Topic: USA Debt Repayable - page 7. (Read 7608 times)

It is actually doable.

You decrease lending and borrowing (force austerity everywhere), increase inflation by a landslide (see where we are at?).

Then, once your money is readily inflating and value is dropping, you invent forced labour  laws with minimum wages (See what I did there?) and increase taxes a little.

What is happening here? Basically, we are creating a war on the value of the currency. We blow the currency as hard as we can, reduce its value enormously and KEEP INFLATION HIGHER THAN THE INTEREST RATE ON DEBT. (See now, what they are doing?!=

This, in turn, will solve the debt crisis. Now, it will also fuck the economy big time, it will hurt the people and make their life miserable for many years to come until the whole scheme went through and it will heavily relocate money into other countries, with offshore accounts. Oh wait, that stuff is still taxed as hell, and since the Franken and other currencies are getting STRONGER against our currencies, the governments win again, by fucking their own currency through the use of offshore tax havens.

Which have to be regulated, of course. (See what is happening now with the offshore people?)

I created a well thought out plan some years ago when I was still in a university, when the debt crisis first hit. Up till today, governments around the world have followed this plan by the latter. I am seriously surprised no one in a shadow society has called me up yet :D:D

Do remember that government debt is generally the savings of the public.  To "wipe away" government debt is to confiscate people's savings.  That's politically impossible in most democracies.

The US debt is being evaluated by fund managers who look after people's savings.  They are so sure it will be paid back that they lend to the government at a rate below inflation.  So US debt is comfortably repayable.

ty!!!!

FTFY

It probably did this already lol

If I had infinite credit I wouldn't pay it back either.

Of course its repayable.  Look at the US bond rates - if there were a risk of default, the rate would rise.  Right now, the US bond rate is less than inflation - in other words the rich are paying the US government to accept the money!

We're getting off topic here... but I'll dance for a moment.

I must be? Why categorize in terns of comfort as if suffering is a vice? I don't particularly seek to conform myself to other's mandates nor to over-confident oracles (but will take a lucky hash guess in a millisecond). Only those who's narrow world view precludes them seeing the value of suffering as a virtuous means to gain a-greater-good for themselves and their fellows (even as they reflexively suffer the boorish hum-drum venality of each other's ill humor to no profit) would find me unsufferable. I'd just depart a party if everyone appeared too comfortable - that's not my idea of a party - that's a assembly of social drones that's dressed in the same straight-jack uniform of conformity. Party's should be fun.



But this is just "the other" fallacy or more precisely the atheistic apologist strawman. The State imposing a philosophy of skepticism is not any different to some religions - except most of the latter are voluntary subscriptions and the prior inflict a sacrifice of life or time for not going with the intellectual-light (so to speak). Our very identity is based on what we believe not on what we don't believe. Making oneself the object of one's own contemplation that there can be no greater is to enter into the realm of vanity, cast off the benefit of the doubt and embrace the pallium of infallibility to make oneself God. I always wondered how atheists who find themselves in court feel about submitting their future oblivion to a trial of one's own infallible peers when their only hope for an acquittal rests in the notion of a reasonable doubt they don't extend to the possibility of God?  

The original common motive in these monstrous men's regimes (but terrible by what moral standard if there is none?) was really academic altruism more so than it was an organic desire for totalitarianism or fascism.  These desired THEIR particular vision for UTOPIA - at any price of blood and cleansing of wrong thoughts/beliefs necessary to gain it. I don't believe that any of these men started off with any maniacal desire to make themselves a supreme ruler or despotic monarch. Men want to be esteemed and loved and revered. That is an aspect of common human nature - from wherever it springs from. What good is esteem if there's no one left alive to hold that esteem or to impress - not even God? As GK Chesterton said "if there were no God there would be no atheists" - and I doubt that any believer or unbeliever would disagree with that.

You are being somewhat sly here by trying to blame the atrocities of Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin on the taints of some religious influence in their lives. Shame on you. I suppose you are intimating that these infamous men were not quite pure enough atheists in their orthodoxy of supreme skepticism (a philosophy of negativism that is not unlike religion in a strange counter-faith aspect). The truth is they were men who caved into malefic actions (evil) and let it consume them -- and everyone around them. If there were no concept of evil there would be no outrage or concern over anything - not even a motive to hate God or religion or even for believers to scorn the warp-speed reach of the FlyingHawkinSpaghettiWheelchair  (Stephen Hawking, that warp-speed traveling tower-of-genus who boldly-goes-to-where-no-man-cared-to-go-before to insist that the laws-of-nature existed without a law giver before time and space even existed).  

Opportunity can be good or bad - the devil of course is in the details, the motives and the ability of takers to wield power to productive and good ends. But if it's all for naught beyond the here-and-now then as the scarecrow of Oz said "Of course, some people do go both ways" and as someone else most recently said "what difference does it really make at this point?". Choices mean nothing in that case and there's not even a principal of causality that would make "yes" and "no" or "right" and "wrong" mean the same thing from one day to the next.


