The US National Debt is Over $35 trillion

[Gromdor]

There are also these guys: Why some of America’s top CEOs take a $1 salary - The Hustle

[DayoOlabisi]

9 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

There are also these guys: Why some of America’s top CEOs take a $1 salary - The Hustle

as a tertiary issue, i'm all in favor of restructuring the tax system to, among other things, eliminate loopholes.

[Edumakated]

9 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

There are also these guys: Why some of America’s top CEOs take a $1 salary - The Hustle

The data is the data...

The top 1% pay nearly 50% of all the taxes.  Yes, there may be an outlier example of someone with a really creative accountant skirting taxes through some loophole, but the fact remains the wealthiest pay the most taxes.

Regarding CEOs that take $1 salaries.  Most are company founders and they have exorbitant amount of equity.  Typically, a CEO taking a salary is usually an employee that was hired or risen through the ranks, not a company founder.  C Suite executives typically have most of their income in equity to ensure their incentives are tied to shareholder value.  There is nothing nefarious about it.  It is basically performance based compensation.

[Gromdor]

1 minute ago, Edumakated said:

The data is the data...

The top 1% pay nearly 50% of all the taxes.  Yes, there may be an outlier example of someone with a really creative accountant skirting taxes through some loophole, but the fact remains the wealthiest pay the most taxes.

Regarding CEOs that take $1 salaries.  Most are company founders and they have exorbitant amount of equity.  Typically, a CEO taking a salary is usually an employee that was hired or risen through the ranks, not a company founder.  C Suite executives typically have most of their income in equity to ensure their incentives are tied to shareholder value.  There is nothing nefarious about it.  It is basically performance based compensation.

Except to when it comes time to file income tax. The top 10% owns 89% of everything- they should be paying 89% of the taxes.

The Bottom 50% owns 3%- they should be paying 3%

Trying to get more is just trying to squeeze blood from a rock.

[+OverSword]

17 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Except to when it comes time to file income tax. The top 10% owns 89% of everything- they should be paying 89% of the taxes.

The Bottom 50% owns 3%- they should be paying 3%

Trying to get more is just trying to squeeze blood from a rock.

Are you proposing the elimination of an income tax and switch over to a heavy property tax to ensure the wealthy pay appropriately? 

[Gromdor]

9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Are you proposing the elimination of an income tax and switch over to a heavy property tax to ensure the wealthy pay appropriately? 

Nah. That's too easy to manipulate by just claiming rent. 

Edit to add:  I suppose I should give an example:  make all your properties owned by a company, charge yourself $1 rent, gouge the poor people with $2000.00 rents, and pay the taxes with the poor people's money.

Edited August 9 by Gromdor

[Edumakated]

3 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Nah. That's too easy to manipulate by just claiming rent. 

Edit to add:  I suppose I should give an example:  make all your properties owned by a company, charge yourself $1 rent, gouge the poor people with $2000.00 rents, and pay the taxes with the poor people's money.

If you own the company, then you are still going to be paying the taxes as a shareholder.  There is only so many games you can play with the tax code.  The key is to follow the rules to your advantage.

The easiest way to prevent all the accounting and legal shenanigans to simplify the code and remove all the special interest deductions.  Go with a simple flat tax on all income regardless of source.

[Gromdor]

3 minutes ago, Edumakated said:

If you own the company, then you are still going to be paying the taxes as a shareholder.  There is only so many games you can play with the tax code.  The key is to follow the rules to your advantage.

The easiest way to prevent all the accounting and legal shenanigans to simplify the code and remove all the special interest deductions.  Go with a simple flat tax on all income regardless of source.

Umm...  Trump International?  Trump paid 0$.

[Edumakated]

2 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Umm...  Trump International?  Trump paid 0$.

You do understand how deductions, depreciation, and carry forward losses work?  Again, change the tax code. 

Anyone who pays taxes is going to follow the tax code as outlined to their advantage.  The more complicated you make it, the easier it is to manipulate the rules.  I'm sure you claim every single deduction and credit legally allowed.  Heck, the Bidens set up S corps to reduce their tax burden.  By your logic, they are cheating instead of just taking a w2.

[Gromdor]

Just now, Edumakated said:

You do understand how deductions, depreciation, and carry forward losses work?  Again, change the tax code. 

