BiggieScooby Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 (edited) U.S. private sector debt is 250% of U.S. GDP. U.S. public sector debt is 100% of U.S. GDP. Why are the Tea Party and Mitt Romney crying about public sector (government) debt? Clearly the problem with our economy is the enormous private sector (individuals & businesses) debt. What is the Right's solution? According to Mitt Romney "freer markets, and ending regulations "mainly on banks", "more energy" (despite the fact we are producing more than ever before? Excuse me Mitt? Did you just suggest returning our country to the same rules and play book that lead us into this recession? You need a better solution on private sector debt. All GOP solutions mean more private sector risk and borrowing. This is at a time of record private sector debt - it makes no sense. Sometimes the Government is needed to stimulate the economy. Think more like FDR righties. Edited May 10, 2012 by BiggieScooby
fjl2nd Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 Private debt is much more of a problem. Our public debt isn't really an issue, but politicians like to make it one to scare voters. Frankly, the Federal government should be doing more spending and prevent layoffs by federal and state governments. The government has been shedding jobs over the last year. If even those numbers stayed even, the economy would look much improved. This is the only time in history that public sector employment has gone down immediately following a recession.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 its a credit bubble... it will eventually burst. it already has, but inflation will take over... just like a slinky stretched out, it will eventually contract, ie the credit markets will realize there never was that much money.
whateverdude Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 (edited) That the same logic as you stealing my car and driving it 100 MPH and then rationalizing the theft by saying I drive it 150 MPH. It's my God damn car and debt your running up not yours Edited May 10, 2012 by whateverdude
GG Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 Do you even understand your question and how asinine it is?
1billsfan Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 U.S. private sector debt is 250% of U.S. GDP. U.S. public sector debt is 100% of U.S. GDP. Why are the Tea Party and Mitt Romney crying about public sector (government) debt? Clearly the problem with our economy is the enormous private sector (individuals & businesses) debt. What is the Right's solution? According to Mitt Romney "freer markets, and ending regulations "mainly on banks", "more energy" (despite the fact we are producing more than ever before? Excuse me Mitt? Did you just suggest returning our country to the same rules and play book that lead us into this recession? You need a better solution on private sector debt. All GOP solutions mean more private sector risk and borrowing. This is at a time of record private sector debt - it makes no sense. Sometimes the Government is needed to stimulate the economy. Think more like FDR righties. That's the biggest lie that uninformed democrats and independents continue to believe.,, http://www.amazon.com/Reckless-Endangerment-Outsized-Corruption-Armageddon/dp/0805091203/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336649015&sr=1-1 "Morgenson and Rosner draw back the curtain on Fannie Mae, the mortgage-finance giant that grew, with the support of the Clinton administration, through the 1990s, becoming a major opponent of government oversight even as it was benefiting from public subsidies. They expose the role played not only by Fannie Mae executives but also by enablers at Countrywide Financial, Goldman Sachs, the Federal Reserve, HUD, Congress, the FDIC, and the biggest players on Wall Street, to show how greed, aggression, and fear led countless officials to ignore warning signs of an imminent disaster."
/dev/null Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 I forget what the actual % is off the top of my head, but government makes up about 20% of GDP That's 1/5 of the economy Your numbers are 100% Private and 250% Public, for a total of 350% debt to GDP. Why does everything come back to Tree-Fiddy? Some basic division 100/350, let's make it easier by dropping the trailing 0's. 10/35. Both are also divisible by 5, so let's knock it down to a smaller ratio of 2/7 which comes out to 28.5% So something that contributes (and I use that term loosely as all they do is take a cut and redistribute the rest) about 20% to the economy is responsible for 28% of the debt.
WorldTraveller Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 U.S. private sector debt is 250% of U.S. GDP. U.S. public sector debt is 100% of U.S. GDP. Why are the Tea Party and Mitt Romney crying about public sector (government) debt? Clearly the problem with our economy is the enormous private sector (individuals & businesses) debt. What is the Right's solution? According to Mitt Romney "freer markets, and ending regulations "mainly on banks", "more energy" (despite the fact we are producing more than ever before? Excuse me Mitt? Did you just suggest returning our country to the same rules and play book that lead us into this recession? You need a better solution on private sector debt. All GOP solutions mean more private sector risk and borrowing. This is at a time of record private sector debt - it makes no sense. Sometimes the Government is needed to stimulate the economy. Think more like FDR righties. Our public debt isn't really an issue, but politicians like to make it one to scare voters. You are woefully misinformed.
3rdnlng Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 Private debt vs. public debt? What a !@#$ing canard. Grow up and either contribute something meaningful or don't bother to post. There's a reason I didn't respond to your specific OP.
