Democratic Forum - A discussion forum for Democrats, liberals, and progressives

Prospero Blocks

Hot Searches

'American Idol'

Presidential Race

More Hot Searches

Chat Center

	The Coffee House Topic: A Peaceful Place to Chat
	The Soap Box Topic: Politics

Board Folders

	Today's Topic 76511 msgs in 11739 dscns Latest: 1:27 PM
	Obama Chronicles 21876 msgs in 4453 dscns Latest: 1:29 PM
	Wars & World A... 11968 msgs in 1048 dscns Latest: 3:23 AM
	Elections - 2010 19063 msgs in 1913 dscns Latest: Feb-2
	Still the Econ... 4910 msgs in 589 dscns Latest: 3:41 AM
	Social Issues 7078 msgs in 673 dscns Latest: 8:08 AM
	The Media 7867 msgs in 1039 dscns Latest: 2:02 AM
	Rights, States... 13617 msgs in 745 dscns Latest: 1:30 PM
	Party of NO ! 28033 msgs in 1438 dscns Latest: Feb-8
	The Sandbox . 5721 msgs in 366 dscns Latest: Feb-1
	Forum Announce... -448 msgs in -185 dscns Latest: Feb-1
	Coffee Shop 15428 msgs in 3229 dscns Latest: Feb-8

1

Payback: Debating Debt

Print Discussion

#1 of 54 Posted Nov-23 12:14 PM

From Jim1 Posts 1920 Last Dec-12
To All [Msg # 148123.1 ]

According to the New York Times, the U.S. is facing a "debt time bomb". Their own columnist, Nobel prize-winning economist, Paul Krugman, disagrees on the financial approach the country must take to face the future on benefits programs like Medicare and Social Security, set to begin.

Mr. Krugman argues that "Most economists I talk to believe that the big risk to recovery comes from the inadequacy of government efforts: the stimulus was too small, and it will fade out next year, while high unemployment is undermining both consumer and business confidence."

Many economists, including Dean Baker, agree with Paul Krugman and scoff at the Times's over-hyped debt reporting, noting that there is "no evidence presented in this article that the rise in interest rates will place the U.S. government in a situation where it will be unable to pay its bills and no one cited in this article makes such a claim."

Who do you believe?

After months of bailouts, does Wall Street have any credibility left to come to the table?

Should President Obama follow Paul Krugman's advice and be bolder in dealing with the economy?

Edited Nov-23 by Jim1

Edited Nov-23 by Barbara/Sysop

#2 of 54 Posted Nov-23 2:00 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.2 148123.1 ]

If a person had an income of $30,000/yr, a total debt of $120,000 and interest of 5,000/yr, would we be talking of a "debt bomb"? Multiply those numbers by 100 million, and you have the approximate federal situation.

Edited Nov-23 by PathO'Logic

#3 of 54 Posted Nov-23 4:34 PM

From Jim1 Posts 1920 Last Dec-12
To PathO'Logic [Msg # 148123.3 148123.2 ]

How do you feel about Angela Merkel's recent statement, "No bank should be so big it can blackmail the government." ?

#4 of 54 Posted Nov-23 5:05 PM

From Barbara/Sysop Posts 2298 Last 1:02 PM
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.4 148123.1 ]

<<Who do you believe? >>

Maybe it's more a question of who has a better solution other than what's been done thus far. It certainly doesn't seem far-fetched to believe that the U.S. is facing a "debt time bomb", and if one has to ask, you have to wonder if anyone in charge is being honest about the situation.

If people ran their finances the way the government's been doing, where would they be? Answer: Right where they are. They're in debt, facing foreclosures, and looking for some of that bailout stuff Wall Street's been getting.

>>After months of bailouts, does Wall Street have any credibility left to come to the table? <<

It wasn't bad enough that Wall Street raped investors; they were bailed out and then stuck it to us again when they convinced themselves (mistakenly rationalized) that they still deserved their greedy bonuses, while their investors scrambled for hope when the DOW crept up, and agonized when it went the other way even a little. Credible? Not in my book.

>>Should President Obama follow Paul Krugman's advice and be bolder in dealing with the economy?<<

Maybe the president and Krugman should listen to these people to get a better idea of how to handle the economy, because the U.S. is made up of real people, with real lives, and have to deal with the "real" economy:

The recession has shaken many Americans’ most fundamental beliefs about their country and their prospects for economic mobility. Only a little more than half (52%) believe that if you “work hard and play by the rules,” you can have a solid middle-class life. Meanwhile, 87% are worried about the future of the nation, 61% feel that they “did everything right and still lost,” and 65% “ can’t believe that this happened to us today in America.”