Anyone who pays taxes is going to follow the tax code as outlined to their advantage.  The more complicated you make it, the easier it is to manipulate the rules.  I'm sure you claim every single deduction and credit legally allowed.  Heck, the Bidens set up S corps to reduce their tax burden.  By your logic, they are cheating instead of just taking a w2.

I do understand deductions- you were the one claiming that the system couldn't be gamed that far- not I.

[Tatetopa]

31 minutes ago, Edumakated said:

According to IRS data, the top 1% earned 26.3% of income but pay 45.8 percent of all federal income taxes.

Not sure where you think the rich don't pay squat.  Bottom 50% don't pay jack squat.... zero.   In fact, the bottom 5% basically has a negative tax rate as they are getting money from the government.

OK, a big exaggeration on my part. Its not true except under specific circumstances.  The rich do pay taxes.  Corporations do pay taxes.  Then we come to a difference of opinions @Edumakated.

You may or may not think of society as a social enforcer of standards that abandon or punish citizens who are not moral, ethical, or productive.  I do not think of government as being a moral tutor.  That is for parents and community as one grows up.  I think of a government as a business.  The government is in the business  of producing citizens that can contribute to society as a whole with knowledge applied to productive work..

I come from a precision manufacturing  background.  When I think of running the US as a business, I think of it as a manufacturing business.    You make money by producing a product that will meet quality standards more efficiently than competitors.  You don't make money scrapping products that you already have sunk capital and labor into producing.  You build your manufacturing to avoid scrap or by repairing it in a cost effective way.

Sadly, some people are  scrap products and will never produce a positive outcome.  However they reproduce and their children are not scrap products at an early age.  Good public schools, assistance for shelter, and free food at school may help make a productive citizen out of these children.  It takes a good public school to provide mentoring, the excitement and accomplishment attached to learning, and the environment to make a young person believe they can be something.  It is an investment that is predicted to provide a good return as that person grows up and contributes to the tax stream.  The same is true of elites,  they have to contribute more than it costs to produce them.  So yeah, I am a firm believer that public assistance can be profitable for a government. 

 

I have been a follower of Warren Buffet for a lot of years.  He thinks the wealthy do not pay enough tax. One of his more famous quips is that his tax rate is lower than his secretary's  percentage  

 

[Edumakated]

23 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

OK, a big exaggeration on my part. Its not true except under specific circumstances.  The rich do pay taxes.  Corporations do pay taxes.  Then we come to a difference of opinions @Edumakated.

You may or may not think of society as a social enforcer of standards that abandon or punish citizens who are not moral, ethical, or productive.  I do not think of government as being a moral tutor.  That is for parents and community as one grows up.  I think of a government as a business.  The government is in the business  of producing citizens that can contribute to society as a whole with knowledge applied to productive work..

I come from a precision manufacturing  background.  When I think of running the US as a business, I think of it as a manufacturing business.    You make money by producing a product that will meet quality standards more efficiently than competitors.  You don't make money scrapping products that you already have sunk capital and labor into producing.  You build your manufacturing to avoid scrap or by repairing it in a cost effective way.

Sadly, some people are  scrap products and will never produce a positive outcome.  However they reproduce and their children are not scrap products at an early age.  Good public schools, assistance for shelter, and free food at school may help make a productive citizen out of these children.  It takes a good public school to provide mentoring, the excitement and accomplishment attached to learning, and the environment to make a young person believe they can be something.  It is an investment that is predicted to provide a good return as that person grows up and contributes to the tax stream.  The same is true of elites,  they have to contribute more than it costs to produce them.  So yeah, I am a firm believer that public assistance can be profitable for a government. 

 

I have been a follower of Warren Buffet for a lot of years.  He thinks the wealthy do not pay enough tax. One of his more famous quips is that his tax rate is lower than his secretary's  percentage  

 

Warren is being a bit disingenuous...   Many of the companies he owns through Berkshire frequently challenge the IRS.  I recall his quip about his secretary.  The reality is his secretary earns a w2 wage which is taxed differently from capital gains.  Warren could easily just pay himself a w2 salary and pay higher taxes but he chooses not to...

Capital gains is taxed lower than salaried wages because capital gains is investment income meaning that in most cases, it was already taxed.  In addition, that money is being risked and you cannot write off all your losses but get taxed on your gains.  This is necessary to keep capital flowing into investments.  The issue is we tax w2 wages way too high... not that we under tax capital gains.

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, Edumakated said:

  The issue is we tax w2 wages way too high... not that we under tax capital gains.

