Moderator: Community Team
I don't think this chart accounts for the current proposals on the debt ceiling being raised. AS I understand it, they are going to raise the ceiling to 14.something trillion. It is also my understanding the USA economy generates about 15 trillion/year. We are almost at 100%, not including entitlement spending (SS, Medicare etc..)thegreekdog wrote:Interesting. My first thought was whether it would be possible to figure out what the effective tax rate was with respect to the US GDP (i.e. we have $X GDP and the average tax rate on that GDP is Y%). I'm not sure that's possible (I also think it's much less than 40%).bedub1 wrote:
The Government used to spend about 7.5% of the GDP of the country. Last I heard it was nearly 40%. So if you take all the money the entire population creates in a year, the government blows/spends/consumers 40% of it. This number needs to be down to about 10%. If we continue on this trend, then I estimate by about 2110, the government will spend 100% of the nations GDP.
Does the government spend too much money? Yes. Should the government be spending money like they did in 1910? Not sure.
Wtf are you on about? Japan and Italy and a multitude of other countries are over or very near to 100% public debt/GDP and they are not in any serious trouble. What history lessons are we supposed to be taking lessons from, when in history did this cause an almighty collapse?Phatscotty wrote:I don't think this chart accounts for the current proposals on the debt ceiling being raised. AS I understand it, they are going to raise the ceiling to 14.something trillion. It is also my understanding the USA economy generates about 15 trillion/year. We are almost at 100%, not including entitlement spending (SS, Medicare etc..)thegreekdog wrote:Interesting. My first thought was whether it would be possible to figure out what the effective tax rate was with respect to the US GDP (i.e. we have $X GDP and the average tax rate on that GDP is Y%). I'm not sure that's possible (I also think it's much less than 40%).bedub1 wrote:
The Government used to spend about 7.5% of the GDP of the country. Last I heard it was nearly 40%. So if you take all the money the entire population creates in a year, the government blows/spends/consumers 40% of it. This number needs to be down to about 10%. If we continue on this trend, then I estimate by about 2110, the government will spend 100% of the nations GDP.
Does the government spend too much money? Yes. Should the government be spending money like they did in 1910? Not sure.
History does not bode well from here
Famous Last Words...Titanic wrote:Wtf are you on about? Japan and Italy and a multitude of other countries are over or very near to 100% public debt/GDP and they are not in any serious trouble.Phatscotty wrote:I don't think this chart accounts for the current proposals on the debt ceiling being raised. AS I understand it, they are going to raise the ceiling to 14.something trillion. It is also my understanding the USA economy generates about 15 trillion/year. We are almost at 100%, not including entitlement spending (SS, Medicare etc..)thegreekdog wrote:Interesting. My first thought was whether it would be possible to figure out what the effective tax rate was with respect to the US GDP (i.e. we have $X GDP and the average tax rate on that GDP is Y%). I'm not sure that's possible (I also think it's much less than 40%).bedub1 wrote:
The Government used to spend about 7.5% of the GDP of the country. Last I heard it was nearly 40%. So if you take all the money the entire population creates in a year, the government blows/spends/consumers 40% of it. This number needs to be down to about 10%. If we continue on this trend, then I estimate by about 2110, the government will spend 100% of the nations GDP.
Does the government spend too much money? Yes. Should the government be spending money like they did in 1910? Not sure.
History does not bode well from here
Great comeback, intellectually strong argument there...Phatscotty wrote:Famous Last Words...Titanic wrote:Wtf are you on about? Japan and Italy and a multitude of other countries are over or very near to 100% public debt/GDP and they are not in any serious trouble.Phatscotty wrote:I don't think this chart accounts for the current proposals on the debt ceiling being raised. AS I understand it, they are going to raise the ceiling to 14.something trillion. It is also my understanding the USA economy generates about 15 trillion/year. We are almost at 100%, not including entitlement spending (SS, Medicare etc..)thegreekdog wrote:Interesting. My first thought was whether it would be possible to figure out what the effective tax rate was with respect to the US GDP (i.e. we have $X GDP and the average tax rate on that GDP is Y%). I'm not sure that's possible (I also think it's much less than 40%).bedub1 wrote:
The Government used to spend about 7.5% of the GDP of the country. Last I heard it was nearly 40%. So if you take all the money the entire population creates in a year, the government blows/spends/consumers 40% of it. This number needs to be down to about 10%. If we continue on this trend, then I estimate by about 2110, the government will spend 100% of the nations GDP.
