No. IMO, We have seen enough. there is no 'maybe'. He is onto nothing. He just talks with no accountability and all the smartness on right is being wasted to make it look like there is at the least a 'maybe' there!!
There are big problems, and there have always been. Imagine if, in the past, people had just said, 'Heck with it,' and actually done nothing, or worse, engaged in destructive behaviors, making things worse, not better. The good news is throughout human history, we have, so far, solved many big problems. It's not a linear line, but generally upward with setbacks. Many solutions lie in the advancement of science, knowledge, and our technical abilities to create amazing things. If you look at today, the future of our technological advancement isn't slowing down; it's accelerating. I'm very excited about our future, and I think we are still very much at the beginning of our capability. We are in the midst of an AI boom that will dramatically accelerate progress. Long-term, it's a very bright future, not doom and gloom. (Yeah, climate change is doom and gloom, but I'm putting that aside for now, and I do hope our advancement will help us solve it). In the shorter term, the problems we have are more political than anything. We have a democracy that has been shaken. We have extreme partisanship driven, IMHO, largely by outrage expressions that now have the channels to consume massive attention. But there is much good around—people can see it through their friends and family. We largely share the same values, wanting things to be better for us and our families. Goodness is everywhere, but evil/outrage gets all the attention. As related to this thread, during this AI boom, one of the most important things is how to protect the people that will be left behind. We have basically operated in a trickle-down environment since Reagan and have just recently started to reverse that with Biden's policy of growing from the middle out and not from the top. With AI, you can already see how much, if left completely to our current market, wealth can be further concentrated among a few players such as Microsoft, Google, and Apple. I think we are on the cusp of a major shift in work, but this time will be different in that it will impact not just the bottom workforce but everyone except for the very top, as AI has the capacity to replace lawyers, writers, programmers, designers, and so on. The government here has a pivotal role to play, which I think boils down to two basic approaches: let wealth and power concentrate and hope they do good for all (or the trickle-down approach), or ensure wealth is not too concentrated and protect workers (or the middle-out approach). Of course, there are various degrees to each of the two approaches. The question of which approach we will see during this critical period of the early phase of the AI boom is on the 2024 ballot. Choose wisely; literally, all of our jobs are on the line. The Biden admin is pushing for, of course, the latter. Here is a recent op-ed from them. This is mostly an election piece, but that doesn't mean there aren't policies here that are very important concerning this AI boom. Op-ed: Biden admin says rules must ensure AI boom 'does right by workers' (yahoo.com) Modern collective bargaining agreements like these underscore the vital role of unions in building and fortifying the middle class, now and in the future. They also provide positive, replicable models for the broader labor market; whether a union exists or not, industry and labor can establish formal mechanisms to incorporate workers’ perspectives into AI development and deployment, equip workers with the digital literacy necessary to adapt to an AI-enabled work, and advocate collectively for worker-centric policies. This is exactly what Microsoft has recently done in a newly announced partnership with the AFL-CIO. Importantly, Microsoft has also pledged to maintain neutrality in any future organizing efforts. The Biden Administration is committed to doing its part. This includes embedding worker protections in rules for key grant programs and continuing to promote high-quality jobs and the right to organize through the Department of Labor’s Good Jobs Initiative. The Department of Labor is also creating a set of principles for the responsible, worker-centric use of AI. These principles will prescribe vital safeguards, such as transparency in the use of AI, careful pre-deployment testing of AI systems, appropriate and meaningful human review of their outputs, and privacy-enhancing technologies. Additionally, the National Science Foundation is investing in critical research around privacy-preserving techniques, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has already released guidance to ensure the use of AI aligns with civil rights laws. We are going further to ensure workers thrive in an AI-powered economy, and can take advantage of benefits that this technology might bring, by supporting inclusive training programs that help all workers access jobs created or changed by AI. The administration is also preparing detailed policy recommendations to protect and support workers against potential AI-related job displacement. After decades of rising income inequality and communities of workers being left behind in previous periods of technological advancements, we need to ensure that any economic windfalls from AI do not come at the expense of displaced workers. Instead, reinvesting gains from AI in workers will help us secure stronger economic growth for decades to come.
It should improve. In the last 4 years, the economy grew around ~27% whereas the debt grew ~45%. If this spending is needed for Strong Economy, heaven help our indebted generations of children when Weak Economy ever happens. I haven't seen the usual suspects on here even attempt to explain how to service impending annual 1 trillion dollar interest only payments on top of our existing budgetary needs. MuLtiPLiER eFFeX oNLy CouNTs FoR GrOWtH!11
Are you seriously okay mentally? Theres no way someone can be this obsessed with debt without being unhinged
it is beyond your mental capacity to undersand that the US $ has been the reserve currncy of the world 25 % of US debt are owned by foreign entities; so 75% of the 1 trillion dollars (interest payment on debts) stay in the US economy towards more contribution to the GDP invisible has been parroting those who conveniently ignore that the US $ has been the de facto reserve currency of the world entities thru out the world continue to be more than willing to buy US debt
@Amiga , not replying to your post for size, I am not as optimistic about AI. I think the biggest problem with AI and many other technologies is that there are parties out there who do not share the same ethical concerns about them. Thats a topic for another thread. My main point was that while extreme partisanship is bad so is reflexive cynicism. Certainly both parties can and should be criticized but just complaining about them and saying you’re not going to get involved doesn’t solve anything.
