are the only party that in the 21st century acts as though we can simultaneously cut taxes and increase…

There are two ways to tax the people: By destroying money or by creating money. Republicans may generally prefer creating money over destroying money, but that doesn't mean they aren't applying taxation. "Tax cuts" in normal speak just means a reduction in how much money is being destroyed. It does not refer to a reduction in your tax burden.

I’m not an economist but when trillions of dollars are created doesn’t that create an illusion of sorts of economic growth (revenue growth) in the form of inflation while also having the effect of making the general population poorer by reducing their buying power?

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#124

Post by marcusverus »

It's hard to imagine a political solution to this problem. Both parties are playing chicken, each daring the other to fall on their sword for the good of the country, with neither willing to commit political suicide. Republicans don't have the stomach for the (unpopular) spending cuts that would be required to reduce the deficit, and of course they don't want to raise taxes. They reasonably fear that, even if they gutted the core programs to balance the budget, the next Democrat administration (whose election would be essentially guaranteed by massive cuts) would turn around and use the savings to fund new and exciting ways to buy votes. On the flip side, Democrats shriek in horror at the slightest spending cuts and even advocate for massive increases in spending ("Medicare for all" alone would cost another $1.5 Trillion per year) yet they are afraid to acknowledge, let alone levy, the (unpopular) broad-based taxes required to cover the current deficit, let alone pay for new programs.

It is the ultimate tragedy of the commons.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#125

Post by hirako2000 »

bbayles wrote: post #76
hirako2000 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the doesn't come due. So long as you can cough up the interests.

There are short term and long term bonds.

Effectively the debt does not mature, as bonds get refinanced.

The problem is if nobody wants to buy new bonds, of course.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#126

Post by 8note »

chasd00 wrote: post #70
elteto wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You made a tiny mistake, you forgot the $800 billion for the military!

> you forgot the $800 billion for the military! I agree but i wouldn't be that upset if that money was spent on soldier's pay and buying things or R/D from US companies built in the United States while employing US citizens. To me, that's a decent tax/spend jobs program. Now, military money flowing overseas and propping up some other economy? There could be valid reasons but that deserves to go under a microscope.

youd be pleasently surprised to find out that same as most aid the US gives out, military aid is mostly in the form of cheques from which to buy US equipment and materiel

the people who came up with these spends thought hard about what to do and how

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#127

Post by rayiner »

juujian wrote: post #3

Upsetting how we are reaching these lows while the administration is accusing everyone else of wasting taxpayer money except for themselves. At least under previous administrations you would get something for your money, like science funding and healthcare for the needy, not just bombing runs and posturing.

I don't want to waste money bombing Iran either, but the total cost of the operation has been $37.5 billion. Meanwhile, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security each grew around $100 billion in the last year.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#128

Post by 8note »

ericmay wrote: post #74
SoftTalker wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True that the government spends a lot on stuff that it shouldn't, but these examples don't make much of a case. Single-digit millions are not even pocket change here.

But they're still wastes of money, and based on the one-line description provided by the OP, they are rather absurd. A few others I can think of: Government insurance/funding for homes destroyed by natural disasters - why am I bailing out Florida homeowners when their home is destroyed by a hurricane? At best you get the first one free and then you're on your own after that. Billions for highway construction that is…

I think it would be more wasteful overall to not give that bailout to florida home owners. A walking migrant crisis and maintaining the refugee camps for impovrished floridians after a hurricane sounds extremely expensive for a long time.

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#129

Post by hvb2 »

ericmay wrote: post #113
hvb2 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny you go within a single paragraph from > you have no expertise or authority to make claims as to whether we're spending the right amount of money To > Maybe the US is actually spending too little, and other countries are spending proportionally much less on vaporware? But more on topic, the real question is if this is spending that is worth going into debt for. No family anywhere in the world can sustain a…

> It's funny you go within a single paragraph from You made a general, pedestrian claim about spending, I questioned your claim based on what you wrote. That's all. I wouldn't read in to it more than that. > But more on topic, the real question is if this is spending that is worth going into debt for. No family anywhere in the world can sustain a long period of overspending relative to income. Sure but then we can ju…

> You made a general, pedestrian claim about spending

I didn't do anything, that wasn't me.

> You're not making a serious claim that we're overspending.

This is the thread about debt to GDP ratio hitting 123%. I don't claim anything, but if this isn't overspending then I think we agree to disagree.

> Not really. Most US debt is owed to Americans, and in the circumstances in which we're worried about some other country amassing so much debt that they can leverage us, well, it's a good thing we bought all those ships, planes, and tanks and whatnot so we can fix the issue with kinetic force.

According to [1], 23.5% is owned by foreign investors. That's a minority of the total, but you don't need a majority to cause a big problem because trust is all that matters (see 2008).

You want to solve that with weapons?? That'll only make everyone drop the dollar, as simple as that.

> But I'm certainly interested in your view here.

The US military is there in all of those countries for influence, more so than for actual defense. The US can defend every NATO country simply by reaffirming article 5, you don't have to be present.

Not even Russia would attempt an attack, they've been in a war of attrition for years now with a non NATO country with no end in sight for limited gains in territory.

They've done this for the past 70 years, starting from 1945. Whether this is something the US has benefitted from can be debated, I think they certainly have.

The Russia vs Ukraine war and the Iran conflict show that super powers can try to use their military power but 'winning' is hard. No matter how superior you are based on the numbers. Iran isn't winning on the battlefield, their most potent weapon is economic, that has turned out to be more powerful than all their weapons combined.

1: https://www.us-debt-clock.com/blog/who-owns-us-debt-breakdow...

Re: U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio reaches 123%

#130

Post by rayiner »

notfromhere wrote: post #14
joinjune wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both can be true. The previous administration bailed out the unfunded pension funds of cities and state employees when they did Covid-19 bailouts despite it having nothing to do with Covid-19 and without requiring these local governments to properly fund these pensions moving forward. They bailed these pension programs out many times more than their financial support for restaurants they forced closed. Basically, Ame…

The problem is that half the political system thinks you can cut taxes and grow revenues. Which is an intentional strategy to repeal social programs that they’d never get the votes to do so via legislation

> The problem is that half the political system thinks you can cut taxes and grow revenues.

And the other half thinks you can pay for a European-style welfare state without European-style middle class taxes. Americans are Disney adults.

Post reply on HN