We have different opinions again.  If you live here and are a citizen member of our club, you pay the dues.  We decide whether it is too much by our actions.  Are you planning to uproot your life in the US and move to a country with lower taxes?  Can you suggest  another country that offers lower taxes and more benefits for any class from poverty to elite?  Are you looking for a free lunch somewhere?

[Alchopwn]

On 8/7/2024 at 11:38 PM, DayoOlabisi said:

that certainly is what the brochure says. the problem is that a debt based society rewards the richest and punishes the poorest. this is the reason we see such wealth inequality. it is likely only to grow.

Actually  I must completely disagree.  If a country runs into debt, the people with the most invested in the society will be the most affected, financially.  If you are poor to begin with, you are used to living poor.  If you are rich, and you lose everything, you become Nouveau-Poor, and that is a total shock to the system...  A bit like taking someone's pampered poodle and chucking it into a septic tank (pardon the metaphor). It might be able to swim and clamber out, but it will probably drown.

On 8/7/2024 at 11:38 PM, DayoOlabisi said:

it is also important to mention that there is a threshold beyond which this system no longer works. at some point, bonds become more difficult to sell and permanently more expensive to fulfill. the answer, of course, is inflation. but it isn't the permanent, expected 2% inflation target (which is already a constant, regressive tax). in fact, the Fed has already suggested that the 2% target might not be something we can sustain for long periods any more. the risk at the far end (and inevitable end unless the trajectory changes) is hyperinflation.

Well, I think you will find that the US economy is better managed than that.  You also haven't factored in the fact that the $US is the global currency.  The scenario you are suggesting is likely only if you have supreme incompetents running the economy.  Presently, The US economy under Biden is dragging the rest of the world, kicking and screaming, out of recession. 

On 8/7/2024 at 11:38 PM, DayoOlabisi said:

US tax-to-gdp ratio ~27%

US debt-to-gdp ratio ~123%

US government spending as percentage of gdp ~36%

US unfunded liabilities ~$43 trillion

US total combined wealth of billionaires ~$5 trillion

US tax-to-gdp ratio ~27%  - It is probably sitting about where it needs to be.

US debt-to-gdp ratio ~123% - This is less than ideal, but very manageable.

US government spending as percentage of gdp ~36% - Keynesian economics works.  This is fine.

US unfunded liabilities ~$43 trillion - I dispute this figure.  Most of these liabilities are subject to various programs that don't require continuous govt funding.  It's a beat-up.

US total combined wealth of billionaires ~$5 trillion - How much higher is this figure if you add in millionaires?

[+DieChecker]

I voted "No", but I do recognize that we get a Lot of benefits given back. Not the least of which is the military. Such a powerful tool that no one dares oppose us in any real way. 

Yet ONLY the interest on our Debt is now more of an expense than our entire military spending. 

Theres something wrong with that.

And its not just the current Debt, its that it seems it will keep increasing at several trillion per year till eventually the bubble will pop. It seems it could easily be within my lifetime. Which makes it a threat to my kids futures.

The state of California is about to have a horrendous year in 2025, as it has to cut between 10% and 15%, of its spending. Watch what happens... Thats the whole USA in 10 years.

We need a better budgetary spending system. More accountability on staying near the Total Revenues.

[DayoOlabisi]

On 8/10/2024 at 3:00 AM, Alchopwn said:

Actually  I must completely disagree.  If a country runs into debt, the people with the most invested in the society will be the most affected, financially.  If you are poor to begin with, you are used to living poor.  If you are rich, and you lose everything, you become Nouveau-Poor, and that is a total shock to the system...  A bit like taking someone's pampered poodle and chucking it into a septic tank (pardon the metaphor). It might be able to swim and clamber out, but it will probably drown.

Well, I think you will find that the US economy is better managed than that.  You also haven't factored in the fact that the $US is the global currency.  The scenario you are suggesting is likely only if you have supreme incompetents running the economy.  Presently, The US economy under Biden is dragging the rest of the world, kicking and screaming, out of recession. 

US tax-to-gdp ratio ~27%  - It is probably sitting about where it needs to be.

US debt-to-gdp ratio ~123% - This is less than ideal, but very manageable.

US government spending as percentage of gdp ~36% - Keynesian economics works.  This is fine.

US unfunded liabilities ~$43 trillion - I dispute this figure.  Most of these liabilities are subject to various programs that don't require continuous govt funding.  It's a beat-up.

