Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

The_Countess t1_iy84ra1 wrote

Government don't need to pay off debt (or write it off), they just need to service it, and wait for inflation and economic growth to make it basically irrelevant.

US world war 2 debt for example was never repaid, but at 285 billion, today, with the US economy reaching 23 trillion, it would represent just 1.2% of the economy.

Government debt isn't like household debt.

283

gumpythegreat t1_iy890nk wrote

And the largest holder of US debt is ... US citizens, investing their money in the single most stable and risk free investment to spend it in the future.

The only concern is when the cost of servicing the debt (ie interest payments) becomes too high that the government struggles to pay for services.

102

Jrapin t1_iy9wemx wrote

There is no struggle for the US gov to service the interest. The US gov is the issuer of all the US dollars, it's nothing more than key strokes to service the interest.

−15

gumpythegreat t1_iya32m7 wrote

If it started to reach the point where the government was printing extra money to service the debt, we would be in trouble. But we're far off, partly because there is also tremendous global demand for US dollars as a reserve currency and de factor international currency across the world

13

ForgotTheBogusName t1_iyaz8pp wrote

That time may be closer than you think. There is some good research called “The Dollar Milkshake Endgame” that details hyperinflation and our path to it. It was written more than a year ago and we’re walking it now. I’ll see if I can find it and update this post.

Edit: check out the Dollar Milkshake Endgame here. This is part 4.2, but links to the previous research are in there too.

1

Concerned_Asuran t1_iya8976 wrote

No man. He means the US government literally can't owe dollars to anyone. Cities, and States, sure, but not the Fed. It's impossible because the US has monetary sovereignty. Like England, Canada, Japan, etc.

Spain, France and Greece can go completely broke from owing money, for example, because they don't have monetary sovereignty.

Read The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton. It will change your life.

−18

bmoredoc t1_iyab7fp wrote

Stephanie Kelton is a proponent of a theory called MMT that most economists think is false.

Most economists would agree with the commenter above you. Yes you can repay sovereign debt by printing money, but this has consequences for interest rates and debt that can negatively affect the economy and necessitate, for example, large tax increases.

In short, there's no free lunch.

17

Concerned_Asuran t1_iye87v0 wrote

>Yes you can repay sovereign debt by printing money

No. You literally don't need to repay sovereign debt because you never borrowed any in the first place. We use "debt" simply because economists got lazy and didn't come up with a different word. But it is completely different from your household transactions.

1

whatdowedo2022 t1_iyaa8q3 wrote

What? We borrow our currency from the fed, which is an external organization that doesn’t answer to the US unless it chooses to. They’re very similar to the national bank, which jackson eliminated in his term in office, which caused the nation to be thrown into a recession bc of the subsequent response by the national bank. What uh, what’re you talking about?

2

Concerned_Asuran t1_iye7gga wrote

>We borrow our currency from the fed

The fed is the US Federal government though. Just cause it's a different building in Washington doesn't mean it's China.

1

YoopedWhiskey t1_iy9z2vt wrote

That solves the payment, yes. To much of that will destroy your economy

1

Jrapin t1_iya345z wrote

There would have to be many other factors for that to be true. Impossible no, liley certainly not.

2

bitscavenger t1_iy8l7e9 wrote

There is also the fact that this debt is the genesis of our money supply. Paying off or writing off the debt would be the complete unwinding of the current monetary system which no one is in any hurry to do.

20

addiktion t1_iybkvps wrote

I always find those U.S debt clocks pretty funny. As if paying off all that debt would do anything but crash the economy.

4

Smile_Cool t1_iy895ad wrote

That assumes same level of productivity growth which is probably not happening. My guess is central banks are going to let inflation run.

11

codyish t1_iy9yox6 wrote

But my libertarian friends assure me that their metaphors about people using credit cards and global macroeconomics and government debt are perfectly reasonable and not at all childish oversimplifications.

9

BoomZhakaLaka t1_iy8taby wrote

You're making some assumptions about demographics there. Government debt could become a real catastrophe under a shrinking population, which is an imminent problem across the first world.

8

dee_berg t1_iy9eymh wrote

Immigration. Boom fixed the problem.

14

oh-propagandhi t1_iy9ktjh wrote

Yeah, with a fix that has been known by economists for 20+ years no less. None of it is rocket science. The only real struggle is to make sure that your immigration is varied so as not to create incoming voting blocs and increase stress of acculturalization.

7

Ok-disaster2022 t1_iyaatt2 wrote

The UK government when they freed the slaves in the UK paid for them all with a massive loan. They didn't make the final payment on that debt until 1991.

