The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-22-2013, 03:02 PM   #1
Arkie
Ring of Famer
 
Arkie's Avatar
 
Say 'what' again, I dare you

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,431
Default The Debt Limit is unlimited

It's impossible to reduce our debt to $0 under our current monetary system. I know some of you are aware of how central banking and debt based money works, but this is one of the best explanations I've seen.

Arkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-22-2013, 03:11 PM   #2
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,823
Default

Why is debt of $0 a priori a Good Thing?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 03:24 PM   #3
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,628
Default

More and more people are starting to become aware. SLOWLY.....

The reality is it's a profitable game for the owners of the feds and we are the pawns. When Obama was a senator he was dead set against raising the debt ceiling. Now that he's the president he whines on TV that it has to be done.

The reality is nobody wants it to implode on their watch. Just a matter of time but even then the party in power will just blame the one before them!

Hmm....Wish I could buy stock in the fed!
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 05:17 PM   #4
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,273

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

The Tea Party is crying for a debt fix while doing everything in their power to stall the economy. If the radical extremists on the Right were gone tomorrow and our government could come together, agree on some cuts and some stimulus spending, plus raising taxes, while putting together a long term budget, business would start getting back to work, making long term plans, and hiring people. Then, when the economy got rolling again, we could deal with our debts. It will never happen while fanatics like Cruz are more addicted to destroying Obama's presidency than they are to doing what's best for the American people.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 05:41 PM   #5
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,628
Default

It's interesting how trying to run a government with a budget has become "radical".

How far America has fallen.
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 08:54 PM   #6
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,273

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
It's interesting how trying to run a government with a budget has become "radical".

How far America has fallen.
You're not going to fix the deficit by stalling the economy. Will - Never - Happen.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 09:12 PM   #7
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,991

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
It's interesting how trying to run a government with a budget has become "radical".

How far America has fallen.
It's not radical to run a gov with a budget, just your dumbass ideas on how to do it are.
peacepipe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 11:14 PM   #8
Arkie
Ring of Famer
 
Arkie's Avatar
 
Say 'what' again, I dare you

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
You're not going to fix the deficit by stalling the economy. Will - Never - Happen.
It's mathematically impossible to fix the deficit with deficit spending. If you borrow a dollar into existence, it has to be paid back plus interest. So even if you don't spend it (no chance of that), you still have to borrow additional money to cover the interest, pay off the debt, and arrive back at square one with more debt than before.
Arkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 11:39 PM   #9
Arkie
Ring of Famer
 
Arkie's Avatar
 
Say 'what' again, I dare you

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,431
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Why is debt of $0 a priori a Good Thing?
It's better than debt of $17 trillion, but our generation didn't really have much control. The Federal Reserve and IRS were created exactly 100 years ago. That generation had more control over our fate by creating new false prosperity for the short-term. But we have control over our grandchildren's fate. They have no choice but to be saddled with the debt we pass on to them, and the policies that create it. It could reach a quadrillion in their lifetime. That's 1000 trillion. Interest rates won't be zero forever, so that will compound the problem. No pun intended.
Arkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:55 AM   #10
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,273

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkie View Post
It's mathematically impossible to fix the deficit with deficit spending. If you borrow a dollar into existence, it has to be paid back plus interest. So even if you don't spend it (no chance of that), you still have to borrow additional money to cover the interest, pay off the debt, and arrive back at square one with more debt than before.
You're missing the point. It's also mathematically impossible to pay off debt while the economy continues to backslide. If the economy is stalled, you'll keep going backwards. An improved economy means more revenue. The ridiculous tax breaks of Reagan/Bush need to be rescinded. I think it is now obvious to everybody that the radical Right Wing faction in this country puts destroying Obama ahead of getting this economy working again.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:09 AM   #11
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,828

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

All we're doing at this point is kicking the can down the road. Pay now...pay later, but we will pay.
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:09 AM   #12
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,885

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
You're missing the point. It's also mathematically impossible to pay off debt while the economy continues to backslide. If the economy is stalled, you'll keep going backwards. An improved economy means more revenue. The ridiculous tax breaks of Reagan/Bush need to be rescinded. I think it is now obvious to everybody that the radical Right Wing faction in this country puts destroying Obama ahead of getting this economy working again.
Yeah because taking money out of the private sector and giving it to our obviously super-competent and super-efficient federal government is the only answer.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:25 AM   #13
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,273

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Yeah because taking money out of the private sector and giving it to our obviously super-competent and super-efficient federal government is the only answer.
Private sector? Oh, you mean the Cayman Islands.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:30 AM   #14
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,885

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Private sector? Oh, you mean the Cayman Islands.
If it's good enough for Obama's Treasury Secretary, it's good enough for me.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:40 AM   #15
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkie View Post
It's better than debt of $17 trillion, but our generation didn't really have much control. The Federal Reserve and IRS were created exactly 100 years ago. That generation had more control over our fate by creating new false prosperity for the short-term. But we have control over our grandchildren's fate. They have no choice but to be saddled with the debt we pass on to them, and the policies that create it. It could reach a quadrillion in their lifetime. That's 1000 trillion. Interest rates won't be zero forever, so that will compound the problem. No pun intended.
What's worse? A $500 debt or a $5,000 debt?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:28 AM   #16
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Yeah because taking money out of the private sector and giving it to our obviously super-competent and super-efficient federal government is the only answer.
Seriously. The owners of the Fed love the sheep who think it's best to raise taxes. Oh let me rephrase that. The people that want higher taxes don't want to pay them. They want OTHERS to pay them.