US total combined wealth of billionaires ~$5 trillion - How much higher is this figure if you add in millionaires?

you point out that rich people are dependent on being rich. this does not address the systemic issues of wealth inequality, which is the claim that i made. it does, however, reinforce my point that rich people will want to continue monetary trends that benefit them, though the benefits get consolidated over time. this is part of the human problem. a debt-based society does not lack stakeholders. a debt-based society incentivizes stakeholders to continue to be a debt-based society.

US dollar being global currency - yes, this undoubtedly props up the dollar. it is the best currency in the world. much of it is due to the petrol-dollar system, which is beginning to end, and the euro-dollar banking system which is increasingly unmanageable. the US dollar will probably outlast all other current world currencies, but it won't last forever. and yet, this doesn't even address the main problem. because i have not said that the dollar collapse is most likely, or that debt-default is most likely. more likely is hyperinflation. this is partly because of the dollar's role in the world. it needs to be maintained and as a result, there will be no default on debt. yet, the debt cannot be repaid without almost exponential growth. and so, the debt will be covered through inflation. the levels at which the debt is rising will mathematically require ever increasing levels of inflation. we are beginning to see the end of the 2% inflation target that was supposedly healthy. you can argue one way or another whether it actually was, but we are going to be sold that 3%, no 4%, no X% is actually healthy etc. and at some point that becomes unsustainable (and only increases wealth inequality, as i said). all the while, the rest of the globe will transition away from a less stable dollar (they already are positioning for this) and will value debt denominated in US dollars less and less. in the future, this will require even more deficit spending and more taxes as the market for bonds cools. so bonds at traditional rates can't cover the debt and taxes can't cover the debt (we don't have the available wealth to cover it without destroying the economy). the only option left is to inflate it away. we can't inflate it away at 2% because we have to finance our bonds at higher rates in a cooler market. this means higher interest on the debt, that then requires more bonds at higher rates and more taxes and more inflation.

US total combined wealth of billionaires and millionaires ~$31 trillion. congratulations, we've taxed them all at 100%, destroyed the economy and effectively brought down the wealth of everyone else to ~0 and we're only $4 trillion in debt now (and if we can't admit we have a spending problem, that's 4 trillion and growing...). keep in mind that a significant percentage of millionaires are retirees, who only have $1-3 million to last them the rest of their lives. these are not people who can give up $1 million and just get back to the grindstone to generate more wealth. again, this is all just to put things into perspective. it's not even a realistic strategy because value is interdependent and all the numbers change as soon as we start doing it. it's just about showing how much available wealth there is (or rather is not).

i think you and i agree that inflation is the answer. you just seem to have this general sense that is it well-managed and i'm pointing out the exact opposite. the "manageable" situation that we are in is exactly what is going to convince us that we can "manage" a little more and a little more. and that is exactly how things become unmanageable.

of course, it is possible that we undergo a tech revolution and somehow don't outspend its increases for a period of time and that catches us up. but that's about our only hope outside of fixing spending, which stakeholders won't want because the spending is the investment that spurs gains etc etc (there's your Keynesianism hard at work). as you pointed out, the rich people do not want to lose their wealth so they will prop it up at some future cost and when it comes time to pay that future cost, the rich people then will seek to do the same again. only at some point, it will not work. the pace at which the consequences come due is ever-increasing and it will get to the point where the strategy continues but the consequences become immediate. that is the shock to the system that will both, be devastating, and finally catalyze change. though whether the change is good or not is up to whoever is dealing with it at the time. it might be that the crisis will be blamed on some salient, recent news and not the fundamental problems that were denied for years and years.

[Alchopwn]

On 8/13/2024 at 12:42 AM, DayoOlabisi said:

you point out that rich people are dependent on being rich. 

No, I am not pointing out that rich people depend on being rich.  You have understood my point in only superficial way.  

On 8/13/2024 at 12:42 AM, DayoOlabisi said:

 this does not address the systemic issues of wealth inequality, which is the claim that i made. it does, however, reinforce my point that rich people will want to continue monetary trends that benefit them, though the benefits get consolidated over time. this is part of the human problem. a debt-based society does not lack stakeholders. a debt-based society incentivizes stakeholders to continue to be a debt-based society.

And who do you think is going to magically appear and solve wealth inequality?  The ghost of Karl Marx, who has long since ceased haunting Europe and taken up residence in the hind brain of envious, lazy, unsuccessful people?  Look very closely at the total abject failure of Communism around the world.  Right now, China is teetering on economic collapse too, and it embraced some capitalism to keep itself alive, but is so fundamentally ignorant of the systems that keep a society alive that it has utterly undermined itself.  

