How will a Trump presidency affect you?

[ZenMode]

I'm intrigued by your novel definition of a straw man as "anything that points out the logical deficiencies in my arguments." Maybe with that definition, we're on the doorstep of a Straw Man Summer?

I think you don't know what it means to say an argument is a straw man argument.

 

[hedge]

Bankers look at something similar when you go to get a loan and they know that once your debt ratio is too high, that you are high risk and won't loan you any money. Countries need to maintain confidence for investors (their bankers)

When you owe the bank $100,000, that's your problem. When you owe the bank $100 million (or, in this case, $30 trillion) it's the bank's problem...

 

[Healing]

When I inputted a character study of Zen, alongside “straw man summer”, into gpt image creator … voila:

 

[Duke Mu]

MAGA types are just cutting down on dolls for the kids and grandkids. Tightening the belt. Buying less groceries. Because Agent Orange knows best.

 

[Duke Mu]

Seriously, grants and contracts, including federal, pay my summer salary. I could see a 20% cut in annual earnings while dealing with more inflation. We have an autism spectrum daughter at home. It will suck.

Day One.

 

[ChileG]

It's not an either/or argument. It's a "There are wastes of money and there are just idiotic, Sesame Street for Iran/transgender plays in Colombia/40 vax studies" wastes of money that, even if we had zero debt would be questionable.

It isn’t an either/or strategy, agreed.

I assume you know a lot more about these 40 studies and can explain why they are a waste and you aren’t merely going by the very limited information in the NPR article, right?
Because there doesn’t seem to be any information in the article which would tell us if they are wasteful or not.

 

[hedge]

MAGA types are just cutting down on dolls for the kids and grandkids. Tightening the belt. Buying less groceries. Because Agent Orange knows best.

Gotta give an upvote to the NYPost for Skimp on the Barbie...

 

[Duke Mu]

Gotta give an upvote to the NYPost for Skimp on the Barbie...

It's so perfect, especially as Trump hates children and dogs.

 

[UNCatTech]

I question that Ross Perot had a clearer grasp. Back in 1992, we had a debt to GDP ratio of around 46%. I would think most economist would agree that the debt ratio is the proper way to look at it. Bankers look at something similar when you go to get a loan and they know that once your debt ratio is too high, that you are high risk and won't loan you any money. Countries need to maintain confidence for investors (their bankers) They can't do that when the ratio gets too high.

We now have a ratio above 120% and headed much higher. Debt interest payments are beginning to get out of hand. And the bond market is starting to have issues that may not all be related to this, but its troubling and indicates a lack of confidence in the United States.

Don't know how much more rope we have on the debt ratio. But its concerning and would be a good idea to fix it.

How does this ratio work for a government that can print money?

Where did that lack of confidence come from? It seemed to really accelerate the decline around Liberation day.

Japan started selling securities after Trump so successfully destabilized the works confidence in the US.

 

[BlueSmoke]

When you owe the bank $100,000, that's your problem. When you owe the bank $100 million (or, in this case, $30 trillion) it's the bank's problem...

Ah, but the borrower (or country in this case) can't shut the borrowing down overnight. So it is the borrower (country's) problem. And that line of thinking ignores economic issues that arise from a lack of confidence. To get the issue resolved and repaid requires a smooth economy.

 

[BlueSmoke]

How does this ratio work for a government that can print money?

Where did that lack of confidence come from? It seemed to really accelerate the decline around Liberation day.

Japan started selling securities after Trump so successfully destabilized the works confidence in the US.

I agree liberation day was a significant factor. But on the exact same day, the Senate passed its Budget Resolution. There were some economists that opined that much of the bond market's issues might be just as much related to that event as tariff liberation. They woke up and said oh crap, they ain't serious about the debt ratio (debt).

Without looking it up, Japan is a good example of a government that let its debt ratio get out of hand. May have led to its lost decade which was really longer then that. And we have the examples of Banana Republics. My point is simply that its a good idea to address the ratio. If anyone is claiming that we can ignore it, then I think the preponderance of historical economic evidence proves that wrong.

As to printing money, I suppose the government does a little of that just to support economic growth when the Federal Reserves buy's Treasury's. But in general, the Fed almost always keeps the money supply in balance to keep inflation in line. Now they did a bunch of that (or quantitative easing) after the Great Recession. But pretty sure, in recent years they have unloaded most of that.

There are certainly more qualified folks on this forum to give better answers.

 

[BlueSmoke]

Politicians always refer to paying off the national debt. Which is overlooking some things and gives the public the wrong ideas. A growing business almost always is borrowing more and its debt level or the total debt it owes keeps going up. It borrows to leverage its resources to support its growth. But that doesn't mean its debt ratio is also going up. Two different animals.

Same with countries. A country with a growing economy almost always increases its total debt. But, it should manage its debt ratio or debt to GDP ratio. Or it could enter Banana Republic territory.

 

[UNCatTech]

I agree liberation day was a significant factor. But on the exact same day, the Senate passed its Budget Resolution. There were some economists that opined that much of the bond market's issues might be just as much related to that event as tariff liberation. They woke up and said oh crap, they ain't serious about the debt ratio (debt).

Without looking it up, Japan is a good example of a government that let its debt ratio get out of hand. May have led to its lost decade which was really longer then that. And we have the examples of Banana Republics. My point is simply that its a good idea to address the ratio. If anyone is claiming that we can ignore it, then I think the preponderance of historical economic evidence proves that wrong.

As to printing money, I suppose the government does a little of that just to support economic growth when the Federal Reserves buy's Treasury's. But in general, the Fed almost always keeps the money supply in balance to keep inflation in line. Now they did a bunch of that (or quantitative easing) after the Great Recession. But pretty sure, in recent years they have unloaded most of that.

There are certainly more qualified folks on this forum to give better answers.

I am also concerned about the debt, but my understanding is that we can't look at it as a comparison to household debt.

Same as you, I know there are more qualified experts. I really wish that some were in the current administration.