Why liberals should care about a balanced budget.

[♪alt13]

Your quote says "permanent". Where did I mention otherwise?

1)The fed doesn't print money to buy treasury securities. not temporarily and not ever
2)If you click and read the the second link(I will post again) you will see that this distinction(impermanence) means that the fed is not monetizing our debt, the fed is holding it. In other words they are still deficits.

https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/article/9644

Correct. I already said as much. See the FoF comment.

As to the bolded part, ex-Fed Chairman Bernanke and your previous comment were absolutely correct that the govt should step in and spend on investments to make the debt more sustainable, and payable.

glad we agree

Your initial premise was that social welfare cuts would be the result of increasing debt loads. The opposite is true: the debt will increase because of increasing social welfare loads.

Again not my premise. I wouldn't feel qualified to make that determination on my own. The CBO said that we would need a tax increase or spending cuts of 14% to service the increased debt payments within the next 10 years. It is likely that the Dems and Reps will split the difference meaning a possible 7% cut in welfare programs just as boomers retire.

Also, I didn't do the math but back of the napkin calculations say it's much less than 13.6%. We are paying out $200 somethin billion and getting what, $90 billion back???

I'm not sure what you are getting at? 13.6% of $225 billion is around $30 billion. Either way I don't work for the fed so I can only really give the total of their share of balances I can't tell you what they intend to do with their holdings.

My numbers came from the White House official publication. $200 some odd billion back in 2000 or 2001, and about the same now except we are getting billions more back from the Federal Reserve each year.

If you are including payments to the Trust Fund then you are contradicting your claim that debt service will require social welfare cuts.

As I said above I'm not including payments to the trust fund. (if I was the number for fy 2013 would be $415b not $225b)

I would believe that the numbers are similar to 2000 because the interest rate paid on them has been more than cut in half since then.

 

[franklin]

1)The fed doesn't print money to buy treasury securities. not temporarily and not ever
2)If you click and read the the second link(I will post again) you will see that this distinction(impermanence) means that the fed is not monetizing our debt, the fed is holding it. In other words they are still deficits.

https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/es/article/9644

You seem to be confusing the Fed's mandate and testimony with reality. The Fed has been printing to buy our debt out of necessity. I don't care to get into semantics on this just b/c our system is denying it is happening...

Again not my premise. I wouldn't feel qualified to make that determination on my own. The CBO said that we would need a tax increase or spending cuts of 14% to service the increased debt payments within the next 10 years. It is likely that the Dems and Reps will split the difference meaning a possible 7% cut in welfare programs just as boomers retire.

If the premise of your thread title wasn't to scare liberals into fixing the entitlement problem as a way to avoid the entitlement budget problem then please clarify so I can better understand what you're trying to convey.

I'm not sure what you are getting at? 13.6% of $225 billion is around $30 billion. Either way I don't work for the fed so I can only really give the total of their share of balances I can't tell you what they intend to do with their holdings.

The Fed is under congressional mandate and has no intentions.

As I said above I'm not including payments to the trust fund. (if I was the number for fy 2013 would be $415b not $225b)

I would believe that the numbers are similar to 2000 because the interest rate paid on them has been more than cut in half since then.

What is the number in 2001-2001 vs today?

glad we agree

None of this. I first need to make an alt before we can become the new OB-Ain't.

 

[♪alt13]

You seem to be confusing the Fed's mandate and testimony with reality. The Fed has been printing to buy our debt out of necessity. I don't care to get into semantics on this just b/c our system is denying it is happening...



If the premise of your thread title wasn't to scare liberals into fixing the entitlement problem as a way to avoid the entitlement budget problem then please clarify so I can better understand what you're trying to convey.





The Fed is under congressional mandate and has no intentions.





What is the number in 2001-2001 vs today?




None of this. I first need to make an alt before we can become the new OB-Ain't.

smh