I'm all for equitable taxes but the reality is tens of millions don't even pay them at all!
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:47 AM   #17
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
Seriously. The owners of the Fed love the sheep who think it's best to raise taxes. Oh let me rephrase that. The people that want higher taxes don't want to pay them. They want OTHERS to pay them.

I'm all for equitable taxes but the reality is tens of millions don't even pay them at all!
The owners of the Fed want low taxes and high spending, as that maximizes their profit. What sane people want is higher taxes and lower spending, which minimizes the Fed profit.

Attacking the problem from both ends over a period of years is the only sane way to deal with the problem. The thing being labeled as "radical" is the idea that we can just lop off the entire sum of the deficit (including defaulting on current debts) in one fell swoop and that that won't just cause more problems than we already have.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 10:09 AM   #18
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,885

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
The owners of the Fed want low taxes and high spending, as that maximizes their profit. What sane people want is higher taxes and lower spending, which minimizes the Fed profit.

Attacking the problem from both ends over a period of years is the only sane way to deal with the problem. The thing being labeled as "radical" is the idea that we can just lop off the entire sum of the deficit (including defaulting on current debts) in one fell swoop and that that won't just cause more problems than we already have.
And by "higher taxes" you mean "for people other than me"



We really need a flat tax. Or at least a much flatter tax. So people start to take some of our federal excesses a little more personally.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:00 AM   #19
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
And by "higher taxes" you mean "for people other than me"
Nope, as someone sitting comfortably within the 5%, I'm arguing to tax myself too. That doesn't mean, of course, that I think that the upper 1% should be paying less than half of what I do.

Quote:
We really need a flat tax. Or at least a much flatter tax. So people start to take some of our federal excesses a little more personally.
The problem is not rate. The problem is not a progressive income tax system. Even "the 47%" pay tax (FICA tax, excise taxes, etc.).

The problem is how we've structured taxes. There's no good argument for the current regressive FICA taxes. There's not good reason for a 15% LTCG rate for people who derive their income from dividends & cap gains (rather than actually producing something).

Why should the shareholders of ACME corp only pay 15% tax on their income, while the people actually doing the work get taxed as much as 40-50% (realistically after deductions 35%+ in income and FICA taxes for the high earning employees) for their contribution?

Why should a poverty level earner be paying 12.4% in SS taxes, when someone making $150k is only paying 8.7%?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:32 AM   #20
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,628
Default

So you make over 200k/year eh Fedyakin? That's what top 5% is based on some quick research I did. So are you willing to do your part and just send in "extra" money to the IRS out of the kindness of your heart? There are after all more people on government assistance than every before that need help from you.

Or do you prefer to donate your money directly to charities of your choice?

Do you think that YOUR income can be better allocated BY YOU or do you think the GOVERNMENT can do a better job with your income?
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:34 AM   #21
orinjkrush
...
 
orinjkrush's Avatar
 
Hey, no hurling on the shell, dude,

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: FrontRangeAbove8500ft
Posts: 5,161

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ben Garland
Default

the concept of "interest" means "the debt" cannot ever be mathematically "zeroed out".

the real battle is going on between the Keynesians and the Von Mises types over the importance and relevance of "debt".

irrespective of philosophical viewpoint, its all just imaginary digits on someone's excel spreadsheet.
orinjkrush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:37 AM   #22
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
So you make over 200k/year eh Fedyakin? That's what top 5% is based on some quick research I did. So are you willing to do your part and just send in "extra" money to the IRS out of the kindness of your heart? There are after all more people on government assistance than every before that need help from you.

Or do you prefer to donate your money directly to charities of your choice?
Quote:
Do you think that YOUR income can be better allocated BY YOU or do you think the GOVERNMENT can do a better job with your income?
We're talking about fixing the deficit and debt here. Do try to keep up.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:40 AM   #23
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,628
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
We're talking about fixing the deficit and debt here. Do try to keep up.


You are either part of the solution or part of the problem. It's ok. You not answering the question speaks for itself.
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:52 AM   #24
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,929

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post


You are either part of the solution or part of the problem. It's ok. You not answering the question speaks for itself.
No matter how well I manage my income, it won't help paying of the debt unless I hand over part of that income in tax.

As for the idiocy of the first part of your last comment, only a buffoon would think that was a worthwhile argument. Even if I gave 100% of my money to the IRS, wouldn't even be perceptible. Hell, even if Warren Buffet handed over 100% of his current assets, it wouldn't make a significant dent.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 12:06 PM   #25
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,885

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
The problem is how we've structured taxes. There's no good argument for the current regressive FICA taxes. There's not good reason for a 15% LTCG rate for people who derive their income from dividends & cap gains (rather than actually producing something).
I'll agree that the structure underneath the marginal rates renders them a pretty useless measurement.

I wouldn't mind seeing them pay more actual dollars than they sometimes get away with. But that kind of reform needs to be coupled with ending this:

BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 PM.


Denver Broncos