Posted by 2002sliverado on March 21, 2018 at 08:41:59 from (216.16.75.34):
In Reply to: $21 Trillion in debt posted by Hay hay hay on March 20, 2018 at 14:47:28:
This has been a pet peeve issue for me for years. The frustrating thing is that neither party seems to care and is perfectly content adding to the debt. I was a bit encouraged by Trump even bringing this issue up in the 2016 debates. It has been considered a non-talking point for years! The tax cuts have come, and now we are looking at racking up debt even faster. I was appalled at the rate of increase in the prior administration. I am just as upset the leadership of this country IN BOTH PARTIES will continue to kick the can down the road even further. I was a junior in high school in 1984 when the federal debt surpassed $1 trillion. The federal government had 4 years when it was "fiscally in the black." These were the last two years under the Clinton administration and the first two years of the G.W. Bush administration. An economist friend of mine told me that historically, this nation would raise taxes, aggressively sell bonds, enact rationing of various goods, and other tactics during a time of war, so that everyone felt the "pain" of being at war, which would rally the nation and its people and to aggressively work to end that war. This has no longer been the case for decades. The leadership of this country should have never lowered taxes when the war on terror and the Iraqi war began. Estimates I have come across suggest the cost of this since its start tally up to $6 trillion.
Various "experts" suggested that as long as the annual debt was less than some percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of this nation, it was of no concern. Others have suggested as long as the total debt does not exceed 100 percent of total annual GDP, it was not a concern. We have surpassed both of those figures, and few, if any, show any sort of concern. I appreciate Hay Hay Hay bringing this up for discussion. I believe at the end of World War II, the nation's debt was at a figure comparable to where we are today, in terms of "percent of GDP." A key difference today, is that our country continued manufacturing and employing people to aid in rebuilding Europe and Japan after the war, which resulted in overall a great economic boom. That is no longer a factor today as we have outsourced so much of our manufacturing, and we have people who are under employed. We also have a low percentage rate of employable people who are employed, which I believe indicates a high percentage of people who have essentially given up on finding work, or considered perpetually unemployed.
I realize the situation has changed, and my comments may not entirely be accurate, but in those final years of the Clinton administration and the first couple years of the Bush administration, when there was a "budget surplus," our nation had very low unemployment (probably not much different from today), a low in "underemployment (people were mostly working in their chosen careers and being paid for what they were trained and educated for), and a high in the percentage of people who were employable in the workforce. In terms of helping to solve some of our key national economic issues, and probably some of our social issues, shouldn't this be what we as a nation should be striving for? I guess I do, and I think this initiative has the best potential for getting the nation back on track as a whole, and I do not believe either political party and its leaders have a clue about this very issue I raise.
Upload one or more videos to your post. Photo filesizes should be less than 300K and Videos, less than 2MB. Formats allowed are gif, jpg, png, ogg, mp4, mov, and avi. Be sure to use filenames without spaces or special characters, and filetypes of 3 digits lower case.
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]
Today's Featured Article - Restoration Story: Fordson Major - by Anthony West. George bought his Fordson Major from a an implement sale about 18 years ago for £200.00 (UK). There is no known history regarding its origins or what service it had done, but the following work was undertaken alone to bring it up to show standard. From the engine number, it was found that this Major was produced late 1946. It was almost complete but had various parts that would definitely need replacing.
... [Read Article]
Latest Ad:
1964 I-H 140 tractor with cultivators and sidedresser. Starts and runs good. Asking 2650. CALL RON AT 502-319-1952
[More Ads]
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.