5 ms·

The worst part is, what did we get for that $31 Trillion in debt and other spending? Are we any better off? Did we convert to a clean grid? Connect every city

The worst part is, what did we get for that $31 Trillion in debt and other spending? Are we any better off? Did we convert to a clean grid? Connect every city by rail? Fix every road and bridge? Fix healthcare and education? Reduce crime to a minimum? Reduce homelessness to a minimum? Did anything improve materially? Did we... do anything constructive and meaningful with that $31 Trillion?

taylodl 4y ago
The $31 trillion is the debt - the difference between federal income and federal outlays. The actual federal outlay was significantly higher. I know your last question is rhetorical but consider the work of NASA. Would you call the Mars rovers constructive and meaningful? What about the James Webb telescope? We also spend a lot of money stabilizing the agricultural market to maintain a steady food supply. Is that constructive and meaningful? What about all the medical research we fund? Is that worth it? After all that research has led to the discovery of cures for various cancers and has saved lives. It should also be duly noted that Joe Biden and the Democrat-led Congress has been able to do something that hasn't been done in over 40 years - they got an infrastructure bill passed and it was quite comprehensive. All your questions, even if rhetorical, point to why elections matter.
kaashif 4y ago
Aren't the largest parts of the federal budget Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security? I think that's money well spent.
- megaman821 4y ago
  Is it? It feels like something is broken. The government spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on health related expenses. They should be investing aggressively so that a trillion dollars in health related expense aren't needed forever. It seems totally unsustainable. The US is going to need cheaper, more effective health care to keep Medicare/Medicaid/VA Hospital programs solvent.
strawhatguy 4y ago
Nope! The national (and state) regulatory bodies also tend to get in the way of such improvements as well: they make those efforts more unlikely, even as more and more money’s spent.
MisterBastahrd 4y ago
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/natio... You can start by learning what the national debt actually is.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
apropos_g 4y ago
> Did we convert to a clean grid? Connect every city by rail? Fix every road and bridge? Fix healthcare and education? Reduce crime to a minimum? Reduce homelessness to a minimum? Did anything improve materially? Maybe the misconception is that these crises are exclusively caused by low budgets. For example, rail transport might be worse in many ways than cars. Or maybe some roads are impractical to maintain, and must be demolished. Or maybe homelessness is a symptom of inequality, and whatever its underlying cause is, large direct payments will not address it.
zmaurelius 4y ago
Unfortunately, politicians in the US lack the foresight and willpower to enact any of those changes because that would necessitate foregoing short term gains. Even if we pulled another $31 trillion out of thin air, none of these problems are getting fixed. Anything that takes longer than four years has a hugely diminished chance of getting traction and that is not going to change in the foreseeable future.
- aliqot 4y ago
  4 year cycle, 2 parties. It's by design.
  - voisin 4y ago
    And yet there’s an interstate system, collection of national parks, and space program. It can’t be by design if it hasn’t always been this broken.
cbsmith 4y ago
I wouldn't lose to much sleep over it. It's going to feel like only $25 Trillion in debt in a few years, thanks to inflation. ;-)
Digory 4y ago
Rich doctors. And relatively wealthy seniors who spent their social security going to rich doctors.
linuxftw 4y ago
They built a lot of bombs, then proceeded to sell them to friendly regimes and drop them on others. Of course, after the bombs are dropped and the regimes are replaced, the bombs are sold to the new regime. Hegemony ain't cheap.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

taylodl 4y ago

The $31 trillion is the debt - the difference between federal income and federal outlays. The actual federal outlay was significantly higher. I know your last question is rhetorical but consider the work of NASA. Would you call the Mars rovers constructive and meaningful? What about the James Webb telescope? We also spend a lot of money stabilizing the agricultural market to maintain a steady food supply. Is that constructive and meaningful? What about all the medical research we fund? Is that worth it? After all that research has led to the discovery of cures for various cancers and has saved lives. It should also be duly noted that Joe Biden and the Democrat-led Congress has been able to do something that hasn't been done in over 40 years - they got an infrastructure bill passed and it was quite comprehensive. All your questions, even if rhetorical, point to why elections matter.

kaashif 4y ago

Aren't the largest parts of the federal budget Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security? I think that's money well spent.

megaman821 4y ago
Is it? It feels like something is broken. The government spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on health related expenses. They should be investing aggressively so that a trillion dollars in health related expense aren't needed forever. It seems totally unsustainable. The US is going to need cheaper, more effective health care to keep Medicare/Medicaid/VA Hospital programs solvent.

strawhatguy 4y ago

Nope! The national (and state) regulatory bodies also tend to get in the way of such improvements as well: they make those efforts more unlikely, even as more and more money’s spent.

MisterBastahrd 4y ago

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/natio... You can start by learning what the national debt actually is.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

apropos_g 4y ago

> Did we convert to a clean grid? Connect every city by rail? Fix every road and bridge? Fix healthcare and education? Reduce crime to a minimum? Reduce homelessness to a minimum? Did anything improve materially? Maybe the misconception is that these crises are exclusively caused by low budgets. For example, rail transport might be worse in many ways than cars. Or maybe some roads are impractical to maintain, and must be demolished. Or maybe homelessness is a symptom of inequality, and whatever its underlying cause is, large direct payments will not address it.

zmaurelius 4y ago

Unfortunately, politicians in the US lack the foresight and willpower to enact any of those changes because that would necessitate foregoing short term gains. Even if we pulled another $31 trillion out of thin air, none of these problems are getting fixed. Anything that takes longer than four years has a hugely diminished chance of getting traction and that is not going to change in the foreseeable future.

aliqot 4y ago
4 year cycle, 2 parties. It's by design.
- voisin 4y ago
  And yet there’s an interstate system, collection of national parks, and space program. It can’t be by design if it hasn’t always been this broken.

cbsmith 4y ago

I wouldn't lose to much sleep over it. It's going to feel like only $25 Trillion in debt in a few years, thanks to inflation. ;-)

Digory 4y ago

Rich doctors. And relatively wealthy seniors who spent their social security going to rich doctors.

linuxftw 4y ago

They built a lot of bombs, then proceeded to sell them to friendly regimes and drop them on others. Of course, after the bombs are dropped and the regimes are replaced, the bombs are sold to the new regime. Hegemony ain't cheap.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]