2/2 According to McCain, he's for Social Security and "paying down
the debt." When we pay down the debt, who benefits the most?
IN other words, who holds certificates to our nation's debt?
\_ The CHILDREN. Won't somebody *please* think of the CHILDREN!
\- er, i think you are misunderstanding what this means. the
alternative to paying down the debt isnt defaulting. paying down the
debt really means you will slow down the rate of issuing new debt.
you have to finance deficit spending either by borrowing [in which
case the govt competes with private industry for savings, raising the
cost of money, i.e. the itnerest rate] or the govt can print money, an
option not open to a private individual/firm, but not totally free
for the govt either, since paying back with inflated dollars is kind
of a partial defualt. quite a bit of US treasure instruments are
held by foreigners, btw. --psb
\_ I think you are misunderstanding the question. The person asked
who will benefit by the paying off of the National debt, not
what effect it would have upon any (hypothetical) future deficit
spending.
\_ #1 holder of US Treasury products is Americans. Japanese #2.
I think Chinese have recently started buying huge
amounts.
\_ Why do you think that the Gov't's lenders want to be paid
back instead of continuing to be paid interest? And remember,
this is money they already gave the Gov't. Right now I think
$200G goes to paying iterest on our debt. How much does our
military cost? --PeterM
\_ My point (admittedly unclear) about the military
is that the interest on our debt could go a long
way to paying the military budget. --PeterM
\- if you look at debt/GDP for the us, the number isnt too bad.
the problem here isnt high debt, but extrmemely low private
savings rate. --psb
\_ You want to dump the military? Which foreign language
would you prefer to learn to talk to your new leaders?
\_ Japanese! :-)
\_ right. in japan, you'd be lucky to find people to
openly express themselves in public conversation like
this.
\_ thats why I like it. And no more stupid
"gay marriages" either.
\_ If you want to live in a cultural clam shell, go
there. No reason to destroy this country when
Japan is only a plane flight away. To each his
own.
\_ No tipping! Schoolgirl panties in vending
machines! It's a utopia!
\_ And blue dots on all the pr0n.
\_ Blue Dots are Artistic, or something. --oj
\_ Pubic hair is banned. Rape is ok.
with nukes at our disposal? The age of true tactical warfare
on a large, sustained scale are long gone. Red Storm Rising
will never occur in an age of easy and cheap nuclear armament.
\_Screw the military, we have nukes, who's gonna invade us
with nukes at our disposal? The age of true tactical
warfare on a large, sustained scale are long gone. Red
Storm Rising will never occur in an age of easy and cheap
nuclear armament.
\_ You're neither funny, nor clever, nor a good troll.
\_ You're an idiot. Or this is a weak troll. Or both.
Either way, there's no point in providing a serious
reply. No military = pick your new foreign leadership.
\_ We should take all the welfare cases, issue them with
little mind control helmets, and give them all backpack
nukes. That would rewl. Also, we should get rid of all
our tanks and buy a few hundred thousand Daihatsu Grand
Moves (the really narrow minibuses that always tip over)
and put Davy Crockett XM-28 recoilless atomic cannon on
the top of them and fill them with TNT and have these
massive swarms of little stupid-looking minibuses
with bigfoot tires chewing up the countryside lobbing
rapid-fire atomic munitions at the enemy before ramming
them in a blaze of glory. We'll get rid of INS and
customs/border patrol too, and replace them with massive
300-deep belts of of B-54 SADM nuclear land mines. We
will take care of our strategic interests by building
a titanic post-hole digger and dropping massive amounts
of nuke silos in the entire midwest, side-by-side.
Problems with Iraq? Send 'em a few Minutemen IIs for
fun. China acting up? Santa's bringing a bag full
of Titans with 20MT warheads to Peking. All US-flagged
vessels will be replaced with TridentIII subs (let the
cruise-line geezers swim) and all US air carriers will
be required to replace their planes with B-70s, for
extra impressive value. Slim Pickens for president!
Nukular Fucking Weapons! We'll be invincible! -John
\_ You're an idiot. Or this is a weak troll. Or both.
Either way, there's no point in providing a serious
reply. No military = pick your new foreign leadership.
\_ John, you my hero.
