6 ms·

That's one way to put it. Another way to put it is saddling future generations of Americans with debt.

chewz 7y ago
> Another way to put it is saddling future generations of Americans with debt. It would be wasteful not to borrow money at near zero rates
- romaaeterna 7y ago
  Yes and no. The borrowing can prop up counterproductive spending, such as hiring smart people for government sinecures, keeping them from being creative in the public sector, etc. Also, budget dependence on cheap debt has in the past been a very costly habit for many countries when the high interest times come along again.
- option_greek 7y ago
  Only if the generation borrowing is approximately same as the one paying it back :)
  - chewz 7y ago
    Relax - we live in MMT era ;-)
    - ianai 7y ago
      Glad I’m not alone!!
- scottlocklin 7y ago
  >It would be wasteful not to borrow money at near zero rates Someone gave me this argument recently. Mostly because she would have made a couple thousand in fees. I'd have been out tens of thousands in fees and interest. It wouldn't have done me a lick of good unless I had something amazing to invest in, which means I could have borrowed some money later. The same actually does apply to the government spending dumb ass Saudi/Japanese tribute money. If they're not investing it in something useful for the future, it's just lighting money on fire.
ianai 7y ago
When the US government has a debt there is wealth out in the non-US government above what clearing the balance sheet would allow. It’s actually a measure of the governmental contribution to social wealth. The pickle is in making the other side of the balance sheet positively affect the wealth of the nation the greatest. “Or it should be.” A surplus would be the government taking wealth in from the non-US government side. Something that sounds a lot more like governmental corruption and waste than the other option. Exactly equalling it out would make the entire economy zero sum.

> Another way to put it is saddling future generations of Americans with debt. It would be wasteful not to borrow money at near zero rates

romaaeterna 7y ago
Yes and no. The borrowing can prop up counterproductive spending, such as hiring smart people for government sinecures, keeping them from being creative in the public sector, etc. Also, budget dependence on cheap debt has in the past been a very costly habit for many countries when the high interest times come along again.
option_greek 7y ago
Only if the generation borrowing is approximately same as the one paying it back :)
- chewz 7y ago
  Relax - we live in MMT era ;-)
  - ianai 7y ago
    Glad I’m not alone!!
scottlocklin 7y ago
>It would be wasteful not to borrow money at near zero rates Someone gave me this argument recently. Mostly because she would have made a couple thousand in fees. I'd have been out tens of thousands in fees and interest. It wouldn't have done me a lick of good unless I had something amazing to invest in, which means I could have borrowed some money later. The same actually does apply to the government spending dumb ass Saudi/Japanese tribute money. If they're not investing it in something useful for the future, it's just lighting money on fire.

ianai 7y ago

When the US government has a debt there is wealth out in the non-US government above what clearing the balance sheet would allow. It’s actually a measure of the governmental contribution to social wealth. The pickle is in making the other side of the balance sheet positively affect the wealth of the nation the greatest. “Or it should be.” A surplus would be the government taking wealth in from the non-US government side. Something that sounds a lot more like governmental corruption and waste than the other option. Exactly equalling it out would make the entire economy zero sum.