It's a big topic on its own. I'm optimistic, albeit with significant concerns that I think require the gov to play a constructive but regulatory role. My main point, as related to this thread, is that AI will have huge implications for the economy and everyone's job. Bideonomic (or growing from the middle out) vs. trickle-down are two policy approaches toward AI. The ramifications will be significant in the years to come. I lean towards supporting the Bidenomic approach more than the trickle-down, though I don't want to see the extreme of either.
Whether you support the Bidenomics approach or not my concern is the countries, businesses and even individuals who will not follow the same ethical or even legal guidelines that may be developed in the US or some other countries.
Trumps entire economic strategy is to levy huge tariffs which will do nothing but accelerate inflation but his dipshit followers @LosPollosHermanos want to gas light us that trump is better on the economy
@Space Ghost it's almost as if bidens climate bill is working exactly like planned and everything I predicted came true like always
Tripling the Chinese steel tariffs? Show of hands. How many are tired of paying an extra 5K for their cars and now desire to pay an extra 15K instead? ETA: How many bought a new car in the last 5 years or so and had a Chinese man in suit give you a check for 5K to pay for the tariffs, while finalizing the finances at the dealership?
It's amazing how Americans are so brainwashed into thinking trump is good at economy. He took over a economy that produced 5 years of Job gains. All he did was pass a fancy 2 trillion tax scam for Wall Street and folks think he somehow did something amazing for economy. It's amazing how much credit he gets for doing absolutely nothing
And the usual suspects always like to use big numbers and not actually explain what we spent things on…. … as if the Covid money didn’t go to expanded unemployment, child care, help plug state and municipal budgets that pay folks like firefighters, teachers, city maintenance, etc…. Or infrastructure and industrial policy instead of being reliant on often unfriendly nations for critical supply chains. Or let’s not bring up how an aging population is adding to our debt burden. I wish the usual suspects could actually bring nuance to the conversation instead of just large, headline numbers
Since y'all are talking about Debt... I thought this is a good article on comparing Japan's High Debt to the US. What Lessons Can Be Drawn from Japan’s High Debt-to-GDP Ratio? (stlouisfed.org) November 14, 2023 By YiLi Chien , Ashley H. Stewart The U.S. national debt reached $32 trillion in the second quarter of 2023, which is approximately 120% of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP). On its own, $32 trillion is a large number, but is a debt-to-GDP ratio of 120% also considered high? According to historical data, the answer is yes. Twenty years ago, the U.S. debt ratio was only 56% of GDP. Looking further back in time, the previous high was 118% in 1946,1 following the heavy expenses associated with World War II. Additionally, the Congressional Budget Office has projected that if current laws remain unchanged, the U.S. will continue to run a large primary deficit, at over 3% of GDP annually until 2053. Under this scenario, the U.S. will need to steadily increase its debt level to finance its deficit. Given that the CBO is currently forecasting the economy to grow less than 2% annually through 2053, this means that the debt-to-GDP ratio will keep growing as well. Under this forecast, it seems unlikely that the U.S. will begin running a fiscal surplus anytime soon. Given this high level of national debt, paired with the uncertainty of a future government surplus, there is concern regarding the United States’ ability to sustain its public debt. Looking at Japan’s Debt Burden Some economists have turned to Japan as an example to address this concern. Why? For more than two decades, Japan’s national debt has floated above 100% of its GDP. In fact, as of the second quarter of 2022, Japan’s debt-to-GDP ratio was 226%. In other words, Japan has been able to maintain a very high level of debt for decades. Researchers have also pointed out similarities in the fiscal problems faced by the U.S. today and Japan 20 years ago. Due to Japan’s rapidly aging population, economists predicted that the heavy burden of social security expenses would result in a large fiscal deficit, which could then lead to a public debt crisis. However, a crisis has yet to occur. When examining Japan’s debt-to-GDP, it may therefore seem fair to assume that concerns regarding the U.S.’s high level of debt are overstated. In this blog post, we show that, while simple, a comparison based solely on the debt-to-GDP ratio overlooks several other key factors. A more comprehensive view of the debt issue necessitates an examination of the public sector’s balance sheet as a whole, the level of net liability and the revenue from its asset returns. Consolidated Balance Sheets Explained We must look outside the federal government’s level of national debt for a few reasons. First, the government’s liability position may be more than its level of public debt. For example, the government may also have other types of borrowing from the private sector or hold unfunded pension obligations to government retirees. Secondly, any operating surpluses or deficits sustained by independent government agencies such as the Social Security Administration will eventually be felt by the general public. So arguably, there is no reason to focus solely on the liabilities and assets of the executive departments of the federal government, ignoring all other public institutions. In some countries, these public institutions likely hold a sizeable asset position in the form of social security funds or sovereign wealth funds. As we will discuss, Japan’s social security fund is quite large—around 55% of GDP in the second quarter of 2022. In short, it is important to look at the public sector as a whole, given that its overall level of assets indicates the country’s ability to offset any outstanding liabilities, including debts. Looking at the Numbers for Japan