COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

The Federal Deficit.

JohnnySavage said:
46gDD.gif
Click to expand...
"It was Colonel Mustard with the candlestick!"

Meanwhile, won't a huge deficit drive up interest rates and inflation so those extra few dollars USA workers receive won't be worth much? And if USA defaults on its debt, will the debt-holders repossess?
 
BeeZeBody said:
tumblr_nk1y5s5O2R1t102z2o1_1280.jpg
Click to expand...

WOW. Could someone please get Lady Funkenblack in here to analysis that? I'm really needing some expert clarifying help with trying to deal with the seemingly endless number of possible implications/inferences that shot instantly raises on this socialist/progressive/Democrat-slanted porn site. And please tell me you haven't posted a picture of the naturally submissive BJ, Dorky or neverwasthetime here on the GB without their permissions?
 
BeeZeBody said:
who do we OWE the "debt" to?
Click to expand...

Good question. From Wiki:

There are two components of gross national debt:[1]

Debt held by the public, such as Treasury securities held by investors outside the federal government, including those held by individuals, corporations, the Federal Reserve System, and foreign, state and local governments.

Debt held by government accounts or intragovernmental debt, such as non-marketable Treasury securities held in accounts of programs administered by the federal government, such as the Social Security Trust Fund. Debt held by government accounts represents the cumulative surpluses, including interest earnings, of various government programs that have been invested in Treasury securities.
Click to expand...

The following two graphs detail the breakdown of the two debt components referred to above. The graph on the ownership of treasury securities is best thought of in terms of who we "owe" that portion of the debt to. The graph on intragovernmental debt is best thought of in terms of that portion of the debt we have generated due to excess spending over revenues.


Estimated_ownership_of_treasury_securities_by_year.gif


U.S._Intragovernmental_debt_-_v1.png
 
richard_daily said:
We're currently in 4 wars, if you add in Yemin and Syria.

Bad for the deficit. I'm sure Col. Hogan will be along any moment to call for an end to those wars. Unless of course, he's picking fly shit out of the pepper or whatever he said.
Click to expand...

I fully support ending the War on Terror. Provided we win it. I'm uncertain about that to the extent that defeating ISIS in Syria aids Assad, but the one and only thing Assad has going for him is that he doesn't entertain the fantasy of conducting an extended campaign of terror against the United States. Against his own people, unfortunately yes, but not the United States.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
Good question. From Wiki:
Click to expand...

Exactly right. Retirement, retirement, and social security (retirement). You can't make these disappear to those that earned it. Fixed cost. But a real leader (especially a businessman) would realize this is not sustainable.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
I fully support ending the War on Terror. Provided we win it. I'm uncertain about that to the extent that defeating ISIS in Syria aids Assad, but the one and only thing Assad has going for him is that he doesn't entertain the fantasy of conducting an extended campaign of terror against the United States. Against his own people, unfortunately yes, but not the United States.
Click to expand...

Well, as soon as we get the "war on drugs" wrapped up, I'm sure the "war on terror" will be won shortly thereafter.

You can't win a war on terror when nearly all of the actions of our military creates more terrorists. It's a neverending cycle.

These aren't conflicts that are designed to be won. They are conflicts that are designed to keep a bloated military budget bloated. They add to the deficit.

ISIS will morph into something else, and if you want to play whack-a-mole with US taxpayer dollars, more power to you, but I think it's a waste of time, money, and lives.

Assad will be propped up, and the best chance to topple him is the Kurds, who DJT just de-funded a few weeks ago.

Over $818 billion on the Iraq war alone... nearly 1/20th of the overall deficit, on something that was completely avoidable and has gained the US nothing.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
I fully support ending the War on Terror.
Click to expand...
Terror is a tactic and a strategy, not an entity. Might as well have a War on Infiltration. Terror involves terrorizing (scaring shitless) a population. Official gov't pronouncements frightening the populace are terrorism. White House spox, beware.

US attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, et al, are sold as fighting terrorism. What does a victory over terrorism look like? How will we know we've prevailed? CAN we ever 'win'? Must everyone love USA and never be nasty toward us again?

I recall a paperback I read on the transport when my division redeployed to Europe: IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING, YOU'LL PROBABLY END UP SOMEWHERE ELSE. That's TWAT (The War Against Terror) in a nutshell.
 
Last edited:
Going back and reading through some of these posts, well ... there is a lot of bliss here.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
I fully support ending the War on Terror. Provided we win it.
Click to expand...

I don't think the politicians and know the people don't have the stomach for the level of warmongering it would take to accomplish that.

And even if we had the political willpower backing it, we would need to take a break for a few years, regroup, refit, get our corruption under control and do some GOOD spending, as opposed to budget inflating, on our military.

richard_daily said:
You can't win a war on terror when nearly all of the actions of our military creates more terrorists.
Click to expand...

That's what you get for half stepping.

We can win it, but not in a do-gooder, cuddly, friendly "progressive" manner.

It would piss off "progressive" USA and probably start a war with some sort of European alliance.

richard_daily said:
These aren't conflicts that are designed to be won. They are conflicts that are designed to keep a bloated military budget bloated. They add to the deficit.
Click to expand...

