Not at all, it's accurate. We're going to stack another $5 trillion on in the next four years.
Since when are facts sensationalist bullshit?
From this day four years ago to now, we've added roughly $5.89 trillion to the public debt ($9.869t to $15.765t), and that doesn't count all of our liabilities, that's merely a fraction of it represented by the so called "public debt."
I'd love to see the math on how you propose we ever pay back the $11 trillion in new public debt added from 2008 to 2016/17. Clinton ran the biggest surplus we've had in a very long time ($236b), and it was fake, because it didn't include the money borrowed from inbound Social Security money for the non-existent trust. If we could magically run that Clinton surplus rate from 2017 to 2102 (about 85 years), we'd finally pay off the $20 trillion in public debt we're going to have four years from now. That assumes we never once slip up again, and constantly pay $236 billion per year strictly toward only the public debt.
So, a mere 100 years of record surplus' ought to do the trick.
You do not need to run a surplus to pay back government debt. Debt payments are and will be included in the regular annual budget of the U.S. government.
In fact an annual surplus creates additional government debt because the only place the U.S. federal government can store profit is in U.S. Treasury bonds (see: the Social Security "trust fund"). This is why there was so much interest in refunding the surplus to taxpayers.
Now is a great time for the U.S. to be borrowing, because everyone wants to give us their money. Treasury yields continue to hover well below their historical averages. Even at long-run average rates of economic growth and inflation, we will stay ahead of today's Treasury yields and afford our payments.
So: your numbers might be accurate (I don't have the time to check them), but your assumption that we can never pay our debt is flawed.
Comments
Not at all, it's accurate. We're going to stack another $5 trillion on in the next four years.
Since when are facts sensationalist bullshit?
From this day four years ago to now, we've added roughly $5.89 trillion to the public debt ($9.869t to $15.765t), and that doesn't count all of our liabilities, that's merely a fraction of it represented by the so called "public debt."
I'd love to see the math on how you propose we ever pay back the $11 trillion in new public debt added from 2008 to 2016/17. Clinton ran the biggest surplus we've had in a very long time ($236b), and it was fake, because it didn't include the money borrowed from inbound Social Security money for the non-existent trust. If we could magically run that Clinton surplus rate from 2017 to 2102 (about 85 years), we'd finally pay off the $20 trillion in public debt we're going to have four years from now. That assumes we never once slip up again, and constantly pay $236 billion per year strictly toward only the public debt.
So, a mere 100 years of record surplus' ought to do the trick.
You do not need to run a surplus to pay back government debt. Debt payments are and will be included in the regular annual budget of the U.S. government.
In fact an annual surplus creates additional government debt because the only place the U.S. federal government can store profit is in U.S. Treasury bonds (see: the Social Security "trust fund"). This is why there was so much interest in refunding the surplus to taxpayers.
Now is a great time for the U.S. to be borrowing, because everyone wants to give us their money. Treasury yields continue to hover well below their historical averages. Even at long-run average rates of economic growth and inflation, we will stay ahead of today's Treasury yields and afford our payments.
So: your numbers might be accurate (I don't have the time to check them), but your assumption that we can never pay our debt is flawed.