5 ms·

> Our national debt is skyrocketing to higher levels than World War 2 (as percent of GDP). Funny, that you say that. What happened after WW2 with taxes and the

by yokaze 6y ago

> Our national debt is skyrocketing to higher levels than World War 2 (as percent of GDP). Funny, that you say that. What happened after WW2 with taxes and the economy?

icelancer 6y ago
We subjugated multiple world powers and their economies. The reverse is potentially happening to us this time around.
chrisco255 6y ago
It's not 1945. First of all, we had Bretton Woods agreement in 1944 establishing dollar as world reserve currency backed by gold. That of course, went away by 1971 and modern dollar is fiat and susceptible to poor monetary policy. We had 50% of world economy coming out of WWII as we were the only major country not buried in ashes. We had a birth boom (the boomers now retiring). We had tons of assets to still borrow against and we weren't overlevereged on everything from housing to education to corporate assets, etc. We had tons of technological and economical expansion left to experience, like interstate highways, jet travel, spread of electricity, computing, world trade, integration of women in work force, etc. It's 2020. We don't have the deck stacked in our favor like we did in 1945. We've got massive obligations and a populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts, loan forgiveness, UBI, etc which are all untenable given that our existing social programs are already approaching insolvency. The government is on pace to spend half or more of GDP this year alone. Its not clear this spending will actually stimulate economy in the same way building interstate highways, airports, nuclear power, etc. in the 50s did.
- rswail 6y ago
  > It's 2020. We don't have the deck stacked in our favor like we did in 1945. We've got massive obligations and a populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts, loan forgiveness, UBI, etc which are all untenable given that our existing social programs are already approaching insolvency. US Social Security is effectively funded by US Treasuries. There is no "locked box" that somehow the US government "saves" contributions into. The national debt is debt generated now to be paid in the future, perhaps. The question about what that borrowing is spent on now is the question. Right now, spending it on social programs will aid the individuals that otherwise would be in dire poverty. Spending it on infrastructure (and the US infrastructure is woeful) is useful investment that will generate returns in the future. So the answer is to do both.
- me_me_me 6y ago
  I agree with your points, except of phrasing of one thing. >populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts Its corporations that setup that system and those are sole beneficiary of the system. Now days you cannot default on student debt even if you are working in completely different area. Corpos eat up all profits in times of prosperity, and in times of crisis all they do is cry for bailout money. Which they will promptly get, award the ceo for their cunning skills and move on. That is the problem, the business model of too big to fail. That is straight out rent seeking. And that is the problem. Bloated 'too big to fails' copros are holding nations as hostages. Allowing them to act like they are 'too big to fails'. > Its not clear this spending will actually stimulate economy in the same way building interstate highways, airports, nuclear power, etc. in the 50s did. This is another clear example of current insanity. Building infrastructure was the solution, it worked. It gave money to the bottom guy, who spend it locally allowing small business to stay afloat further propping up confidence in spending. But now only solution is to shower fire with money in hopes that eventually it will die down.

by yokaze 6y ago

> Our national debt is skyrocketing to higher levels than World War 2 (as percent of GDP). Funny, that you say that. What happened after WW2 with taxes and the economy?

icelancer 6y ago

We subjugated multiple world powers and their economies. The reverse is potentially happening to us this time around.

chrisco255 6y ago

It's not 1945. First of all, we had Bretton Woods agreement in 1944 establishing dollar as world reserve currency backed by gold. That of course, went away by 1971 and modern dollar is fiat and susceptible to poor monetary policy. We had 50% of world economy coming out of WWII as we were the only major country not buried in ashes. We had a birth boom (the boomers now retiring). We had tons of assets to still borrow against and we weren't overlevereged on everything from housing to education to corporate assets, etc. We had tons of technological and economical expansion left to experience, like interstate highways, jet travel, spread of electricity, computing, world trade, integration of women in work force, etc. It's 2020. We don't have the deck stacked in our favor like we did in 1945. We've got massive obligations and a populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts, loan forgiveness, UBI, etc which are all untenable given that our existing social programs are already approaching insolvency. The government is on pace to spend half or more of GDP this year alone. Its not clear this spending will actually stimulate economy in the same way building interstate highways, airports, nuclear power, etc. in the 50s did.

rswail 6y ago
> It's 2020. We don't have the deck stacked in our favor like we did in 1945. We've got massive obligations and a populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts, loan forgiveness, UBI, etc which are all untenable given that our existing social programs are already approaching insolvency. US Social Security is effectively funded by US Treasuries. There is no "locked box" that somehow the US government "saves" contributions into. The national debt is debt generated now to be paid in the future, perhaps. The question about what that borrowing is spent on now is the question. Right now, spending it on social programs will aid the individuals that otherwise would be in dire poverty. Spending it on infrastructure (and the US infrastructure is woeful) is useful investment that will generate returns in the future. So the answer is to do both.
me_me_me 6y ago
I agree with your points, except of phrasing of one thing. >populace that's becoming increasingly demanding of bailouts Its corporations that setup that system and those are sole beneficiary of the system. Now days you cannot default on student debt even if you are working in completely different area. Corpos eat up all profits in times of prosperity, and in times of crisis all they do is cry for bailout money. Which they will promptly get, award the ceo for their cunning skills and move on. That is the problem, the business model of too big to fail. That is straight out rent seeking. And that is the problem. Bloated 'too big to fails' copros are holding nations as hostages. Allowing them to act like they are 'too big to fails'. > Its not clear this spending will actually stimulate economy in the same way building interstate highways, airports, nuclear power, etc. in the 50s did. This is another clear example of current insanity. Building infrastructure was the solution, it worked. It gave money to the bottom guy, who spend it locally allowing small business to stay afloat further propping up confidence in spending. But now only solution is to shower fire with money in hopes that eventually it will die down.