Can anyone give me an answer to an important QUESTION at the end - TopicsExpress



          

Can anyone give me an answer to an important QUESTION at the end of this short post? Ive asked others in other forums, but no solution. Few things would make me happier than one of you informing me of a real solution to a big problem I have, which you share with me. All solutions I have heard are ostensible because they ignore material facts. I did what I could in short time, but I admit this post is incomplete. I cited four sources, even though FB gives you a thumbnail graphic of only one of them. Here are my concerns which set up my QUESTION at the end of this short post. Republicans and Democrats have been running up excessive debt and deficits for 33 years, ever since we were worried in 1981 that the national debt would exceed $1 trillion--which it soon did in the early to mid 1980s. If we had known then what was coming. The national debt will be almost $20 trillion when President Obama leaves office. Both parties are responsible, as are those who voted them in, meaning me. And you. We have collectively failed. I care about the poor. Who doesnt? Everybody cares about the poor. My concerns about Obamas subsidy-oriented policies do not mean I dont care about the poor. My concerns about the costs of having attacked a country under Republican leadership that did not attack us, do not mean I dont care about human suffering and the murder of millions of Kurds. Im glad Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. Im glad Osama Bin Laden can no longer support mass killing in the USA. Im possibly glad we have food stamps and an (inefficient) welfare program for those who need it. I also have a big but(t). Im about to show it to you. Avert your eyes if you dont want to see it. BUT I am concerned about the national debt as a percentage of GDP, and I am concerned about the budget deficit. I am also concerned about deflective rhetoric claiming we should be happy that the current budget deficit is purportedly less than it would have been, had we not [insert political agenda]. The national debt as a percentage of GDP has not just been climbing toward an eclipse...it breached 100 percent of GDP in World War II before falling back down appropriately...but now it has again breached 100 percent of GDP in 2012 (!!!) in the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008, and it isnt falling back down appropriately (usgovernmentspending/federal_debt_chart.html). The budget deficit, despite modest reductions, remains unsustainable. How long can this last without a severe economic collapse, and does either major party have the clout and the will to change it? Not by present appearances (but read on for the excellence of Clinton/Bush/Reagan and the sliver of hope it might precipitate). Ever since the climb started in about 1981 (or some year depending on your view), the parties have together failed to fix this on a bi-partisan basis or any basis, EXCEPT when the debt as a percentage of GDP dropped severely from about 1994-2001 (under the collective influence of Clinton/Bush/Reagan). While I hope the Republicans and Democrats (i.e. we, although I personally am not a member of either) can reduce spending and deficit, I dont have any confidence they (we) will, based on the past 33 years, beginning with our collective worry in 81 that the debt would exceed $1 trillion, unless we can do what we did to lead up to the wonder slide that occurred 1994-2001, during which national debt as a percentage of GDP dropped significantly. Could we? Sources (including my citation here) indicate our national debt eclipsed our GDP in about 2012 and the debt is still climbing. This should ALARM you. Hope in our recent modest reductions in the budget deficit seem belied by the fact that the employment rate has been about 5% LOWER since about 2008, which even the New York Times admits to (economix.blogs.nytimes/2013/04/05/the-employment-rate/?_r=1), and that that figure is not truly recovering (bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm) (it did increase slightly from the 58.5% reported in April, 2013, to 59.2% as of October 2014 per that source, but that is a far cry from the pre-2008 62.5% we enjoyed). I am talking about the employment rate, not the unemployment statistics. The unemployment rate is misleading because it fails to take into account millions of unemployed discouraged workers who are no longer looking for work. The EMPLOYMENT RATE, meaning the Employment-population ratio (not to be confused with the civilian labor force participation rate) is the one Im talking about. The phrase balanced budget amendment is a reviled phrase. What should be more reviled should be U.S. fiscal results in the last 33 years...again except for the wonderful slide of 94-01. If such an amendment (or a law with bite but short of constitutionalization) were to include some flexibility that would allow some deficit spending but still a cap on the national debt as a percentage of GDP, perhaps we could get somewhere. Perhaps we could survive. There is hope ONLY if a fiscal reversal is in the offing. Is it? I like the idea of a balanced budget amendment with flex and continued deficit spending (to make it passable) but the debt capped as some acceptable percentage of GDP. If not, there is hope only (or mainly) for those who, on an individual basis, spend (a lot) less than they earn, and save, save, save, IMO. Be that as it may, (1) our tax burden to sustain the debt must either climb much higher, or (2) an economic collapse at the expense of a (possibly near) future generation must occur (theeconomiccollapseblog/archives/17-national-debt-statistics-which-prove-that-we-have-sold-our-children-and-grandchildren-into-perpetual-debt-slavery), or (3) we must reverse fiscal course with something drastic that the voting public does not appear to have the cojones to pass. Yes...I said cojones. We need to grow some. Something tells me option (3) is not going to happen. Option (1) would be better than option (2), and maybe future generations could all live in 600 square foot smart houses to make it all possible, and/or were headed for option (2). If a balanced budget amendment (or a law with bite) could stabilize the national debt as a percentage of GDP and cap that ratio, I could believe in avoiding option (2). Many disbelieve that we are headed for option (2) and its ramifications, but those who do, have failed (as far as I have seen) to explain how and why option (2) will be avoided. If anybody feels Im fear mongering, Ill ask your forgiveness if you can tell me why option (2) above will be avoided, and if you have a real solution to this problem in the form of a complete, un-evasive answer to the QUESTION: QUESTION: How do we cap the national debt as a reasonable percentage of GDP?
Posted on: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 18:18:25 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015