The fact is, within a Capitalist system, ANYONE can become rich.  Most of the great fortunes generated in the last 35 years were started by enterprising young men in the basements and garages of their family home.  They see a need in the market, they research it, they build a prototype product, research some more to improve it, and they take it to market.  Three years later they are a millionaire.  Six years after that they are a billionaire.  It all depends on how hard you are prepared to work, both physically and mentally.  The majority of these people didn't start with family fortunes to fall back on, and they went into debt to finance their ambitions.

This is a normal state of affairs.  ALL societies arrange themselves in hierarchies, ESPECIALLY the communist ones.  The difference is, that Capitalism allows a much faster progress thru the class structure based on merit.  You are also far less likely to be murdered in a purge in a capitalist system.

In fact wealth equality, even if it could be achieved, is undesirable.  If everybody received $20,000 a year, 3 years later you will have your first millionaires.  The fact is, if you are looking for fair wages, you are playing the game incorrectly, you should be aiming to run your own business.  Hierarchies are normal in human societies, and always have been.

On 8/13/2024 at 12:42 AM, DayoOlabisi said:

 the US dollar will probably outlast all other current world currencies, but it won't last forever.

It should last as long as the United States of America does.  The USA remains the largest and richest global marketplace, and is backed by the largest and most powerful military, and has the most globally influential culture.  What makes the USA different is that it has finished its territorial expansion period, and doesn't go about attacking other countries unless they pick a fight.  The USA has been a very good global hegemon, when compared to the other powers that have held that position.

On 8/13/2024 at 12:42 AM, DayoOlabisi said:

because i have not said that the dollar collapse is most likely, or that debt-default is most likely. more likely is hyperinflation. this is partly because of the dollar's role in the world. it needs to be maintained and as a result, there will be no default on debt. yet, the debt cannot be repaid without almost exponential growth. and so, the debt will be covered through inflation. the levels at which the debt is rising will mathematically require ever increasing levels of inflation. we are beginning to see the end of the 2% inflation target that was supposedly healthy. you can argue one way or another whether it actually was, but we are going to be sold that 3%, no 4%, no X% is actually healthy etc. and at some point that becomes unsustainable (and only increases wealth inequality, as i said). all the while, the rest of the globe will transition away from a less stable dollar (they already are positioning for this) and will value debt denominated in US dollars less and less. in the future, this will require even more deficit spending and more taxes as the market for bonds cools. so bonds at traditional rates can't cover the debt and taxes can't cover the debt (we don't have the available wealth to cover it without destroying the economy). the only option left is to inflate it away. we can't inflate it away at 2% because we have to finance our bonds at higher rates in a cooler market. this means higher interest on the debt, that then requires more bonds at higher rates and more taxes and more inflation.

The present inflation problem is not limited to the USA.  It is a product of COVID, when EVERY nation in the world opted to pay for the pandemic by turning on the mint printing presses.  As such, there is no chance that this will change the global system, as everyone is in the same boat and the USA under Biden has been leading the world economically.

As to inflation figures, some of us have lived thru times when inflation was running at 7% and society didn't cease to function.  Inflation means that debt is easier to pay off as currency is worth less, and wages tend to rise, as do prices.  I don't think hyperinflation is around the corner for the USA.

On 8/13/2024 at 12:42 AM, DayoOlabisi said:

i think you and i agree that inflation is the answer. you just seem to have this general sense that is it well-managed and i'm pointing out the exact opposite. the "manageable" situation that we are in is exactly what is going to convince us that we can "manage" a little more and a little more. and that is exactly how things become unmanageable.

The Biden administration has made it a priority to decrease inflation and has used monetary policy to change interest rates.  I can't see the Harris administration doing anything different.

The real wild card is how much damage China's economic collapse will do to the USA and the global economy.

[DayoOlabisi]

8 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

No, I am not pointing out that rich people depend on being rich.  You have understood my point in only superficial way.  

And who do you think is going to magically appear and solve wealth inequality?  The ghost of Karl Marx, who has long since ceased haunting Europe and taken up residence in the hind brain of envious, lazy, unsuccessful people?  Look very closely at the total abject failure of Communism around the world.  Right now, China is teetering on economic collapse too, and it embraced some capitalism to keep itself alive, but is so fundamentally ignorant of the systems that keep a society alive that it has utterly undermined itself.  