It's also worth pointing out, government debt can be seen as a positive economic tool. Governments issue bonds that are highly secure but low yield investments.

1

Xaqaree t1_iyc4wer wrote

Getting real tired of this clowncar argument that pretends economic reality does not matter because it is on the scale of government.

Government debt IS like household debt. This does not end well for you clowns.

1

existential_plastic t1_iydnga8 wrote

Okay, but it's really not. If I owe you a $100,000 unsecured debt, that's easily a source of friction between us, especially if I come to you for another $10,000. If a country owes you $100 billion, and (let's say) it gets hit by a hurricane that knocks out its electrical grid, you might actually give away $10 billion so they can fix it, because it's worth doing so in order to collect on the $100 billion debt.

After the Revolutionary War, generation and maintenance of sovereign debt to foreign nations was an explicit goal of the early U.S. government, because it presented parties who might otherwise be neutral (or who might even lean towards British sympathies) with a strong incentive to continue to recognize the new government, instead, lest their accumulated debt become worthless in the face of an American collapse. This played out to some degree in 1812, when there was every reason for other European powers to get involved in the war (especially Spain, who could have easily negotiated a southern front in return for e.g. Florida's return), but instead all of them sat on their hands and, in many cases, continued to buy American goods (to the extent that they could get past the blockades).

2

Sumthin-Sumthin44692 t1_iyd59vc wrote

It is more complex than household debt but it does ultimately operate the same. The rational for high government debt which you mention is the same rational for taking out student loans. It’s a lot of money upfront but over time inflation and increased earnings make it a smart investment, assuming (a) there is no hard cap to total economic growth and (b) society doesn’t totally collapse or fundamentally change.

1

Concerned_Asuran t1_iya7fg8 wrote

>Government debt isn't like household debt.

Correct.

>Government don't need to pay off debt (or write it off), they just need to service it, and wait for inflation and economic growth to make it basically irrelevant.

Incorrect.

>US world war 2 debt for example was never repaid, but at 285 billion, today, with the US economy reaching 23 trillion, it would represent just 1.2% of the economy.

Ambiguous.

The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton should be required reading in middle and high school. Adults world-wide die of old age still believing in Santa Claus.

−10

The_Countess t1_iyaf5c8 wrote

most of these competing economic theories, like MMT pushed by Kelton here, just look like people arguing over which part of the feedback loop is most important.

They are all important.

If you pick one and push on that too much, then before long it becomes more efficient to push on the other.

5

Concerned_Asuran t1_iye7ov7 wrote

No no. The book I mentioned just explains step by step what happens during a typical day in Washington. Don't be scared.

1

MaximusJCat t1_iy7xs5y wrote

It also looks fake. The pixels around the letters don’t match the pixelation in the rest of the image.

95

SteveMcQwark t1_iy88gb5 wrote

That's really just jpeg artifacting around a high contrast feature of the image. You can see the same thing on the license plate.

37

anon2282 t1_iy8smw1 wrote

The angle of the text looks off, too.

10

oh-propagandhi t1_iy9m0r7 wrote

It's black ink on a white vinyl rectangle. It was placed poorly. You can see the corners. As a graphic designer and photo manipulator none of this looks fake, if it is it was expertly done.

I would assume that this is guerilla messaging done by someone who has access to vinyl printing equipment and upwards of half a brain.

10

pichael288 t1_iy83win wrote

It could be a sticker that's kind of fucked up. Usually when the letters look like that and the pixelation is not the same sized pixels as the rest of the image, it's a sign of photoshop

5

Type31 OP t1_iy7y98p wrote

I see what you mean. It does look fake. But it’s very much real I assure you.

2

MaximusJCat t1_iy7ypwy wrote

With the knowledge that you probably took this photo then. Be curious to know if this is some form of graffiti? Originally zoomed in because it looked like paper with the text on it, which led to seeing the pixels, so maybe this is something someone pasted on the bus and not something done with the intent of the school.

2

Type31 OP t1_iy84b1s wrote

No idea. I took it whilst driving to work this morning. It looks like they’ve painted over the bit where they wanted to put the writing before applying it. Maybe to make the writing more adhesive?

6

badideas1 t1_iy8oc7s wrote

"It's about control."
"Control of what, exactly?"
"You know, control! Do your research! They're controlling us!"

44

Inevitable-Basil-178 t1_iy9kyay wrote

Control as in forcing you to work 40 hours a week for your whole life. Not commenting on what should or shouldn't be, just interpreting the message. If people didn't need to work, they wouldn't, and nothing would get done. A few people with a lot of wealth don't have to work, but depend on the people who do to maintain their lifestyles.

