lol, china owns us?
partisan hackery detected. trap sprung. tell me how much of our debt china owns. i'll await reply. I, like everyone else took Bonnies claim as a metaphor, even though China is the largest foreign creditor, they're not the only foreign creditor. But the fact is, we owe a third of our entire debt to foreign creditors and that's a larger sum than Germany, Great Briton and China's total economy combined.
remember how those "blood sucking social programs" were around since before WWII? i do. never ballooned the debt on their own. Then you better read up on FDR's new Deal in 1933 and the depression that followed in 1937 and how it prolonged the recovery from great depression by more than 15 years.
what ballooned the debt is when certain people realized, like you said, that they could vote themselves more of the treasury.
who are these certain people? well, to identify them, let's look where the money has gone since the debt started ballooning in the early 80's.
has it gone to the middle class and working poor? certainly not. their incomes have remained stagnant. have we massively ballooned those "blood sucking social programs" called the social safety net? nope, those have been just the same. in fact, welfare has been reformed, COL increases have been reduced, etc.
that leaves one place where the money has gone: straight to the top. it is demonstrable that this has happened, just take a look at the income inequality gap, which has ballooned right along with the debt. You're all over the place Bucky, the OP was not talking about income disparity, it was referring to our national debt. Back to class for you Bucky.
The federal debt is how much the American people owe collectively (federal government) When you change the debate to income disparity, what you fail to realize is, that money is in private circulation which has absolutely nothing to do with our national debt, absolutely nothing. Even if your charts were relevant to the OP, they're not adjusted for inflation, are they? LOL
the change that corresponds with ballooning debt has absolutely jack and shit to do with social programs, that theory is partisan hackery bologna.
the change that corresponds with ballooning debt is shipping all the money to the top and naively expecting that it will "trickle down". it doesn't.
class dismissed.
Class is just beginning for you my friend, you need to understand that money in private circulation is not used to fund our government Bucky, only the revenues collected in the form of taxes are used for this.
The US government gets 99% of it's money from tax revenue or printing money we do not have, thereby inflating our economy, we all will agree that this is irrefutable.
Like all of us, the only possible way the government (or our family) gets itself into debt, is spending more money than it takes in, again, this is irrefutable.
So with that said, please explain how spending money we do not have on more social programs is not putting us further into debt??????????
In the real world there are only two solutions and only one of them is viable.
Solution #1. Raising taxes: According to the IRS, there are a total of 70million America tax payers. As our annual deficit sits today, every single one of those tax payers would have to pay an EXTRA $21,000 each year just to satisfy the yearly deficit, that's if increased spending stopped today! And before you bleat the same worn out mantra to increase taxes on the "rich" do a little research, you find that the total number of Americans making over $1million annually is only 0.1% of all tax payers. Raising taxes on the rich will only increase federal revenues by $60-$80billion per year, take note that our interest alone is $225billion per year, we'd still be a $145 billion in the hole each year.
Solution #2. Any ideas? LOL