The fact is, within a Capitalist system, ANYONE can become rich.  Most of the great fortunes generated in the last 35 years were started by enterprising young men in the basements and garages of their family home.  They see a need in the market, they research it, they build a prototype product, research some more to improve it, and they take it to market.  Three years later they are a millionaire.  Six years after that they are a billionaire.  It all depends on how hard you are prepared to work, both physically and mentally.  The majority of these people didn't start with family fortunes to fall back on, and they went into debt to finance their ambitions.

This is a normal state of affairs.  ALL societies arrange themselves in hierarchies, ESPECIALLY the communist ones.  The difference is, that Capitalism allows a much faster progress thru the class structure based on merit.  You are also far less likely to be murdered in a purge in a capitalist system.

In fact wealth equality, even if it could be achieved, is undesirable.  If everybody received $20,000 a year, 3 years later you will have your first millionaires.  The fact is, if you are looking for fair wages, you are playing the game incorrectly, you should be aiming to run your own business.  Hierarchies are normal in human societies, and always have been.

It should last as long as the United States of America does.  The USA remains the largest and richest global marketplace, and is backed by the largest and most powerful military, and has the most globally influential culture.  What makes the USA different is that it has finished its territorial expansion period, and doesn't go about attacking other countries unless they pick a fight.  The USA has been a very good global hegemon, when compared to the other powers that have held that position.

The present inflation problem is not limited to the USA.  It is a product of COVID, when EVERY nation in the world opted to pay for the pandemic by turning on the mint printing presses.  As such, there is no chance that this will change the global system, as everyone is in the same boat and the USA under Biden has been leading the world economically.

As to inflation figures, some of us have lived thru times when inflation was running at 7% and society didn't cease to function.  Inflation means that debt is easier to pay off as currency is worth less, and wages tend to rise, as do prices.  I don't think hyperinflation is around the corner for the USA.

The Biden administration has made it a priority to decrease inflation and has used monetary policy to change interest rates.  I can't see the Harris administration doing anything different.

The real wild card is how much damage China's economic collapse will do to the USA and the global economy.

i think we're talking past each other a bit here because you think that i misrepresented what you said and i think you have too. let's just hope we get the AI tech boom that makes this all moot for at least another generation.

[+DieChecker]

https://www.marketplace.org/2024/08/13/u-s-debt-just-hit-35-trillion-is-it-putting-the-global-economy-at-risk/

Quote

Global debt hit a milestone recently. If you add up the debt of all of the countries on Earth, you end up with a stunning $91 trillion. More than a third of that comes from one country: the United States.  

Quote

This nation’s gross cumulative debt has hit $35 trillion — a number so large, the International Monetary Fund warns that it’s putting the entire global economy at risk.

This part is funny. Or maybe not...

Quote

Keep in mind, a dollar bill is just over 6 inches long, and 35 trillion of them would almost reach Pluto. 

 

[+DieChecker]

About 25 years ago I had a lot of Debt. I had a lot of Credit Cards. I think maybe 10. I'd been taught by a friend how to juggle my accounts using transfers, and credit increases, and opening new accounts. But it got so I had no available credit, and I couldnt get any good new credit. And I was struggling with minimum payments. Some cards were getting ready to start legal proceedings.

So, know what I did? I used a consolidation service and closed all the accounts. I sold my nice car and bought a junker. I moved from my nice apartment to a "bad" neighborhood. I started looking for a better job. I didnt eat out every day. I ate ramin and soup. (Yeah i know ramin is technically soup...)

But you get my point. There's a breaking point. BUT, IT IS BETTER if you stop before that point. Problem is no one will stop till they learn for themselves.

The USA is about a decade away from learning a HARD lesson. It would be better... easier on everyone... If we turned toward that fiscal reality now... But we won't. 

Just my opinion though. Tons of people have told me there is no problem and never will be.

I think those stock brokers that jumped from windows in the 1930s probably said the same thing....

[Myles]

It is how our young think is the way to live.   Carry debt and hope it goes away.   It doesn't, usually.   

[+DieChecker]

20 hours ago, Myles said:

It is how our young think is the way to live.   Carry debt and hope it goes away.   It doesn't, usually.   

Doesnt help that teachers, universities/colleges, and financial counselors, all tell young people they need to take out big credit cards, to develope their credit.

When what ususlly happens is the opposite, and they ruin their credit.