Ahhaha
Your posts raise so many enticing issues that it is like looking at a smorgasboard, I do not know where to start. To make discourse easier, I will try address only a few of these issues at a time. I would first like to address the national debt.
You contend that the The national debt is not an issue of any significance and compare it to taking a mortgage on a house. Yet the BIS recently reported that the US foreign debt now approaching 1.5 trillion dollars is a major concern for the continued strength of the dollar. Does national debt not include foreign debt. If it does, why is not the BIS correct, since does not the increasing foreign debt increase the amount of dollars held in foreign states.
Additionally, continuing with your example of a mortgage, a prudent rule is that one should only mortgage a house if one has the capacity to pay the interest - and the higher the mortgage interest one must pay, the less one has to spend elsewhere - and if the mortgage is too high, one can lose the house for default. Does not this same principal apply to the national debt and the US Government as the mortgagor.
Thirdly, considering foreign debt, is it is not one thing to mortgage a house and pay interest to a fellow citizen who by consuming or investing in the state, and paying taxes on the interest, benefits the state and its citizens. It is not another to pay the interest to one in another state where no such benefits are gained and the interest representing the productivity of the domestic state is loss?
|