Thanks for suffering the read. Hopefully fun...

<<--- back to topic

So I agree this is the most likely scenario, one of the effects of this scenario is the polarisation of wealth, the first spenders of the new money attract the wealth through the Cantillon Effect, at the expense of the productive people who produce the wealth in the economy.

So the scenario is very stressful for people just getting buy, the ones who can't afford property today but good for the people in power.

What type of things should Joe average invest in, obviously taking on debt is relative to how close you are to the new money. look at an average university grad working in Starbucks taking on debt, they are one of the last earners of the inflation causing new money and it is going to be much harder to pay off that dept as they earn less relative to the inflation, in contrast a graduate from Yale working in law, an accounting firm, government or a large corporation, is well positioned to take advantage of inflation by acquiring assets.

PM's aside what are mechanisms for preserving or saving wealth in this scenario? (Bitcoin is the only one I have found but there must be more, any ideas?)

None of those characters are atheists, because the belief in government is a theistic belief. Believing in government is believing in a god, so by definition it's not possible to be an atheist who believes in government.

Wow, you must be unsufferable at parties.

None of the totalitarian characters trotted out in the "atheists have killed more people" fallacy, whether they were atheist or not, killed in the name of a lack of belief in a god. Some of them suppressed religion as a tool to further the goal of totalitarian control.

"State-imposed atheism" is a misnomer; there can be no such thing. Imposed irreligion is not atheism. Atheism is only the lack of belief in a god; one can't force people to not believe in a god.

The actions of Mao, Pol and Joe (who attended seminary) were totalitarian opportunists. They sought total authority and banned religion which would compete with that authority. The pursuit of control over a people was the cause for the bloodshed.

Although Stalin initially sought to rid Russia of religion, once firmly in office he re-instîtuted the Russian Orthodox Church and re-opened theological schools. Suppression of religion was a tool not a reason.

Pol Pot is said to have practiced some Theravada Buddhism (and his Khmer Rouge were radical Buddhists). He studied at a Catholic school in Phnom Pen for 8 years. This mad man targeted not only religion but science, medicine and education. Political dissent was not permitted, with torture a common sentence.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=20th_century_atrocities

Printing is the easiest haircut possible.  A default would mean:
a) The biggest losers would be Americans.  Most debt is owned by Americans and a huge chunk of that is private pension funds.
b) New debt would be essentially impossible.  That would force a "balanced budget" by defacto.
c) Simply cutoff social security (no reduction in payments, no adjusting eligibility, the checks just stop forever) or raise real taxes massively (something on the order of doubling taxes for all brackets with no exemptions).

A haircut would be an instant implosion of the government as we know it today.  A devaluation means robbing people slowly over time.   The difference between a car out of control at 100 mph and no brakes coasting to a stop once it runs out of gas or smashing into a wall with throttle wide open.

So if a country like the US can't pay its debt in "good faith" (i.e. no honoring the letter of the contract and devaluing the value of the returned payments given the choice of a default or a devaluation the choice is clear.  If you think the US government will "default" on its debts the more likely scenario is above average inflation over the next couple decades as money supply growth makes that dollar denominated debt worth less and less until it can pay it.  Make sure your financial choices reflect that scenario.

The irony is they will default on this, but protect the banks and wealth stewards.

This sounds about right.
Japan is definitely in this stage (this inflation is the primary weapon in the currency war)

The winners are projected to be the capital / influences behind the IMF and World Bank who will save the day with an SDR type world currency used as a reserve currency for the world.

Ultimately they will pick the winner and loser nations and possibly enforce militant rule through a peace keeping UN program.

The EU also made an unpredictable move in this currency war instead of inflating they prescribed a hair cut.

Bitcoin to me are like the rodents at the end of the dinosaur era 10 years before the asteroid, not able to compete but the ultimate winners.

Our finite one world global ecology is another under estimate player, in this situation it too can't lose, it's just a question of allegiance. Who will ally with the law of nature and freedom, sustainability, and who will ally with the laws of men and tyranny and economic growth?

Tyranny has the upper hand and will up until it can't hold on any more. I think an environmental correction will be the first shift in a power in favor of global freedom and sustainability.

The debt is a trivial problem compared to the unfunded liabilities.

Politicians have made a lot of promises that can not be kept, both to their own retired employees and the public at large. They promises are not notational - they are promises for real good and services such as medical care and inflation-adjusted pensions. The inability of those promises to be kept can not be corrected by devaluation.

It's almost as bad as if they promised every person over 65 their own private moon base. It's just not possible to produce that many of them, so the promises will not be kept.

^^ welcome to the forum Sonofbits. I concur with much of what you are saying but alas my coffee has not hit my bloodstream yet, so am unable to add any worthwhile, cogent points...


Wow that is a neat site. It's like a car crash and I can't look away.

Funny as well, it looks like the student debt loan is going to reach 1 trillion (it's at 980 bill right now). But there isn't enough room for the 1 trillion decimal place, so I wonder it'll just roll back to '0' like an analog odometer.