\_ Oh My God John I just creamed my shorts. I wish
I wrote that. -brain
\_ Funny how I knew this was John by line 2. I got
as far as "mind control helmets".
\_ I would totally LOVE to keep and save all the money that the
social security system is taking away from me to squander
on the retirees of today.
\_ You get your turn when you're retired to screw the
children and grand children of the people who are
screwing you now.
\_ Unfortunately, I am of post-babyboom and
pre-echoboom, meaning that I get screwed
and when I try to screw, they have the
numbers to share the burden. Maybe that
means I will have a comfortable retirement
even if I spend all my money today.
\_ Me too and no we won't because the 'echo
boomers' are going to make sure there's lots
of SS money in place before they get there.
They'll outnumber the old geezers. We'll be
fine. SS isn't the kind of program that can
be changed over night and it isn't going
away any time soon.
\_ Pay down the debt = interest rates go down, bonds are less
attractive (capital is cheaper), money is distributed to more
efficient uses (ie. capital) ... Virtually every credible
economist, including Greenspan, supports paying down the
debt before taxes. The benefits of paying down the debt
assumption of 1.5% average annual growth rate, which is way conservative.
The average for the century (with Great Depression and all) is something
like twice that, not to mention current growth rates...
outway lower taxes.
\_ Too bad we do neither to any great degree.
\_ Ah, the sound of young impressionable minds soaking up libertarian
propaganda. Government debt is not like yours or mine. Most of the
lack of a name in an inherintly anonymous forum. I
government debt is owned directly or inderectly (eq via pension funds)
private individuals. So, we have a bunch of ordinary Americans repaying
another bunch of ordinary Americans. Who exacly is getting a better deal
- the lenders or the borrowers is, as usual, far from clear.
The very popular study of Social Security going broke is based on the
assumption of 1.5% average annual growth rate, which is way
conservative. The average for the century (with Great Depression and
\_ Oops, sorry I wrote that. -- ilyas
all) is something like twice that, not to mention current growth
rates...
Does the above poster imply that "Greenspan supports lower interest
rates"? (simple transitivity) The way I understand Federal Reserve's
current approach is that they see issuing government paper as primarily
an instrument of monetary policy, not fiscal policy. -muchandr
\_ Hey Muchkin, I never had a chance to ask what your political views
were. -- ilyas
\_ Then don't. Not on the motd.
\_ Hey, the man isn't stupid, he can write me.
And sign your name.
-- ilyas
\_ What's up with the obsession with signing one's name? If
they wanted to they would have in the first place, duh.
\_ Coward. -- ilyas
\_ G-duh! You're such an idiot. "Anyone who doesn't
post everything with their real name like me is a
coward!!!! -ilyas". Sheesh, you and Tom. At least
Tom is mature enough now to stop drooling over the
anon posters and dismissing them entirely merely for
lack of a name in an inherently anonymous forum. I
suspect it'll take you even longer to grow up since
you're clearly less intelligent than Tom.
\_ It's 'inherently.' And the motd isn't inherently
anything. You can choose to sign your name and
stand by your words like me, or Tom, or psb or
you could just be an anonymous bombardier whose
words don't carry any weight. -- ilyas
\_ Anonymity does not make the words any less true.
And signing one's name doesn't make the words
any more true. You're a perfect example of
the latter. You sign everything yet your words
signify nothing. Numerous anonymous people
here have provided a lot of useful and accurate
information. Anonymity has nothing to do with
the quality or value of the contribution. And
yes the motd is inherently anonymous as there
is no signing requirement or method to enforce
such a thing. The default is anonymity. If
you choose otherwise, that's nice, but not at
all relevent to anything.
\_ If they signify nothing then replying is
a waste of time. At any rate, I am of the
opinion that truly tasteful flaming has to
have a name behind it. God knows there are
lots of people I don't like, and I never
had a problem telling them this to their
face. -- ilyas
\_ I'm glad you're happy being a loutish
boor. The rest of us try to get along
and mostly shut the fuck up when we don't
like someone because telling them so won't
improve matters and often makes it worse.
And what does tasteful flaming have to
do with anything? Feeling like a topic
change?
\_ Since low private savings rate is considered a problem, what are
are some approaches to increasing the incentive for private
savings. |
http://csua.com/feed/