Clearly...otherwise Iraq would have been a US territory back in 05' and gas would be 70c/gallon as the locals slaved away their debt to the US.

richard_daily said:
Over $818 billion on the Iraq war alone... nearly 1/20th of the overall deficit, on something that was completely avoidable and has gained the US nothing.
Click to expand...

Should have gotten something out of that one.....but nooooooooo that's racist!!! :rolleyes:
 
Dribble said:
Exactly right. Retirement, retirement, and social security (retirement). You can't make these disappear to those that earned it. Fixed cost. But a real leader (especially a businessman) would realize this is not sustainable.
Click to expand...
You can reduce the costs of pensions and Social Security by reducing access to healthcare so that the recipients die younger.

Who might be employing that tactic?
 
phrodeau said:
You can reduce the costs of pensions and Social Security by reducing access to healthcare so that the recipients die younger.

Who might be employing that tactic?
Click to expand...
We know the Gup health plan:

1) Don't get sick.
2) If you do get sick, go to Mexico to die.
3) Thank you for dying.

Meanwhile, the pension thang is serious. Much of California's public service pension funding is in the conservative CALPERS retirement system whose stocks were fucked in Dubya's depression and haven't yet recovered. Many cities and counties are committed to retired cops and firefighters paid up to 90% of salary. Hundreds of cities are facing bankruptcy here. It's no game.
 
Last edited:
Hypoxia said:
We know the Gup health plan:

1) Don't get sick.
2) If you do get sick, go to Mexico to die.
3) Thank you for dying.

Meanwhile, the pension thang is serious. Much of California's public service pension funding is in the conservative CALPERS retirement system whose stocks were fucked in Dubya's depression and haven't yet recovered. Many cities and counties are committed to retired cops and firefighters paid up to 90% of salary. Hundreds of cities are facing bankruptcy here. It's no game.
Click to expand...

Oh man good thing all that wonderful government you want to give totalitarian control over everything to.

Good thing they never fuck anything up :rolleyes:

God I hope I get out before Sac comes a' callin for my monies and property to cover their mismanagement of the state so that they can continue to fuck the state up.
 
Here is what former Representative Jason Chaffetz had to say on the Fox tabloid about the Republican spending bill:

@jasoninthehouse: "Republicans have lost every single bit of credibility on the idea that they care at all about debts and deficits." pic.twitter.com/EqCBrqxLvV
— FOX Business (@FoxBusiness) February 9, 2018​

"They can talk all they want, but when they had the chance to do it, they caved and they spent so much money it's stunning," Chaffetz added in a panel discussion with "Mornings with Maria" host Maria Bartiromo.

And as Senator Rand Paul said:

dqEv9Ya.gif
 
Back in the day, US Senators would beat each other nearly to death on the Senate floor with thick canes. Taiwanese legislators carry on that tradition. Here and now, it's all so boring... If Sen. Paul were a manly man, he would carry a big stick and use it on deficit spenders. But no, he's just another gesticulating wimp.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
Good question. From Wiki:

There are two components of gross national debt:[1]



The following two graphs detail the breakdown of the two debt components referred to above. The graph on the ownership of treasury securities is best thought of in terms of who we "owe" that portion of the debt to. The graph on intragovernmental debt is best thought of in terms of that portion of the debt we have generated due to excess spending over revenues.


Estimated_ownership_of_treasury_securities_by_year.gif


U.S._Intragovernmental_debt_-_v1.png
Click to expand...

Your graphs do not show the relative volatility/liquidity/longevity of this debt. The Trump/GOP has increased expenditure dramatically (military) and has reduced taxation - thus massively increasing the borrowing requirement. The increased demand for loans will drive up Interest rates and the US dollar. The people best placed to provide the marginal increase in funds to the US will be foreignors particularly those with positive Trade balances. (China Germany for examples.) Good luck Mr Trump when it comes to negotiating trade deals with these people.:rolleyes:

Trump's GOP has set up the USA for a major financial crisis but it will probably take 5/6 years to hit.
 
ishtat said:
Your graphs do not show the relative volatility/liquidity/longevity of this debt. The Trump/GOP has increased expenditure dramatically (military) and has reduced taxation - thus massively increasing the borrowing requirement. The increased demand for loans will drive up Interest rates and the US dollar. The people best placed to provide the marginal increase in funds to the US will be foreignors particularly those with positive Trade balances. (China Germany for examples.) Good luck Mr Trump when it comes to negotiating trade deals with these people.:rolleyes:

Trump's GOP has set up the USA for a major financial crisis but it will probably take 5/6 years to hit.
Click to expand...

He'll be long gone within 5-6 years, and someone else will have to clean up his mess. Just like his daddy used to have to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wishes78
Where to post a story?
Replies
3
Views
91
Rob_Royale
Rob_Royale
live4thebj
Jim Norton
Replies
3
Views
128
Chernosoth
Chernosoth
girlsmiley
What’s the go with men in cars with women?
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Sean
Sean
zoso682001
Did she or didn't she ?
Replies
7
Views
653
HumpDayHoratio
HumpDayHoratio
N
Porn: Where has all the eroticism gone?
2 3
Replies
74
Views
4K
MorlockIam
M
Back
Top