This ties into political ideology also. "Wealth" requires at least the illusion of privilege. The good news is that your average American Middle Class person today lives better than any king of a few generations ago ever did.

Think about it. Here's just s short list of things that the secular new Princes of The Empire that The Fed built get to enjoy today at all ranges of the social and class(less) strata. Most every  Proletariat (via free vote-Democrat EBT virtual money) and the rising two-car divorced with children Bourgeoisie wanna-be have:

Air-conditioned/heated "castles", court-jesters (the talking heads on CNN, ABC, CBS et-al of the MSM politburo) and entertainment on-demand (HDTV with hundreds of channels of pump-up-your-hormone with feel-good pleasure/excitement [testosterone/endomorphins aka "endogenous morphine"/adrenaline]),  legions of available contracepting-females for easy buddy-sex-partners (bitcoin-wenches ),  mobility options (horseless carriages ranging from eco-fraud-electric to high-performance-gas-guzzlers), passenger-jets and cruise ships [with options for cattle-class to pretend-to class], weekend gladiator games in the football and sports stadiums, travel-adventures to exotic-places (that all have the same ubiquitous same Western Empire style franchises and strip-malls [once you have cleared the TSA Obergruppenführers]), pick-your-own-religion de-jur from the smorgasbord of Franchise Religious offings that are "close enough for government work (and We Trust in God too)" , communication (Snail-mail, Internet, Phone, smartphone, ever new hand gestures and emoticons [secure or not]) etc. etc. etc.

So this means that those who set up the structure "that is", whoever they really are , NEED BILLIONS of schmucks willing to trade their mortal lives to sharecrop on the plantations and give back a vig to the enabling and designated "rulers" who claim rights to the the arbitrary geo-political boundaries that said schmucks reside in (whether its the USA, Russia, China or virtual-land). They NEED servants and they need to have a down-line to sell to in order to have a master-slave relationship. There's an inherent co-dependency and if you're smart enough and good enough they invite you higher up into the food chain to your own indifference level depending on how much control and leverage over you that you give them and how much you are willing to sell one's soul (that fewer these days even believe exists so are indifferent to - spurning the notion of Pascal's Wager that there's might be a DEBT owed to the Creator come post-death-cashout).

NO THE DEBT CAN'T BE PAID. They will continue to inflate it away and let the natural mortality retire the old debt as people age and die off and keep progressing it on the youth. THE BIG PROBLEM is that the demographics are busted. The West at large is aborting its youth and being outbirthed by its ideological enemies all at the same time it is mortgaging ever more of the future on the backs of the youth yet unborn (and why the sudden rush by the ideological leaders to embrace non-traditional religions such as Islam to cover their bets and to import massive numbers of foreign "out of status" immigrants to replace or dillute the existing governed subjects here in America).

From a pure risk-reward analysis - the youth ALWAYS rebel once they figure out they are the stuckee's and all they have to look forward to is inheriting a lot of "wealth" that is under the perpetual assault of inflation from the prior generations to spend in a context that was ordained to bear the brunt of it all. And this too is another reason why "they" want to keep the population of the youth diminished to keep it below the critical mass of ideological flash point. At any rate, there are other uncontrollable external risks as well - natural "acts of god", disease (the cost of promiscuity in using one's own sex hormones to keep everyone on the reservation and sharecropping), generalized APATHY (no more response to Gov's glass-trinkets), and of course just insane rulers who start unsanctioned herd-thinning wars for ideological reasons (e.g. ref. the 100s of millions slaughtered in the last century by the atheist-Marxist ideologues Pol Pot, Stalin, Mayo).

There's two kinds of treasure folks - that treasure with fluctuating value (that always trends DOWN to increase entropy) that is tradeable and fungible for tangible things here and now in time-and-space;  and that other treasure who many are betting-on-the-come on the other side of Pascal's Wager beyond time-and-space who see the opportunity for a wide open pot with absolutely zero downside (status quo) if they're wrong.

The other mitigating thing here is that every other country is now in the same game. No one can really profit by the world's federal reserve currency getting taken out. In essence the USA is in a position to extort the rest of the world to do pretty much anything it wants "or else". Everyone should want to help the USA. The really bad news is there's NOT ENOUGH AVAILABLE FREE FIAT CURRENCY on the planet to PURCHASE US DEBT nor enough printing bandwidth to even print the currency fast enough to BUY BACK our own bonds to MONETIZE our own debt with the circular debts of promissory notes. It's comical when you think about it. And those in control are as incompetent as you and I or worse...  

Choose your bets and your treasures wisely,

In fact, FED could wipe out the debt partially, they are actually doing this now by printing money to buy Agent MBS, these securities would worth much less if they don't print money to buy

But for the government, their debt is a severe problem, because they do not own FED, and they can not create money

If a country's government own its central bank, then the national debt will never be a problem

Yes it is possible, there are no systemic obstacles, only self imposed limitations.

Money is debt.

It is not possible under the current system.