Does the government spend too much money? Yes. Should the government be spending money like they did in 1910? Not sure.
History does not bode well from here
By all means Titanic, make the case for borrowing more than you earn.Titanic wrote:Great comeback, intellectually strong argument there...Phatscotty wrote:Famous Last Words...Titanic wrote:Wtf are you on about? Japan and Italy and a multitude of other countries are over or very near to 100% public debt/GDP and they are not in any serious trouble.Phatscotty wrote:I don't think this chart accounts for the current proposals on the debt ceiling being raised. AS I understand it, they are going to raise the ceiling to 14.something trillion. It is also my understanding the USA economy generates about 15 trillion/year. We are almost at 100%, not including entitlement spending (SS, Medicare etc..)thegreekdog wrote:
Interesting. My first thought was whether it would be possible to figure out what the effective tax rate was with respect to the US GDP (i.e. we have $X GDP and the average tax rate on that GDP is Y%). I'm not sure that's possible (I also think it's much less than 40%).
Does the government spend too much money? Yes. Should the government be spending money like they did in 1910? Not sure.
History does not bode well from here
not to mention japans "lost decade" yeah, japan.....rockfist wrote:Japan and Itally have been model economies for the world to emulate in the last oh twenty or so years in the case of Japan...about the last 1900 years for Itally...
According to the IMF data on per capita income in US dollars from 2008:Titanic wrote:Countries which have greater public debt then the USA - France, Canada, Germany, Japan, Italy, Israel, Egypt, Greece, Singapore
Are all of these countries failing? Are they all heading for imminent collapse and a doomed future?
I am not arguing that public debt is a good thing or should be advise, I am fiscally conservative (which neither US party is btw), but the presence of debt itself is not an immediate indicator of "bad things". The periods after WWII were those with the greatest amounts of public debt but all western nations and some others grew at extraordinary rates and continually paid of the debt they had for decades (ironically up until the conservative bastions of Thatcher and Reagan).
Nothing i've ever seen you write on these forums has been fiscally conservative. ever.Titanic wrote:Countries which have greater public debt then the USA - France, Canada, Germany, Japan, Italy, Israel, Egypt, Greece, Singapore
Are all of these countries failing? Are they all heading for imminent collapse and a doomed future?
I am not arguing that public debt is a good thing or should be advise, I am fiscally conservative (which neither US party is btw), but the presence of debt itself is not an immediate indicator of "bad things". The periods after WWII were those with the greatest amounts of public debt but all western nations and some others grew at extraordinary rates and continually paid of the debt they had for decades (ironically up until the conservative bastions of Thatcher and Reagan).

Normal? Well, for Serbia... unfortunately, yes.qwert wrote:i dont know how its in US,but in mine country(with 8 milion people) 10% of Budget going to gouverment salary(yep they need to live good and rest of people can eat s...).
Now when you count 28000 in administration,and 250 people in Parlament,and add 3400 in Ministry departments(25 Ministry seeds this is not normal).
Well you get number of 31650 in gouverment,who spend 10% of Country Budget for hes salary--Its this Normal??
This.thegreekdog wrote:Bedub1 is only talking about spending as it relates to entitlements. He's not talking about spending as it relates to all the other shit our government (and by our government I mean we collectively) spend money on - like, I don't know, fucking roads, our military, police, fire, and other things that didn't exist in 1910 or that we need more of now.
Let's not get confused here bedub, our government is big for the most part because of the military; which is not really an entitlement as you would use that word.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
Can you please outline how you expect to get the percentage down to 10% ?bedub1 wrote:
The Government used to spend about 7.5% of the GDP of the country. Last I heard it was nearly 40%. So if you take all the money the entire population creates in a year, the government blows/spends/consumers 40% of it. This number needs to be down to about 10%. If we continue on this trend, then I estimate by about 2110, the government will spend 100% of the nations GDP.
where do you think these scientific breakthroughs come from? fairies from mars?john9blue wrote:You can't say that increased spending is the sole reason for improved infrastructure. To do so is to ignore natural improvements through science, engineering, etc.
Yes, good point Sultan...SultanOfSurreal wrote:where do you think these scientific breakthroughs come from? fairies from mars?john9blue wrote:You can't say that increased spending is the sole reason for improved infrastructure. To do so is to ignore natural improvements through science, engineering, etc.
But he calls it "personal responsibility"! That makes it noble and good.SultanOfSurreal wrote:well that's not very nice, but at least we all know to discount your opinions out of hand in the future72o wrote:Pretty muchsultanofsurreal wrote:so what you're saying is, f*ck the poor and elderly
cool, at least you're honest
Did you happen to find anything that says from whom Japan is borrowing most of its money? Is it the US or China or private lenders? I have no ulterior motive, just curious.Baron Von PWN wrote:This is a list of Public debt loads around the world complied by the CIA.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... rank=61#us
It seemed relevant to the conversation. In it it appears the US public debt is rather modest at 37% of GDP, compared to the Extreme case of japan at 172% of GDP. it looks like very few rich countries have lower debt burdens.
this is a list of median incomes on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
The only number I've found is one from the economist which says 94% of the debt is owned domestically. I did find an academic journal "Public Debt and the Macroeconomic Stability of Japan" but not being an economist it's a bit over my head.thegreekdog wrote:Did you happen to find anything that says from whom Japan is borrowing most of its money? Is it the US or China or private lenders? I have no ulterior motive, just curious.Baron Von PWN wrote:This is a list of Public debt loads around the world complied by the CIA.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... rank=61#us
It seemed relevant to the conversation. In it it appears the US public debt is rather modest at 37% of GDP, compared to the Extreme case of japan at 172% of GDP. it looks like very few rich countries have lower debt burdens.
this is a list of median incomes on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income
So when you call it "social programs" instead of "handouts" or "wealth redistribution", that's somehow different. I see.Snorri1234 wrote:But he calls it "personal responsibility"! That makes it noble and good.SultanOfSurreal wrote:well that's not very nice, but at least we all know to discount your opinions out of hand in the future72o wrote:Pretty muchsultanofsurreal wrote:so what you're saying is, f*ck the poor and elderly
cool, at least you're honest

Do you even consider the possibility of actually researching a "fact" before it pours out of your thick skull like diarrhea? Military spending is not even close to the majority of our federal government's budget. Although it is a huge number, and more than almost all other defense spending in the world combined, it is a falsehood to say "it's the military that causes us to overspend." The fucking social programs dwarf the military budget by a shit ton. If you want to blame the debt on something, blame that shit.john9blue wrote:This.thegreekdog wrote:Bedub1 is only talking about spending as it relates to entitlements. He's not talking about spending as it relates to all the other shit our government (and by our government I mean we collectively) spend money on - like, I don't know, fucking roads, our military, police, fire, and other things that didn't exist in 1910 or that we need more of now.
Let's not get confused here bedub, our government is big for the most part because of the military; which is not really an entitlement as you would use that word.
The majority of gov. spending goes to the military, which (although being one of the few legitimate functions of government) is bloated and responsible in large part for our excessive debt.
You can't say that increased spending is the sole reason for improved infrastructure. To do so is to ignore natural improvements through science, engineering, etc.
