Why does the wealthiest nation in the world have a massive federal
debt?

On Apr 1, 10:39 am, ta nc.rr.com> wrote:

vast government bloat,.... and civil servants gaming the system, in
some cases for well over 100k a year in over time schemes, and
retirements for rank and file very often well over 100k a year...many
police and fire for example over 140,000 dollars a year.

and corporations racing each other to the bottom, in the process
driving working class wages, and the tax base down,

etc etc

we have become a nation if half wits run by imbiciles and grifters to
a very large extent...it was not always this way, it is now though.

Phil Scott

On Apr 1, 12:39 pm, ta nc.rr.com> wrote:

If you were rich, would you rather pay $100,000 in taxes or buy
$100,000 in treasury bonds?

On Apr 1, 10:39 am, ta nc.rr.com> wrote:

Because recently the burden of expenditures have been shifted to the
middle class for to long. Usually there is a proper and healthy
shifting of the expenditure burden more on the rich and then the
middle and then the rich and then the middle... Plus the entire
government is being run like Enron before they got caught.

In a perpetual quest for more money to line their pockets and more
power to wield against average citizens, a coalition of big business,
the Far and Religious Right and, most terrifyingly, Bush & Co. are...

On Apr 1, 9:48 pm, Ron Peterson shell.core.com> wrote:

False dilemma.

I would rather pay my bills on time and live within my means so that
my children (or their children) do not end up suffering the
consequences of my irresponsible behaviour.

So . . . why does the USA have such a massive debt?

On Apr 1, 5:25 pm, phil scott philscott.net> wrote:

On Apr 1, 1:39 pm, ta nc.rr.com> wrote:

Gov't debt I believe is a worldwide problem. It is not unique to the
United States.

It is inherent in the very nature of gov't in the fact that it is not
a business, i.e. it doesn't really produce anything and is not
intended to "make a profit". There is therefore little built in
incentive for fiscal prudence and to what degree it has any at all it
must derive it from the electorate.

Politicians preen themselves as our benefactors - all of which they
accomplish with...umm...our money, not their own. If you are reluctant
to spend your own hard earned money and will tend to exercise great
care in what you do with it, gov't officials have no great similar
motivation.

On Apr 2, 11:34 am, Fred Weiss papertig.com> wrote:

But not all governments have debt. Take Mexico, China, or Canada, for
example. So why does the US, the wealthiest of all of these nations,
have so much debt?

But again I would point to other governments that have no debt at all.
Why one and not the other?

On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:39:57 -0700, ta wrote:

It begins with defining debt as wealth.
How much wealth does a nation have if all debts are called in today?

On Apr 2, 12:50 pm, ZerkonX X.net> wrote:

So you are saying that because of the massive debt, the US is not that
wealthy? I'll agree with that . . . so then I'll re-phrase . . . why
does a *potentially* wealthy nation like the US have such a massive
federal debt?