Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Economy

Showing Original Post only (View all)

eridani

(51,907 posts)
Mon Jan 2, 2012, 07:04 PM Jan 2012

Debt may be a long term problem, but it certainly isn't an emergency [View all]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/opinion/krugman-nobody-understands-debt.html?_r=1


Deficit-worriers portray a future in which we’re impoverished by the need to pay back money we’ve been borrowing. They see America as being like a family that took out too large a mortgage, and will have a hard time making the monthly payments.

This is, however, a really bad analogy in at least two ways.

First, families have to pay back their debt. Governments don’t — all they need to do is ensure that debt grows more slowly than their tax base. The debt from World War II was never repaid; it just became increasingly irrelevant as the U.S. economy grew, and with it the income subject to taxation.

Second — and this is the point almost nobody seems to get — an over-borrowed family owes money to someone else; U.S. debt is, to a large extent, money we owe to ourselves.

This was clearly true of the debt incurred to win World War II. Taxpayers were on the hook for a debt that was significantly bigger, as a percentage of G.D.P., than debt today; but that debt was also owned by taxpayers, such as all the people who bought savings bonds. So the debt didn’t make postwar America poorer. In particular, the debt didn’t prevent the postwar generation from experiencing the biggest rise in incomes and living standards in our nation’s history.
26 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
You might want to take a look at this thread from a couple days ago on the same topic -- Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #1
What you apparently fail to grasp, is that a Treasury Bond isn't money "borrowed". A HERETIC I AM Jan 2012 #2
Actually, I know very little about bonds Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #3
Then I'll do my best to help you understand them just a little more. A HERETIC I AM Jan 2012 #5
Excuse me, but I think you just agreed with me, except where you misunderstood me Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #6
It depends on which debt. westerebus Jan 2012 #4
Dear Westerebus, Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #7
The reason to Keep Your Powder Dry is on the way... westerebus Jan 2012 #8
$20? Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #9
Randon notation AG. westerebus Jan 2012 #19
I tend to fergets the $40-48 ramp job. Dog farts have lingered longer than that. Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #23
Curious and curiouser. westerebus Jan 2012 #24
Assassinations, 9/11's and other 'Black Swan' cover-ups don't come cheap Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #25
datum can suck Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #10
What's wrong with transfer payments going up? eridani Jan 2012 #11
That wood be an option Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #20
Or we could shorten work weeks and raise or maintain pay eridani Jan 2012 #22
#23 is deceptive -- makes me distrust the rest of the claims, ayuh. Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #12
The key words are 'private sector' Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #13
But the numbers are still deceptive Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #14
You are talking money (which is worse) Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #16
But even the number of contributors isn't apples to apples Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #17
It ain't a left or right thing Po_d Mainiac Jan 2012 #21
You're All Having a Par-tay, And Didn't Invite Me? Demeter Jan 2012 #15
It didn't start out as a par-tay Tansy_Gold Jan 2012 #18
As long as the debt is denomonated in dollars it makes no difference. Sam1 Jan 2012 #26
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Economy»Debt may be a long term ...»Reply #0