11

Sproutykins t1_iyb2vq1 wrote

I absolutely would work if I didn’t have to. I used to volunteer and I find working quite fun. I’m absolutely bonkers, though.

6

rhalf t1_iycqf8p wrote

I also like working if it's fullfilling. I just don't want to work if the entire point is funding some sociopath's perversions.

4

maxcorrice t1_iycmuor wrote

Test programs for UBI always show different, while yes a significant percentage does stop working, most still do work, enough to keep the world moving especially with how much automation can and is coming into play

2

Zealousideal-Feed156 t1_iyf0hol wrote

I would absolutely still work but there’s no fucking way is work 40 hours at a poorly managed company. I could do something fulfilling or just help out at the local grocery store a few hours a week.

2

maxcorrice t1_iyf5awr wrote

Exactly, companies would have to actually deal with capitalism

2

Biggie39 t1_iy9anz9 wrote

I always wonder what these people think they are being held back from…

Did the government ‘control’ them into being an unemployed trailer park louse when they would have otherwise been a…. Unemployed mansion louse?

−4

oh-propagandhi t1_iy9mfkx wrote

It's tied to a deep satisfaction with one's life, and instead of introspection they say "this must be the fault of outsiders", and still fail to miss very real blame outlets like capitalism run amok, instead having special "insider info" makes them feel special. It's not their fault that they are lonely, poor, fat, etc...

3

bustedbuddha t1_iy8n29y wrote

Tell me you don't understand currency without telling me you don't understand currency.

​

edit: anyone else notice that the Troll Farm is in full effect today?

16

State_Dear t1_iy8buir wrote

Not if you use Photoshop,,, it's easy

8

SmuckSlimer t1_iy8p1yp wrote

Some huge chunk of the debt the US government has had was always in bonds issued. People wanted to see their investments grow, so they bought government bonds. This, on the books, is a debt. Last I checked like 80% of the debt was domestic and voluntarily done by the investor each cycle.

The US government debt is not going anywhere. Also, if you balance the budget, the next president will just spend it on whatever they get lobbied to.

8

Levesque2019 t1_iy8gmuq wrote

No punctuation; spelling mistake ("Its" about control...), no dot on the "i" in the top line...looks like what was there originally has been wiped, etc, etc. Fake.

5

Type31 OP t1_iy8h968 wrote

I actually find this whole thing so funny because it is actually real. I took this photo on my way to work this morning.

18

Teddy_Tickles t1_iy8uu5x wrote

Lmfao you think spelling errors are an indication a photo is fake? Like, people don’t make spelling errors that make signs or decals?

6

czar_el t1_iy9g6vz wrote

And that crazy people with conspiracy theories don't tend to also have terrible grammar?

3

Sproutykins t1_iybb0rv wrote

This is what makes me doubt the reality of any conspiracy theories. Have you noticed that, when there are genuine conspiracies which turned out to be actually occurring, the people talking about them were often highly educated, erudite, and articulate? Even the ones who were batshit crazy.

1

KyotoGaijin t1_iy8412k wrote

In my capacity as a specialist Protocol 21 AI Control Agent for the secret world government, I'm upset to see someone publicly commenting about internal matters. Am I still typing?

3

alexh934 t1_iy8v4kn wrote

Someone took a look at

wtfhappenedin1971.com

2

BigAlDogg t1_iyb9xvo wrote

Who do we owe? Each other? How about we all just look the other way and start over??

2

ToAlphaCentauriGuy t1_iy83ovy wrote

Doesnt writing it off mean you get off scott free?

1

NotFleagle t1_iy8bxql wrote

Yes - but it doesn’t matter. The comparative sizes of these numbers makes it essentially meaningless to the governments.

2

scrubjays t1_iy842pl wrote

". . . but it probably paid for this bus."

1

ARedWalrus t1_iy8agky wrote

It's almost like the exchange of debt is truly bound to the exchange of material and labor; just like this bus and the future of those it holds 🙃

1

uasoil123 t1_iy8qo3n wrote

Government debt can never be repaid or it will collapse every currency. Its just a big IOU that just keeps getting passed along

1

oshin69 t1_iy8v4w3 wrote

Life lessons

1

PaxNova t1_iy9214c wrote

Are they looking to write off government debt? Like, all those savings bonds we bought never get paid back? Do they realize government debt is largely to its own citizens?

