In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2352
Online now 2178 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
This is obvious to anyone that isn't stupid.
Unfortunately you can't debate with stupid.
Nations, Institutional Investors, Pension Funds, etc., are lining up to buy US debt. It is still the safest investment in the world. So safe that people are willing to purchase bonds that pay out an interest rate that is almost below inflation.
The debt is a long term structural issue, it really isn't a big deal in the short term.
No I didn't learn that balanced budgets are a bad thing, because that is just pure stupidity. It might under perfect conditions be possible to run a deficit for a very long time, but it certainly isn't ideal.
You just called the New York Times an 'editorial for the white house'. Glenn Beck wouldn't even say that.
No you didn't. The more you borrow the more interest you pay.
Actually he has, and it is.
I think a government needs to err on the safe side so as to spend greatly to smooth out recessions. As a result, I'd want to see the debt/GDP ratio cut down significantly - not because it's smart short term econ, but to have safety net.
Why run a deficit if you don't have to?
Sounds stupid. How so?
All good stuff, but you might want to footnote what you mean when you say "balanced budgets".
Because if the govt runs a surplus then it is taking assets from the private sector and defeating its purpose. The only way for the govt to run a surplus and not harm the private sector is to run a trade surplus (which we are far from doing). Private sector public sector and foreign sector must equal zero. Since we run such a large trade deficit we must run a govt deficit. Godleys law of sectoral balance.
Economy contracts in q4 and govt reports a surplus. Coincidence? I think not. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/02/12/treasury-budget-surplus_n_2672053.html
So running a trillion dollar deficit is not taking money out of the private sector? Cut spending and cut taxes (personal and business) watch the economy explode. The government just has no place in driving the economy, because the only place it's driving it is into the ground. But I bet a bunch of you guys think Quantitative Easing is a good thing.
You do realize that about 100% of that surplus is due to people cashing in their stocks before the new taxes were set to go into affect.
You are a fucking moron.
You are ******* retarded.
BLF at least makes a little bit of sense, even if wrong, but you are just a moron.
No he isn't. The government running a surplus means less assets for the private sector? That's just stupid.
As opposed to more assets for the private sector if the government spends more than it has and ultimately leaves taxpayers on the hook for the bill.
Because what I have learned from this thread is that running a trillion dollar deficit is better than a trillion dollar surplus.
You are all going to be very surprised in a few years if our leaders continue to have the mentality of you guys.
I have a perfect understanding of your warped view of debt. You don't seem to get that I fully understand what your view of our debt situation is and today on this board is far from the first time I have heard these arguments.
They are excellent theories, but they don't change the very simple fact that ultimately money borrowed has to be paid back. And that it is possible to borrow too much.
You know we haven't always borrowed money like this, many countries still don't borrow like this, i don't know how all you morons on this board think that suddenly everything is going great because two stupid presidents and a few dumb congresses have spent too much money and now all of a sudden common sense flies out the window and borrowing money is a good thing. It's pure damn stupidity.
We are saddling our country with debt we will never be able to pay off, the Chinese are building surpluses, we will see in about 20 years who is in the better shape. It won't be us.
I would also like to point out that the Dollar is headed down the same path as the Roman Denarius. Fiat currencies always suffer the same fate and this one will be no different.
Every fiat currency in history has failed, why would this one be any different?
They don't think at all ..-
Stop advancing them credit!
No...running a trillion dollar deficit is not taking money out of the private sector. That's exactly why there is a deficit. Cutting spending will definitely harm the economy. What would you like to cut? ...medicare?...you think old poor people dying is the sign of a good economy? military?...improper defense, nobody making new equipment, others unemployed, farm subsidies?...price of milk and other basic goods shoot through the roof, .....go ahead tell me what you would like to cut and tell me what result will occur. Yes, cutting taxes would be a short term stimulus, but taxes are at historical lows and it's not about short term thinking. We've been doing this for too long. The government is a player in the economy. It's part of the system just like banks, business firms, and individuals. Each has a function. QE is probably necessary, but it wouldn't be as much if we would pick a direction and expand our fiscal policy right now. We just have to identify and real economy to build off of. It appears China's wages are increasing and their currency rising. Look for them to build off of more domestic demand. The US has had falling wages and pursuing a lower dollar. This should make it more attractive to produce goods from the US. So, if Europe could also recover, this could close the gap on our trade deficits, thus our overall deficit, and also improve our unemployment. Several other items to work out, but that appears to be the high level direction.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports