SOinsanity365
19597
703
15
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro
Oct 8, 2024 1:07 AM
SOinsanity365
19597
703
15
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro
Jewdakris
What's incredible to me is how the fuck heads who are going to dramatically increase the national debt have convinced morons that the people who will slightly increase the debt are the problem.i just don't get how we got to this point in reality. How can so many people be so fucking stupid, selfish or otherwise.
mksu
It'd be cool if the fascists ever fucked off long enough to do something responsible about that (and I don't just mean some bullshit austerity).
crs619
Americas FICO scores have to be sub 500.
dasAchteck
no, honey. i'm taking a picture of the sign for this article that i'm writing. i swear. you'll see when i publish it later.
18booma
Imagine if they didn't send Israel another $20-billion to kill more kids.
[deleted]
[deleted]
bippityboppitybuttsex
The US can borrow in its own currency for near 0%; it is in widespread enough use that we could basically run the presses 24/7 for decades without affecting inflation (inflation is at 2.2% and M1 is at a record high)...
That all being said, US spending needs to be for purpose, not just to spend... we need to invest in infrastructure, in American competitiveness, in mass transit... and we can do it without worrying about debt.
YourFirstWorldProblems
Just to be clear: this is what America owes the rest of the world (including shithole African countries) to support their unsustainable lifestyles.
ExecutiveProducerWolfDyck
Only double? Awfully optimistic of them.
override367
They always say this but every time - every time - Democrats get to pass a budget, it moves the deficit downward
override367
*with the one exception of one-time disaster relief or the like
TheZommie
so, it would increase under kamala, but it would fucking SOAR OUT OF CONTROL under trump? dang, that's depressing to think about, guess we got to pick the lesser of two evils and vote kamala so it only increases a bit, thanks non-partisan article
EroticZombiePants
Our national debt rarely goes down for even a tiny period. It managed to decrease a little bit during the Clinton Administration, but the 90s were really the last time anyone has felt our economy was doing "good". Then the dot-com burst happened. Then came the wars.
RetrogradeLlama
No... it would shrink under Trump because of Republican magic dust. And if it doesn't, it's because the Democrats refused to cut Medicare and Welfare spending.
TonawandaBlue
The debit will always increase - the choice is between having the govt invest that debt into helping the majority & growing the economy - or spending & wasting it as a gift to the wealthiest people on the planet, setting it as a drain on the economy & harming the majority?
GemsAreOutrageousTrulyTrulyTrulyOutrageous
Covid relief helped me a ton during the pandemic, as it did for many other borderline poors, but it's a crying fucking shame how many rich people just got richer with it, namely through fraud. :/
bippityboppitybuttsex
Also, paying down the debt accomplishes what, exactly? What does a balanced budget accomplish?
Every dollar, in surplus, is a dollar pulled out of the economy (we literally taxed more than we needed); every dollar, in deficit, is added to the economy...
The exception is tamping down billionaires, they add nothing to society and taxing them and using those funds for public goods, is a net good.
SwagicalYololord
I mean, there are ways to decrease the debt, but it would require drastic changes in American living standards.
neithermenoryou
You don't even have to go that far. All debt is made up and could be forgiven tomorrow, for every single entity on the planet, and life would continue exactly as it has with zero changes anywhere. Oh sure, a bunch of rich people would whine and bitch that they can't use the debts anymore to get more filthy rich but quite frankly, fuck them.
90sLego
I'm gonna let you in on a little secret: nobody is going to try to reduce the deficit.
FuckmotheringxVampire
"Hell yeah! Soar like an EAGLE! USA USA USA!" -republicans if they could read
TheOnlyPtylerdactyl
"you heard it, folks! It would INCREASE under Harris! I gots no choice but to vote tramp"
Strategicgnomer
It isn't in the interest of any politician to make things better. If they did, the other side might get a little stolen credit and that would be AWFUL! So instead they just spend all their time sabotaging the incoming party so they look worse. Rinse, repeat.
khora
$35 trillions. That's like 5 years of global oil subsidies.
Conz
Well duh, they're literally funneling tax money into their own pockets, they're not even trying to hide it.
SavageDrums
Again, governmental budgeting is nothing like household budgeting. This shit is fully irrelevant to the vast majority of governmental business.
C141Clay
He would fix the hurricane.
johnvilnis
When they say soar, they mean he could add another 25%+ to the debt.
RarestXenonAlso
What a manipulative way to write that headline BBC! >.<
LittleAzie
The thing is, this is not taking into effect the taxes Harris wants to get enacted because 'Its a legislative effort that can't be counted on'. Of course they also don't say that Harris' proposals for housing credits/rebates will also take legislative effort. Basically, it is a bad study.
Rendova
Tax, spend, tax, spend---never talking about borrowing without repayment. What kicking a can down the road will get yeah.
nastypooper
“It’s gonna be yuge! USA USA!”
ArgentXero
I have a fun idea. Stop funding the military for a few years. Boom problem solved. Elect me.
CaptCrobar
Drastic but yea. Cut the budget in half. No new manufacturing. Maintenance only for a couple of years would even us out, until the next Red president fucks it up again.
Clockworkdancerobot
Rebuild towns and cities to be revenue positive, no have to loot travelers or their own citizens to fund an ever increasing police dept.
RetrogradeLlama
But cops put their lives on the line! Don't they deserve 4x the pay that soldiers stationed in war zones get?
Clockworkdancerobot
... and the overtime that often doubles if not triples their salaries.. ugh. Last I saw, NYPD has a yearly budget of $12B...
RetrogradeLlama
Yep. In most states, public officials are so terrified of the LEO's that they won't cut the overtime. It's a guaranteed benefit.
Note that Republican proposals to only pay overtime if you work more than 40 hours/week, not when you work over 8 hours per day, specifically exempt police and firefighters.
CheeseGreaterGood
I was surprised and frustrated when I discovered that my state position does that too. Premium OT pay is only if you go over 40 hours in the week. Otherwise it’s considered OT, but at the standard hourly rate.
seenunseen
News at 11, the bbc has a financial gain on a kamala presidency. Do we as americans want the british controlling us again? Trump will improve your income by reducing taxes by applying a tariff on the U.K. if what i just said sounds "weird" to you, you might just be college edgemekated
Skywatcher16
elon musk lacks the wealth required to pay me to admit the level of idiocy you just did. its not "weird" its conspiratorial bullshit
gablestout
dontrike
I'm amazed you can breathe and type that at the same time without falling over.
seenunseen
I thought it was pretty obvious sarcasm, but there's always a few that can't catch it. I nean cmon, the edumekated was the dead giveaway. Sigh, better luck next time
witless1
Tax the rich/stop corporate welfare and cut defense spending in half.
Jonesso
I have a feeling defense spending could be reduced if manufacturers wouldn't overcharge the fuck out of the military
Calicious
Honestly as a Marine, the USMC is almost entirely redundant. Giving the Navy or Army an amphibious combat division and wiping the Marine Corps out entirely would save us $50 billion each year.
Shaodyn
If you made a list of countries ranked by total annual military spending, America would be number one by a long shot. It would technically also be numbers two through ten. Our total is greater than the totals of the next nine countries COMBINED.
awkungen42
And not allow defense manufacturers to rip off the American people with astronomical costs? I think not.
pritolus
Universal healthcare would also save you a lot of federal tax money
eathotdog
Companies like uber need to go down entirely in the wake of lawsuits like the one their currently dealing with, or the corporate ladder just shits out a new scumbag ceo
RedWingedBlackbirds
eathotdog
I like the term delinquent millionaire
GemsAreOutrageousTrulyTrulyTrulyOutrageous
Hell yeah! No one likes paying taxes but when organized, fairly collected ( the 1-10% paying their fair share ), and used INTELLIGENTLY, they are a huge boon to our whole society. Including the red states who think there shouldn't be any or there should be far less regulations and therefore taxes. :P
TheDaharMaster
Citizens United and lobbyists are a cancer to our democracy.
bippityboppitybuttsex
Every dollar the US gov't spends is added to the economy; every dollar taxed is removed from economy... the higher the taxes on those who churn money (not the rich who just hoard it, but those who spend the money they earn)....
'Corporate welfare' subsidizes our food.... it is reason Americans aren't starving, because the US makes that food affordable... monies to oil companies are a mistake, not because of the subsidy, but that we shield the true costs of fossil fuels.
[deleted]
[deleted]
bippityboppitybuttsex
Yep, weird.
witless1
Supply side economics vs demand side economics. You say give money (or make them spend less) to the suppliers and they lower their prices. We know that to be untrue considering the current situation (AKA greedflation). What I say is we tax the rich and businesses and create systems to help people with that money. That way people have money to spend and it flows up to the rich who we then tax.
KingXizor
Money given to weapons manufacturers to develop better ways of turning brown kids to ash would be better spent on ensuring people here have a place to live, food to eat, and healthy bodies without selling themselves for pennies. Money spent on PEOPLE (infrastructure, health, housing, sustainability, etcetera) goes back through the economy. Money given to corporations and banks when they fuck up goes into the offshore accounts of the rich fucks that run them. Food is practically monopolized.
bippityboppitybuttsex
Of course.
