According to USdebtclock.org, US total debt is increasing at 5x the rate of GDP growth. How long can this last? Why does no one care about this? None of the politicians even pretend to care anymore. Trump says we have a booming economy. The only thing that’s booming is the debt.
I personally think that we’re heading for economic Armageddon like we’ve never seen before.
Umm, ok.
Governments don’t run like a household budget.
Must be time for another tax cut. I know that every time I get a pay cut I have more money to pay bills.
We’re talking about government debt here, right? I don’t know where you get that it’s growing 5X faster than GDP, that site you reference is incomprehensible. US debt to GDP increased significantly in the 5 years after the 2007 financial crisis, but has been fairly steady at just over 100% of GDP since 2012.
Here’s a list of countries ranked by debt-to-GDP ratio. Japan has by far the highest debt; the U.S. is not great at 106%, but it’s not significantly more than the Euro area at 90%.
If you think low debt-to-GDP is a primary indicator of economic health, consider such fine economies as Afghanistan (8%), Russia (16%), Venezuela (31%)…
Not just natl debt, all debt at all levels, which is currently approaching $76T.
This.
So give us a cite for exactly what data you want to discuss. “According to USdebtclock.org” is useless as a reference.
Back in 2015 the deficit was $438 billion which is about 2% of GDP.
That could be managed with tax hikes and maybe some spending cuts.
Its more an issue of priorities. The US is one of the lowest taxed developed nations.
But people still want social welfare programs. We raise 26% of GDP in taxation while many nations are closer to 35-40% of GDP and they do fine (Netherlands, Germany, Norway Iceland).
Its more a testament to how dumb us voters are. We want tax cuts and increased spending at the same time.
Cutting taxes without also cutting spending is completely reckless.
Is the US debt clock not a good enough cite? You can go there yourself and see how much faster the total debt is increasing than the economy.
No its not. We can raise taxes and increase spending. Nothing wrong with that.
An America that collects 30-35% of GDP in tax revenue but also has UHC (doesn’t need to be medicare for all), a green new deal, free public college, subsidized daycare and a balanced budget is possible.
Haven’t you heard the term “Starve the Beast”? The Republicans want the deficit & debt to become as large and unmanageable as possible so they have an excuse to eliminate all social spending. That’s why debt always balloons under the Republicans while the Democrats try to shrink it. The Republicans cut taxes and spend like drunken sailors in an attempt to spend the government into the ground.
Looks to me like they are growing at roughly the same rate. Where do you get 5x from?
You’re probably just looking at the national debt. I’m looking at the US total debt, which includes federal, state, local, corporate, credit card, student loan, mortgage, etc etc debt.
But even just the national debt is growing at a moderately faster rate than the GDP.
If it’s debt at all levels, why is the 5x figure significant? You call it “US total debt” but that’s a meaningless figure as it includes not just government debt but personal debts as well and there’s no context historically or against other nations.
If it’s just the fact it’s a large sounding number, it’s a “lies, damned lies, and statistics” kind of statement.
One person’s debt is another’s asset. Until/unless there’s some kind of rationale presented for this is an issue and some kind of evidence that we’re in some historically aberrant debt territory (hey, we’re kind of not, really), then it’s not a topic I’m inclined to consider alarming.
For example, if Americans are currently holding onto $10 trillion in mortgages and another $5 trillion in car loans, this is not necessarily a problem if the homeowners are generally paying on time and were approved because their income and assets were in line with the amount of their loans. This is, in fact, considered a positive in our society, i.e. people owning homes and building equity.
OP, you poisoned your own thread by citing “total debt” without even emphasizing what you meant. Of course everyone’s going to assume you’re speaking of U.S.G. debt. And what’s up with USdebtclock.org? Even if you just wanted “flash”, was the casino-type look of spinning numbers the best flash you could find?
And the present-day financial anomaly is not unique to U.S.A. with its failed governance. (Good governance may be in increasingly short supply around the world. 
Although your own cite does show a few countries — e.g. Germany and Holland — running government surpluses.)
However I do agree with the sentiment that these uncharted high-debt waters are perilous. I was wondering how this puzzling bubble would progress if no supply shock ignites the powder-keg. But it looks like we’ve got a supply shock now, in spades. Heaven help us.
I’m really trying to figure out where the OP is going with this, mixing up government debt and household debt. It’s kinda got a whiff of goldbug stuff about it.
So the debt “isn’t a big deal?” The last economic crisis was caused by a debt bubble. There’s much more debt now than there was then. If we had a debt bubble back in 2008, what the hell do we have now?
So debt is fungible? Government debt is the same as mortgage debt?
This was the point I was making - you are mixing up all sources of any debt (whether or not it’s owed to ourselves even, which is an important consideration) and treating one the same as the other.
“Debt” by itself was not the cause of the 2008 financial crisis. That crisis was precipitated by mortgage debt, and not just any mortgage debt (the vast majority of which was and still is ok - lots of people who had mortgages 10 years ago still have them!) but some particularly toxic debt given out when it shouldn’t have. Government debt, in particular US government debt, was actually doing ok then, and is, putting a rather thick point on it, partially how we got out of that scrape. So, some kinds of debt=good, some kinds of debt=bad. Putting all of it in one basket and labeling it bad is nonsensical and contradicts all our lived experience.
The point being there’s no rationale here. Yes, it’s a problem if bad debt is issued. But what does that have to do with the current situation? Are you claiming all the new debt across all sources issued today is fundamentally terrible? Where’s your cite for that? Or are you looking at big, scary numbers and just making that assumption?