Many people blame politicians and CEOs for their troubles. Seventy-one percent feel betrayed by the government, and 70% don’t think that their leaders have dealt well with the economy. The reputation of U.S. financial institutions has taken a beating as well—76% of respondents say they’l l never trust investments the way they used to, 65% feel anger toward Wall Street, and 44% have adjusted their portfolios to reduce exposure to risk. Perhaps to avoid being blindsided again, 71% are spending more time following news about the economy, and 74% describe themselves as more politically aware than before.
- http://www.parade.com/news/2009/11/01-how-the-economic-crisis-changed-us.html

If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking. - Gen. George Patton

#5 of 54 Posted Nov-23 5:09 PM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To PathO'Logic [Msg # 148123.5 148123.2 ]

Path-->>If a person had an income of $30,000/yr, a total debt of $120,000 and interest of 5,000/yr, would we be talking of a "debt bomb"?

You mean someone who had an income of $21,000/yr, a total debt of $120,000 with a interest of $3,800/yr with a spending deficit of $14,000/yr, don't you?

#6 of 54 Posted Nov-23 5:14 PM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.6 148123.1 ]

Double down, President Obama, the Chi-Coms will pick up the slack.

#7 of 54 Posted Nov-23 7:08 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To CEMJr [Msg # 148123.7 148123.5 ]

No.

#8 of 54 Posted Nov-23 8:25 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.8 148123.3 ]

>> How do you feel about Angela Merkel's recent statement, "No bank should be so big it can blackmail the government." ? <<

Yeah, you can expand that to any company in any industry so big that it threatens the whole economy, not just banks blackmailing the gov. It's time we rethunk capitalism.

#9 of 54 Posted Nov-23 9:56 PM

From Tobster E [Wizoptress] Posts 7201 Last Feb-8
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.9 148123.1 ]

I don’t believe anything that Wall Street says. Krugman and other economists feel that once we get the economy back on track, then we can tackle the deficit.

The reason that the Great Depression went on so long was that Roosevelt listened to Wall Street and the Republicans and cut government spending too quickly, and we fell right back into Depression, a W shaped one. We could have the same thing if we don’t continue on this course. The problem is that we didn’t make the stimulus large enough. Now we need to create more jobs, and quickly.

I would like to remind people that we had deficit problems when Bill Clinton became President, and we made horrible, but necessary cuts, and then we had a surplus, which the Republicans gave to their buddies in the form of tax cuts. I hate to have to do this again.

#10 of 54 Posted Nov-23 9:59 PM

From Tobster E [Wizoptress] Posts 7201 Last Feb-8
To Jim1 [Msg # 148123.10 148123.3 ]

I think that there is a Bill in the House Banking Committee, Barney Frank’s Committee, that would break up the banks that are too big to fail, or at least regulate them. Even the GOP Critters are talking about supporting this. No bank should be too big to fail. We should have the authority to shut them down, or better still, regulate them so they don’t get into this much trouble.

#11 of 54 Posted Nov-23 10:47 PM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To PathO'Logic [Msg # 148123.11 148123.7 ]

So you don't know how bad the debt problem is, tsk, tsk.

#12 of 54 Posted Nov-23 10:49 PM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To Tobster E [Wizoptress] [Msg # 148123.12 148123.9 ]

Still believing in the historical lie that President Clinton got the deficit falling and was not an impediment to deficit reduction.

#13 of 54 Posted Nov-23 11:02 PM

From Tobster E [Wizoptress] Posts 7201 Last Feb-8
To CEMJr [Msg # 148123.13 148123.12 ]

You are kidding, aren’t you Carl. Even you know we were paying down the debt, but then you live in your own reality.

#14 of 54 Posted Nov-23 11:40 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To CEMJr [Msg # 148123.14 148123.11 ]

>> So you don't know how bad the debt problem is, tsk, tsk. <<

So you think Shrub's ill-advised tax cuts are permanent, Shrub's wars will continue forever, Shrub's economic recession will continue each year, Shrub's $700billion bank bailout will happen every year, and Shub's bailout of Fannie and Freddie will happen each year forever? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

#15 of 54 Posted Nov-24 12:26 AM

From Dave Posts 2799 Last Feb-8
To All [Msg # 148123.15 148123.1 ]

Payback: Debating Debt

Tick tick tick tick hope you brought an airbag for the crash laughing the total is over ten trillion already for the nation. But we can afford a few more trillion cant we, if our great grand kids pay 50% tax it might go away in 100 years or so.

Gonna be a nice going outta business sale and we can play burn baby burn when its all over, can I sell California to China?