Money to energy companies builds wind farms and puts solar panels on people's houses... the rule of gov't spending should be about purpose, not amount... are we spending money to benefit the people or to enrich a few?
slinkydust
Weapon manufacturing also have people. A lot of the time these are veterans that are putting their skills to use. People that write software, hardware, research, etc. and this money (and sometimes technology) also goes back into the economy. You can't just ignore the economics just because you don't agree with the allocation of money.
KingXizor
They will find other jobs. Continuously funding weapon manufacturers just so people have jobs is a ridiculous excuse.
jimmityjammity
That is true but there is no 'magic money tree'. If they spend WITHOUT taxing then they must print or borrow money (same inflation) and then normal working people get poorer. Tax should equal spending, it's just where they pull the tax from that's relevant.
[deleted]
[deleted]
jimmityjammity
I don't hate you for not understanding inflation, it's complicated. The talker does but covers the important bit near the end. If Gov is isolated from the 'system' and put money in(print) without taking out (tax), the system gets 'inflated'. While the 'economy' and businesses do well out of this deficit, normal people get fucked. I am not fiscally conservative, spending is GOOD but not at cost of inflation as benefits are never shared equally to cover the resultant inflation when not taxed.
TheMomaw
Just so we're all the same page here: We spend about the same on Medicare as we do on defense. Cutting through the profiteering nonsense in the health care industry would save us just as much money, without compromising our military capabilities in a destabilizing world.
witless1
In the same vein, of the top 10 countries when it comes to military spending we spend 2 times the amount of the next 2 countries (916B vs a total of 426B). So cutting to half is still spending more than the next 2 highest countries. It's not compromising our military ability it's bringing to a less extreme amount.
Ultratoxic
Funnily enough "cut out the middle man" is a good answer for both situations.
FlyingInABlueDream
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/
Go to Spending Categories and pick Agency instead of Category
HHS - 26% of the budget
Social Security - 22%
Treasury - 20% (interest payments and such)
FlyingInABlueDream
Defense - 12%
It's funny that the 12 percent going to Defense is the major focus for federal spending, for so many people
witless1
It's not the 12% it's comparing that spending to the rest of the world. We spend 2 times the amount of the next 2 countries (916B vs a total of 426B). So cutting to half is still spending more than the next 2 highest countries.
DevouringEarth
Given that the Pentagon routinely is unable to explain where most of the money we give them has gone, I would say we can probably cut half of our defense spending and still be fine as well.
Grimmrog
Well some pockets of rich people, as usual.
TheMomaw
Oh, big agree, there is definitely some fat that could be cut by opening up defense contracting to real competition instead of constantly farming out winner-takes-all contracts to the same 3 or 4 companies. I just wouldn't START there because the outcomes are a little more unpredictable. Versus, forcing American health care companies to charge us the same price they charge in other countries for the same products is very clear wins.
Grimmrog
I wonder, if you see how absolutely stupid and unnecessary extraexpensive the healthcare system of the US is, if thats true for military stuff too. How much unnneeded extra do companies grab without truly needing to.
scuuubasteve
As much a fucking possible.
bippityboppitybuttsex
The national debt is not what you think it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FATQ0Yf0Fhc
LincLoud
.
SecondSince
Very interesting!
OkShutItDown
Thank you for this. I really appreciate the point she makes toward the end, on the mentality of responsibly allocating our resources to avoid inflation
bippityboppitybuttsex
The purpose is what is important, not the budget... If you have something worthwhile to build (infrastructure, mass transit, schools... ) and your economy is stalled, you have an imperative (and capacity) to do it.
The problem is that govt has a limit to what it can spend money on (it is an investor in capital improvement not a conaumer)...
We have a huge amount of roads, bridges, rail, etc that need to be rebuilt... We need to create the projects and start them at the next recession
[deleted]
[deleted]
bippityboppitybuttsex
I just saw my -9 on my other MMT comment, they are a fickle bunch.
bippityboppitybuttsex
I have been into MMT since the 1980s when it was just Keynesian Economics... In times of deflationary spiral, bury money, pay people to dig it up.... In times of inflation, tax the rich.
It is really simple and people say it doesn't work (when it has worked every time it has been tried), and then they do austerity and tank the economy further.
boondoggle2025
boondoggle2025
bippityboppitybuttsex
Every argument I have heard, against MMT, goes out of its way to purposefully misunderstand it... "oh, you just want to print money forever and ever!" ... no, I really don't... there is a time for money printing (WW2, Covid, etc.) and there is a time for de-billionaire-ing our country (the late 1970s, Covid. actually, all times are great for de-billionaire-ing our country...)
In billionaire news, T-Swift gave $5M to hurricane relief... that is like someone who makes $100K giving $300.00
[deleted]
[deleted]