1

Bullmoose39 t1_iy94b05 wrote

The school bus is the perfect place for it. We need our kids to stop thinking that debt, like that which the government runs up, is their obligation. It isn't.

1

jk7116 t1_iy9ei44 wrote

Why does the silhouette person have cankles?

1

AsanoSokato t1_iy9ejj1 wrote

Then why did you make an image of it being on the back of a school bus?

1

KelpSchmelp t1_iy9ysqr wrote

God I hate vague mysticism.

1

Jarl_Xar t1_iyahvhd wrote

Looks like its photoshopped on, but that could just be my distrust with this kind of thing.

1

sparkie0501 t1_iyau3p6 wrote

More people need to be made aware of this concept. Could anyone take this statement a little further with some facts and figures, maybe some real world examples?

1

RetiredNuts t1_iyb766g wrote

I guess I'm stuck at the definition of government's write-off.

1

shiriunagi t1_iybee99 wrote

There's no world government, and that's not how debt works. I wish all these people spent a little more time studying the bond market before publicizing their ignorance.

1

NotFleagle t1_iy8c4rk wrote

It’s got pluses and minuses. Like everything.

0

Hattix t1_iy942qi wrote

Well that school doesn't teach economics.

0

tmax666 t1_iyat3s1 wrote

It’s about poor photoshopping

0

uberlux t1_iyazypz wrote

So true though!!!

0

Grunklescorm t1_iy9astg wrote

Strange place to put it, but they ain't wrong.

−1

Tarkcanis t1_iya4vs2 wrote

The Karl Marx Academy

−1

QuantumQaos t1_iy8d35x wrote

Factual. What school is this? Time to move, perhaps.

−4

CuriousCanuk t1_iy7uzr9 wrote

Just educating the kiddo's. Central banking is the scam

−8

Angel_of_Entropy t1_iy8ons7 wrote

Ah yes, as compared to decentralized “banking” which is completely legitimate and totally not a scam /s

6

The_Countess t1_iy84y64 wrote

Central banking is what keeps a financial crisis from turning into another great depression.

4

oh-propagandhi t1_iy9nhk0 wrote

Well feel free to turn all your money in for...whatever...stanley nickels or something.

3

CuriousCanuk t1_iyaxo7z wrote

I have to live in the system. Doesn't mean I can't expose it.

1

oh-propagandhi t1_iyb4h6x wrote

You don't. Trade is perfectly legal, if the seller wants what you have, and can make up the difference in trade values. You only need to pay the government in your country's currency. You can even use gold and silver as storable mediums of exchange. You won't get a native trade rate, but that's not something you're going to see in a non centralized currency market. Sellers can't trust a non-cenralized currency to hold it's value from sale to exchange and holding a variety of currencies is a pain in the ass.

I'd love to know I'm what ways it is a scam though. We've been through all these challenges and yet some folks read an article online and are suddenly fiat currency experts.

1

ThePreciseClimber t1_iy7z7lo wrote

Andrew Jackson, come back!

−11

windchaser__ t1_iy8j9n5 wrote

Ah, Andrew Jackson, the Trump of the 1800s

Gimme some more of that good ol' Trail of Tears

5

ThePreciseClimber t1_iy8tvxg wrote

Considering he was the only president in the history of the USA to get the national debt to zero, I'd say he was pretty good with money.

−3

czar_el t1_iy9hbzm wrote

Yeah, and the result of that, the slashed spending, and his war on the central bank was one of the worst US recessions up till that point. Governments are not household, and don't follow the same simplistic debt=bad frame.

4

windchaser__ t1_iy8vvqz wrote

It's not really important that the national debt get to zero. It's not even ideal. If, as a president, that's what you're focused on, then you're focused on the wrong things. Debt is a very, very useful tool for growth.

Like, consider the Louisiana Purchase, the purchase of most of the Midwest US and Louisiana from the French. This was funded by debt. Was this a good investment? Abso-fuckin-lutely.

Anyone good with money is going to focus more on the quality of the investment overall, not just whether it is funded by debt or not. The debt just becomes part of the calculation.

A note: debt is a bit more dangerous for government when you're on a hard currency standard, compared to today, when US debt is denominated in US-gov't-issued dollars. But even on a gold standard, that doesn't mean you should always strive for zero debt, any more than a large corporation should.

3

I_Miss_Lenny t1_iya9ys1 wrote

Oh yeah let's bring back Mr "Indian Removal Act", that'll be good

/s

2

Fenrunner t1_iy83gmq wrote

Ill pass, i got enough native blood in me to know where that goes. Good ideas on money though, ill give you that.

1