#16 of 54 Posted Nov-24 3:33 AM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To Tobster E [Wizoptress] [Msg # 148123.16 148123.13 ]

Toby-->>Even you know we were paying down the debt, but then you live in your own reality.

No, the reality of the Bureau of Public Debt.

01/20/1993 4,188,092,107,183.60
01/20/1994 4,500,676,535,249.79
01/20/1995 4,796,537,934,595.60
01/19/1996 4,988,397,941,589.45
01/17/1997 5,309,774,506,681.99
01/20/1998 5,495,525,658,807.45
01/20/1999 5,623,807,213,463.02
01/20/2000 5,706,174,969,873.86
01/19/2001 5,727,776,738,304.64

#17 of 54 Posted Nov-24 3:39 AM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To PathO'Logic [Msg # 148123.17 148123.14 ]

It is only a single month but the deficit for October FY10 was $20 billion worse than the deficit for October FY09, has the Obama administration initiated a bailout?

#18 of 54 Posted Nov-24 12:35 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To CEMJr [Msg # 148123.18 148123.17 ]

>> It is only a single month but the deficit for October FY10 was $20 billion worse than the deficit for October FY09, has the Obama administration initiated a bailout? <<

Oh really now? Previously you used the debt change to define a deficit. Here are the actual debt numbers from the Treasury:

               Public Debt            Intergov Holdings           Total debt
30-Sep-08   5,808,691,665,403.71    4,216,033,231,508.78      10,024,724,896,912.40
31-Oct-08   6,302,793,747,598.97    4,271,300,715,369.26      10,574,094,462,968.20
Increase      494,102,082,195.26       55,267,483,860.48         549,369,566,055.80

30-Sep-09   7,551,861,558,736.77    4,357,967,444,774.98      11,909,829,003,511.70
31-Oct-09   7,487,886,930,552.47    4,405,204,097,808.54      11,893,091,028,361.00
Increase      -63,974,628,184.30     47,236,653,033.56         -16,737,975,150.70

But like you say, that's only one month.

#19 of 54 Posted Nov-24 2:01 PM

From CEMJr Posts 1340 Last 2:26 PM
To PathO'Logic [Msg # 148123.19 148123.18 ]

Path-->>Previously you used the debt change to define a deficit.

Nope.

The MTS posts an October 2008 deficit of $155,531 million and an October 2009 deficit of $176,364 million.

#20 of 54 Posted Nov-24 3:30 PM

From PathO'Logic Posts 12602 Last 12:54 PM
To CEMJr [Msg # 148123.20 148123.19 ]

>> Path-->>Previously you used the debt change to define a deficit.

Nope. <<

Oh good! I'm very pleased you're now denying you lied in prior discussions when you used debt differences to show deficits. Lies on top of lies. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

>> The MTS posts an October 2008 deficit of $155,531 million and an October 2009 deficit of $176,364 million. <<

I think you mean FY 2009 and FY 2010. Originally they reported October 2009 had a deficit of $237,177 million. See here.

But like you say, monthly numbers are meaningless.

Print Discussion

Payback: Debating Debt

1

Adjust text size:

Interest level:

Sponsored Links of the Day

•

Are You Safe to Drive?

Find an approved, inexpensive breathalyzer testing device to learn about blood alcohol levels and to better know your limit. Get a Tester Today
http://search.compuserve.com

•

Looking for Love?

Match.com...The best way to meet local singles. Start your search now!
http://www.match.com

•

Get A Flat Screen

Are you still squinting with a dim, FuZZY computer monitor? Get a crisp new flat panel that saves space and energy. Upgrade your Computer!
http://search.compuserve.com

The Democratic Forum

Welcome, Guest

• Post a message

• New messages to you

Find messages


Advanced Search

Prospero Blocks

	Web Offers • Find: Criminal Record Check
• Astrology Chart
• Hybrid Cars
• 6 Figure Jobs
• Social Security Numbers
• Death Records

Special Offers
Show me more info on:

Finding People

• Find a Date

• White Pages

• Reverse Lookup

• Cell Phone Numbers

• Unlisted Numbers

• E-mail Addresses

• Background Checks

• People Finder

• Fine Old Friends

• Family Tree

Cool Clicks!

• Unclaimed Cash

• Free Cell Phones

• Energy Boost

• Party Planning

• Photo Sharing

• Work From Home

• Video Games

• BloggingStocks

• Horoscope Updates

• Adult (18 & Over)

© 2009 CompuServe Interactive Services, Inc. All rights reserved.

Legal Notices | Privacy Policy