BiggieScooby Posted May 13, 2012 Author Posted May 13, 2012 Private debt vs. public debt? What a !@#$ing canard. Grow up and either contribute something meaningful or don't bother to post. There's a reason I didn't respond to your specific OP. Canard? Seriously how do you ignore the fact that private sector debt is 250% vs. the public sector debt of 100%? We are experiencing the fastest contraction of private sector debt in human history. The private sector is collapsing. My question to right wingers was how do you offset this? The economy has two sources of money; public sector & private sector. The private sector can create money by lending to businesses and individuals and the other is the government by running a deficit. What caused the huge private sector bubble was private sector to private sector lending which created a speculative boom, funded by speculation on rising asset prices. If the government sector attempts to run a surplus aka if the government sector tries to cut its spending this will be contractive to our economy. Government deficit cutting has sent massive ripple effects further hurting our economy. In 2009 the U.S. private sector debt was 301% of GDP. Right now its at roughly 250%. The recession will likely end in 5 to 10 years when private sector debt approaches 100% of GDP. There are 2 options here: do nothing and continue to sink, or put money to work to grow the economy.
/dev/null Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Canard? Seriously how do you ignore the fact that private sector debt is 250% vs. the public sector debt of 100%? We are experiencing the fastest contraction of private sector debt in human history. Gov't makes up approx 1/5 of the economy $4 of private spending to every $1 of public spending But $2.5 of private debt to $1 of public debt There are 2 options here: do nothing and continue to sink, or put money to work to grow the economy. So your solution to excess private debt is to increase public debt? In the long run we're all dead anyway
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 because private sector debt takes money from workers, public debt takes from rich people, or at least in theory it should, if you have a progressive tax system, which we dont...
/dev/null Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 because private sector debt takes money from workers, public debt takes from rich people, or at least in theory it should, if you have a progressive tax system, which we dont... Nothing like some good old fashioned class warfare eh? And on the progressiveness of our tax system: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/americans-making-over-50000-year-paid-933-percent-all-taxes-2010 I am the 93.3%
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Nothing like some good old fashioned class warfare eh? And on the progressiveness of our tax system: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/americans-making-over-50000-year-paid-933-percent-all-taxes-2010 I am the 93.3% to bad you dont count the alienation of labor, and you didnt mention the capital gains rates, which are sometimes below 10% or even zero if you count tax subsidies. but yes, generally and most of the time, people making under 250,000 and more so, around 60,000( usually jointly, ie a family or household income) a year, are paying a highter tax rate than billionaires... again, 20% of 20,000 or 40,000 or 60,000 is less in amount but more harmful and hurts more compared to 10% on 100 million. its called purchasing power...
DC Tom Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 because private sector debt takes money from workers, public debt takes from rich people, or at least in theory it should, if you have a progressive tax system, which we dont... Yeah, exactly...except, y'know, reverse those two: private sector debt takes money from the wealthy by reducing the equity of the corporations they have stakes in, whereas public debt ultimately impacts the poor more because the cost of servicing said debt reduces funds available to the programs that support them. Really, where do you get this nonsense? You manage to be exactly incorrect with every post. It's like you're actively trying to be ignorant.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 Yeah, exactly...except, y'know, reverse those two: private sector debt takes money from the wealthy by reducing the equity of the corporations they have stakes in, whereas public debt ultimately impacts the poor more because the cost of servicing said debt reduces funds available to the programs that support them. Really, where do you get this nonsense? You manage to be exactly incorrect with every post. It's like you're actively trying to be ignorant. debt creates money, and then consolidates property. so you are wrong on private debt, without debt, then there is no money. its even more comical because tons of public debt is from tax dollars going to corporations. public debt at 100%, then yes, thats leninism. we are talking about a rational social contract, education, securtity, roads, some form of welfare to protect against market forces, etc.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted May 13, 2012 Posted May 13, 2012 (edited) Andrew Fastow, circa 1998. what does enron have to do with debt creating money? how else do you come up with means to create? you cant build a factory or skyscraper yourself.... Edited May 13, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
BiggieScooby Posted May 13, 2012 Author Posted May 13, 2012 Gov't makes up approx 1/5 of the economy $4 of private spending to every $1 of public spending But $2.5 of private debt to $1 of public debt So your solution to excess private debt is to increase public debt? In the long run we're all dead anyway The idea is that govt spending can be stimulative if it is used for investment rather than speculation. Our 40 year foray into a finance and service based economy is over. I agree we're all dead if we continue on our current path.
Recommended Posts