You have valid points tiny.Very true Oeb. We elect them. We get what we deserve.
I am not a Trump fan - would love to see Pence nominated.
This 2020 election feels like a re-do of 2016.
Shameful our American political parties cannot nominate better candidates.
Ultimately - blame is on us - the voters.
We elect and pay politicians to lie to us, and they know it, and do a damn good job of lying to us. Originally Posted by oeb11
The irony in my post slipped right by you. To be clear, Trump is not a genius. It was his accountants who figured out how to convert his bondholders' and banks' investment losses into tax deductions for Trump. And I do not believe defaulting on the national debt is a good idea.Defaulting on the national debt, since we can print/create any money that we need, is totally pointless.
I won't be voting for Trump or Biden. Trump is a lot like a couple of people I've had the misfortune to work with -- impetuous, overconfident, selfish narcissists who are very good at selling and very poor at delivering. And who play fast and loose with the truth. Those characteristics, related to character, should be disqualifying. Biden might have been OK for a Democrat, but Sanders and others have swung him far to the left. He's going to jack up taxes, run up the national debt even more than Trump, and I shudder to think what may happen to the oil and gas industry, which is very important to our well being here in Texas.
And it's not only that. The Democratic and Republican Parties could at least pick candidates for the most powerful position in the world from people who are on top of their game or close to it. These two are twenty years past it. Originally Posted by Tiny
Defaulting on the national debt, since we can print/create any money that we need, is totally pointless.This is something I don't understand as well as I'd like to. There are a ton of examples of other countries whose national debt got out of control and/or they printed lots of money. And they suffered greatly afterwards. The USA has been immune though, one reason given is that we have the world's reserve currency. The world's central banks keep the majority of their reserves in dollars. Foreign companies borrow money in dollars, and if a Vietnamese company is selling goods to a German company, it's likely they'll be priced in dollars.
I mean, if the government wanted to buy a trillion dollars worth of oil for the storage tanks, we could wire the money to the Saudi's, they would happily take it, and we would have the black gold.
We would just create the money and send it to them. What could be better than that?
So, when we borrow money from others and need to pay it back, just create more money! Kudos to Woodrow Wilson, even if he was a eugenics proponent - the Federal Reserve is the greatest institution ever created by our government and it is my understanding that old Woodrow is the one who helped get it done.
The only thing I don't like about it is all the people who get rich off being insiders... Originally Posted by friendly fred
This is something I don't understand as well as I'd like to. There are a ton of examples of other countries whose national debt got out of control and/or they printed lots of money. And they suffered greatly afterwards. The USA has been immune though, one reason given is that we have the world's reserve currency. The world's central banks keep the majority of their reserves in dollars. Foreign companies borrow money in dollars, and if a Vietnamese company is selling goods to a German company, it's likely they'll be priced in dollars.I think he would as well. Government debt is different from personal debt - which I avoid.
Japan is another example of a country with lots of government debt that hasn't had to bite the bullet. The reason given for the Japanese is that they owe most of their debt to themselves, not to foreigners.
Anyway it makes me nervous. I'd hate to see the USA go down the same path as Greece or Argentina or wherever. The federal national debt is around 25 trillion dollars. Subtract off 5.9 trillion in intragovernmental holdings, and you've got 19.05 trillion held by the public. Compare to 3.3 trillion per year in federal revenues. That's 6 years to pay off the national debt if you don't spend a dime on anything except that. We're closing in on the net federal debt being 100% of GDP, and foreigners hold a lot of our debt, so I'm nervous.
Btw, the person on this board who knows more about this than anyone is LustyLad, and I believe he would take your side on this. Originally Posted by Tiny
I must disagree - the bills will come due eventually.I used to think that and I'm sure it can't be a totally free ride but I just can't convince myself more taxes wouldn't be worse.
One mistake of the writers of the Constitution - they did not impose a balanced budget - since deficit spending of the federal government was not conceivable at the time. Originally Posted by oeb11
I used to think that and I'm sure it can't be a totally free ride but I just can't convince myself more taxes wouldn't be worse.Yeah, We've already got the most progressive tax system in the developed world, where the well-off pay a higher % of taxes in proportion to their income than others. Many Democrats have the mistaken assumption that the well-off can also pay for everyone's health care, a transition to a carbon free nation, a guaranteed income, etc., etc. But they can't because they don't have enough money. And if you take everything they've got you won't be able tax their incomes as much because many won't have much of an income.
The way the lazy public demands free shit we either print the money or pay more in taxes, and I pay way too much already. Originally Posted by friendly fred
Yeah, We've already got the most progressive tax system in the developed world, where the well-off pay a higher % of taxes in proportion to their income than others. Many Democrats have the mistaken assumption that the well-off can also pay for everyone's health care, a transition to a carbon free nation, a guaranteed income, etc., etc. But they can't because they don't have enough money. And if you take everything they've got you won't be able tax their incomes as much because many won't have much of an income.I wish I could more often emulate your posting style.
Given that, I see the wisdom in what you said, "The way the lazy public demands free shit we either print the money or pay more in taxes, and I pay way too much already." Originally Posted by Tiny
Yeah, We've already got the most progressive tax system in the developed world, where the well-off pay a higher % of taxes in proportion to their income than others. Many Democrats have the mistaken assumption that the well-off can also pay for everyone's health care, a transition to a carbon free nation, a guaranteed income, etc., etc. But they can't because they don't have enough money. And if you take everything they've got you won't be able tax their incomes as much because many won't have much of an income.
Given that, I see the wisdom in what you said, "The way the lazy public demands free shit we either print the money or pay more in taxes, and I pay way too much already." Originally Posted by Tiny
you were saying sparky?That's a half a story.
Revenue Slides at Some Trump Businesses, but Vegas Tower Brings Windfall
https://www.wsj.com/articles/revenue...all-1498123804
Some businesses owned by Donald Trump saw their revenue decline since his presidential campaign entered full force and he became president, but one operation enjoyed a windfall: a Las Vegas tower that opened nearly 10 years ago, a new disclosure form shows.
Mr. Trump reported receiving about $66 million from the Las Vegas condo and hotel tower bearing his name (GOD EMPEROR TRUMP) from January 2016 through April 2017. That was about $20 million more than he reported receiving from the building a year earlier. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid