Why we're in debt, well part of the reason.

[Paul Markham]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tyszHg96KI

Watch it and see how screwed up our Governments are. Europeans Governments do exactly the same, the shame is the UK doesn't have programs like John Oliver to point it out.

[kkkkkk]

All these feel good policies for some will come home to roost for all, and soon.

[Paul Markham]

I'm watching this guy now, side-splitting comic.

[clickity click]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tyszHg96KI

Watch it and see how screwed up our Governments are. Europeans Governments do exactly the same, the shame is the UK doesn't have programs like John Oliver to point it out.

Not available in the UK..

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by clickity click

Not available in the UK.

I watch it on HBO and saw it last night on YT which reminded me. It's about how the US mint spends 1.7 US$ pennies to make 1 US$ penny. Spending money to make money. And the fact that no one in America wants the things.

[kane]

While it is a waste of money and pennies would likely be missed by very few people if they were simply cut out of the equation the amount spent on them makes up about .3% of our national debt.

[MiamiBoyz]

Pennies are for pussies

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by kane

While it is a waste of money and pennies would likely be missed by very few people if they were simply cut out of the equation the amount spent on them makes up about .3% of our national debt.

It's only one example of how stupid politicians are, everywhere. There are many more examples of them spending money that costs more than it adds.

The UK is planning to spend £50bn plus on a rail line that will cost a lot more to keep running. To get people to places 20-50 minutes faster. Places most don't want to go to or live.

[slapass]

Originally Posted by kane

While it is a waste of money and pennies would likely be missed by very few people if they were simply cut out of the equation the amount spent on them makes up about .3% of our national debt.

Imagine raising productivity and wiping out .3% of the national debt so easily. It boggles the mind that no one has been able to do that.

[j3rkules]

I really like the new Muppets show...

[kane]

Originally Posted by slapass

Imagine raising productivity and wiping out .3% of the national debt so easily. It boggles the mind that no one has been able to do that.

I don't disagree that it would be an easy way to save money. I think we should get rid of pennies and have thought so for a long time. I guess my point was that the title of this thread is that this is part of why we are in debt and I was just pointing out that while that is technically true, it is only microscopic portion of the debt.

[clickity click]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It's only one example of how stupid politicians are, everywhere. There are many more examples of them spending money that costs more than it adds.

The UK is planning to spend £50bn plus on a rail line that will cost a lot more to keep running. To get people to places 20-50 minutes faster. Places most don't want to go to or live.

Yeah like London.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by kane

I don't disagree that it would be an easy way to save money. I think we should get rid of pennies and have thought so for a long time. I guess my point was that the title of this thread is that this is part of why we are in debt and I was just pointing out that while that is technically true, it is only microscopic portion of the debt.

It will take a lot of those microscopic wastes to wipe out the debt. The main ones are Health and Social Security, Unemployment. Which it's tough to reduce by cutting the amounts. without seeing riots on the streets.

How many of the large spends are also operated as if money grew on trees? In the UK, the attempts to introduce IT has ended in disaster and costs billions. Because the people in charge are simply out of their depth.

[ITraffic]

,,,,


...

[shake]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I watch it on HBO and saw it last night on YT which reminded me. It's about how the US mint spends 1.7 US$ pennies to make 1 US$ penny. Spending money to make money. And the fact that no one in America wants the things.

We finally got rid of pennies in Canada. Cash transactions are rounded up or down. Cents still exist in your bank account and credit card.

[dyna mo]

1. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept of multiple use v cost. if a penny was disposed after 1 use, then yes, it costs that. but pennies are used 1000s of times before they are disposed of. + the fact that a penny costs less than a penny to manufacturer up until very very recently.

2. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept of national debt and how it is absorbed over time by economic growth and refinancing at lower and lower rates.

3. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept that it's a bad idea to get your information from a comedy show youtube video.

[kane]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It will take a lot of those microscopic wastes to wipe out the debt. The main ones are Health and Social Security, Unemployment. Which it's tough to reduce by cutting the amounts. without seeing riots on the streets.

How many of the large spends are also operated as if money grew on trees? In the UK, the attempts to introduce IT has ended in disaster and costs billions. Because the people in charge are simply out of their depth.

One of the best illustrations I have seen of the debt is a plate of food that has a big piece of chicken, a large helping of mashed potatoes and a large helping of veggies. On the side it has a small piece of parsley. It was then explained that the chicken, veggies and potatoes represent defense, social/welfare stuff including social security and medicare, and pensions/interest. The parsley represented everything else. Once shown like that it becomes pretty clear that no serious debt reduction can happen until we start to carve into those big three. We could completely get rid of everything else and still have a massive amount of debt.

[brassmonkey]

War!! this is where the bulk of the countries with the populations spend! #2 is the manufacturing of weapons and medicine.

[$money$]

The op is old and babbling

[Best-In-BC]

lol, oh Paul, welcome back...

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

1. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept of multiple use v cost. if a penny was disposed after 1 use, then yes, it costs that. but pennies are used 1000s of times before they are disposed of. + the fact that a penny costs less than a penny to manufacturer up until very very recently.

2. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept of national debt and how it is absorbed over time by economic growth and refinancing at lower and lower rates.

3. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept that it's a bad idea to get your information from a comedy show youtube video.

1 .Dyna clearly fails to grasp the concept of multiple examples of waste like this one.

2. Dyna clearly fails to grasp the concept of looking further than his nose. Bt expecting growth to always outstrip debt. Which is why Debt v GDP is going the wrong way in far too many countries.



3. Dyna clearly fails to grasp the concept. As the graph shows.

Eventually, Debt v GDP will be like the last bank crash. The debt will be so high the countries involved won't be able to borrow enough to fund their spending. Then people who aren't the ones really responsible will be left to repay the money, or do without vital services. While the rich they kept voting for, run off to a palm beach, white sands island.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by kane

One of the best illustrations I have seen of the debt is a plate of food that has a big piece of chicken, a large helping of mashed potatoes and a large helping of veggies. On the side it has a small piece of parsley. It was then explained that the chicken, veggies and potatoes represent defense, social/welfare stuff including social security and medicare, and pensions/interest. The parsley represented everything else. Once shown like that it becomes pretty clear that no serious debt reduction can happen until we start to carve into those big three. We could completely get rid of everything else and still have a massive amount of debt.

Spot on.



Health and social security are very hard to slice into without people ending up dead and rioting. Defense is an obvious one, it puts a lot of workers and soldiers on the bread line, with the laws on firearms that's a bad situation.

The other problem is money circulates, trickles up and down. By pumping money in, an economy is often worse than the actual living standards. Stop borrowing and the effect would be the same as raising taxes, less money in people's pockets.

A solution would be to tax imports to balance the effect they have on an economy. This is an example, an imported car removes half a job for an American worker, so tax it to the level it costs. Same with $20,000 worth of imported clothing. This would be applied to the trade gap between countries.

Another one is a very strict immigration policy. So no one earning too little to really contribute is allowed to have a job, home, benefits, health care, etc. And once found is put into a camp or returned to their home country. The cost would be higher prices, the upside is more jobs for the nationals of that country. We have seen the effect of open borders here in Europe.

Will these measures be enough?

Look at the West during the 50s to 70s. Before were flooded with cheap imports and cheap workers. The American Dream is all about those years. Look at the countries where sales come from, how many are major suppliers?

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

2. the op clearly fails to grasp the concept of national debt and how it is absorbed over time by economic growth and refinancing at lower and lower rates.

US debt per family: 790K
US median income : 29K

gimme a refinancing example

[redwhiteandblue]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Spot on.



Health and social security are very hard to slice into without people ending up dead and rioting. Defense is an obvious one, it puts a lot of workers and soldiers on the bread line, with the laws on firearms that's a bad situation.

The other problem is money circulates, trickles up and down. By pumping money in, an economy is often worse than the actual living standards. Stop borrowing and the effect would be the same as raising taxes, less money in people's pockets.

A solution would be to tax imports to balance the effect they have on an economy. This is an example, an imported car removes half a job for an American worker, so tax it to the level it costs. Same with $20,000 worth of imported clothing. This would be applied to the trade gap between countries.

Another one is a very strict immigration policy. So no one earning too little to really contribute is allowed to have a job, home, benefits, health care, etc. And once found is put into a camp or returned to their home country. The cost would be higher prices, the upside is more jobs for the nationals of that country. We have seen the effect of open borders here in Europe.

Will these measures be enough?

Look at the West during the 50s to 70s. Before were flooded with cheap imports and cheap workers. The American Dream is all about those years. Look at the countries where sales come from, how many are major suppliers?

Terrible thinking there Paul! But you're not alone. Try reading this all the way through, especially 1, 2, 7, 15 and 41. http://www.adamsmith.org/wp-content/...c-Nonsense.pdf

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by crucifissio

US debt per family: 790K
US median income: 29K

gimme a refinancing example

Yes, the problem is huge. The trouble is no one is even trying to stop the debt rising. Trump says he will limit imports and stop illegal migration. His problem will be getting through congress and the senate. The politicians financiers won't allow it.

redwhiteandblue, yes it's an obvious problem.

Maybe the solution is to allow buyers to keep borrowing funny money, so the sellers can keep selling. To keep people in jobs. I'm not enough of an economist to know if that will work. What I do know is without austerity countries like the UK will sink slowly. And some countries will hit a wall.

[dyna mo]

Brainiac GFY economists, ask Paul Krugman, an actual economist if the debt matters , you won't be able to understand his answer but the bottom line is it does not and history proves that. Combined with the fact you econ experts haven't even realized the vast majority of us debt is internal with foreign investment dropping for the past 12 years.

The reason I know you won't be able to grasp that is because you completely fail at even grasping how to calculate the cost of a penny that gets used 1000s of times.

Too fucking funny watching you eurotards high 5 each other over math and economics you completely fail to comprehend.

[redwhiteandblue]

Krugman talks shit.

[dyna mo]

fucking aha. krugman is a world-renown economist who studies and comprehends this shit for a living and at a level a markham can't even fathom. markham can't even comprehend that a penny gets used 1000s of times.

[pimpmaster9000]

@paul

the 19trillon debt has little to do with immigrants and imports...trump is just a house speaker at best, president does not mean shit in the USA except to start a war...it took them like 50 years just to beat the tobacco lobby LOL the US gov is so corrupt its right up there with n.korea only n.korea does not kill as many people...

@ denial mo

lets see 790K household debt, 29K yearly income = FUCKED

Even without interest, compounded interest and inevitable new debt, it would take 27 years to pay off without spending a single cent on food/shelter/life ect

or if 2 people worked in the household it would take them 13.5 years of no eating no spending a dime, no new debt and interest at 0% in fairy tale land

In reality, at a fictional 2% interest on 27 years thats like another 400K so make that 41 years of no food no spending money LOL

Its a good thing Paul Krugman gets it

[dyna mo]

only dumbfucks associate national debt to household debt. uh, krugman is the economist that states unequivocally that national debt in no way is like household debt. i'm not surprised the gfy eurotard simpletons don't get it.

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

only dumbfucks associate national debt to household debt. uh, krugman is the economist that states unequivocally that national debt in no way is like household debt. i'm not surprised the gfy eurotard simpletons don't get it.

nobody will have to pay off the national debt at all, this is why you and paul krugman kick so much ass

[dyna mo]

agreed, high 5 eurotard.