Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (26388)	2/25/2008 12:39:46 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "...even altered the cost is likely to go up rapidly in nominal, and perhaps in real, dollar terms." Up, yes. But not possible to rise above 100% of GNP. (Which is already projected from current trends to happen before 2072 --- well before your 'centuries' time frame!) Re: "but their error could be to the downside not the upside." Same comment as above. Can't go above a '100%' government take of production. In fact, the practical limit is likely to be far lower then 100%. The nation would collapse, and the people revolt in an actual, not a metaphorical, rebellion FAR BEFORE 100% take was ever reached. Re: "In my previous calculation I didn't include interest on the spending for these programs. I think I should." Yes, you certainly SHOULD! Interest costs are REAL. Re: I'm fairly sure you will object, saying "these programs pay for themselves". You are 100% incorrect then in that assumption.... LOL! Re: [interest on the war debt - which is limited to the weighted average lifespan of the government bonds sold to incur it.] "Not really, it gets rolled over." That would merely add MORE INTEREST EXPENSES, not reduce them. Such action would, of course, strengthen my argument... by driving government costs much, much higher.