and the U.S. The tables below report the consolidated balance sheets of Japan’s and the United States’ public sectors for the third quarter of 2022. NOTE: Most of “domestic loans” are student loans provided by the federal government. The “claims of pension fund on sponsor” category refers to the amount of underfunding in defined benefit pension plans to government workers. Notice that for Japan, the net debt-to-GDP ratio (government bonds-to-GDP ratio) found in the consolidated balance sheet is only 114%, which is much smaller than the debt-to-GDP ratio reported earlier (226% in the second quarter of 2022). This is a direct result of intragovernmental holdings, which refers to public debts that are owned by its own agencies, such as the social security fund and the central bank. For example, the Bank of Japan’s holdings of Japanese government debt is equivalent to around 100% of GDP. For the same reason, the United States’ net debt-to-GDP ratio is also lower (only 78%) in the consolidated balance sheet. On a consolidated balance sheet, intragovernmental holdings will appear on both the asset and liability sides, and hence they cancel each other out. For example, in the U.S., the Social Security trust funds2 and the Federal Reserve System both hold a significant amount of assets in the form of U.S. Treasuries. These holdings contribute to the reduction of the debt-to-GDP ratio shown in the consolidated balance sheet. Additionally, the first table illustrates the Japanese government’s large asset position. Again, this is in large part a result of that country’s sizable social security fund, which is equal to 55% of GDP. A lower level of net liabilities, defined as liabilities minus assets, is indicative of a strong fiscal situation. The Japanese public sector’s liabilities—currency, bank reserves, and government bonds—are 252% of GDP, which is quite high. However, the consolidated balance sheet shows a large number of assets, which represent 134% of GDP. Thus, Japan’s resulting net liability position is only 119%. As for the U.S., with a liability position totaling 142% and a much smaller asset position (23% of GDP), the country’s net liability position is similar to that of Japan’s. Considering the Debt Servicing Burden The final key aspect is the revenue from returns on the assets and liabilities held by each country’s public sector. There is a large return gap between assets and liabilities on Japan’s consolidated balance sheet. Due to Japan’s low interest rate policies, the returns on bank reserves and government bonds are essentially zero, which suggests that the interest burden on the country’s debt is not heavy. Meanwhile, Japan maintains a risky asset position with many domestic equities (30% of GDP) and foreign bonds and equities (55% of GDP), and therefore, the returns are quite high. Essentially, the Japanese government’s strategy is to borrow at an extremely cheap rate and invest in risky, high-return assets—a factor that partially explains why Japan can sustain a high level of debt despite running a consistent deficit.3 Why the U.S. Situation Is Different However, this is not the story for the United States. In fact, the return difference on the U.S. public sector balance sheet is small, meaning the U.S. government borrows at a rate that is close to its average asset return. In short, as a way of supporting the large deficit caused by the aging population, Japan’s strategy involves a concept called financial repression, meaning the government uses regulatory methods to borrow cheaply and widen the returns gap on their balance sheet. For this to hold, some economic agent must be willing or forced to lend to the government cheaply. In this case, the economic agent is Japanese households. When Japanese households—who hold a large amount of low-return demand deposits—deposit their savings into banks, the banks can then lend cheaply to other domestic borrowers such as the government. However, this is not the case in the U.S., where households’ largest portfolio share is equity. Therefore, opportunities for a cheap funding source are much more limited for the U.S. Given differences in the level of net liability and in the revenue from returns between the U.S. and Japan, the aggressive fiscal and monetary policies adopted by Japan may not be appropriate or even feasible for the United States. Thus, we should not rely on the Japanese experience to predict the U.S. fiscal situation.
The Yen is not the world currency. USD has this unique feature. US monetary policy affects the world, so that is always taken into consideration too.
It's rich that everyone has begun to reply only the snippets of my quotes that trigger or kneejerk them the most. Twisting and parsing words seems to be the new normal in internet debates. Do you believe servicing one trillion dollar per year debt is a problem or just "a big scary number"? If you not, do you understand compound interest? If you do, is it fair for future generations to eat that responsibility for our immediate comfort? I've debated with you over spending many times, and I have acknowledged many of the circumstances in your reply. To claim I haven't just means you're happier living in denial. Bidenomics believers want to sell the people that we have a strong economy without acknowledging the unsustainable deficit spending needed to maintain last year's results. I didn't buy Trump's boon economy for the same reason and the past 8 years have nearly doubled our debt by 80%. I would be half as persistent here if Biden sold the idea that he saved a weak economy with profligate spending rather than the gaslight that he created a "strong" one. His job is remotely done to declare Mission Accomplished. I suspect the reason why they spin is because he's sensitive to the charge that he caused the massively unpopular transitory inflation with permanent prices ranging from 30-60% more than 2020. Let's juice the economy with more deficit spending every year. I'm sure Trump has that in mind with yet another tax cut for his cronies.
People like @astros123 would celebrate if the Biden admistration announced 1,000,000 new firemen jobs were going to be opened, never questioning why they were hired in the first place.
