The national debt continues to rise

[Bamaro]

 

[some_al_fan]

We are currently at the peak of the baby boomers' retirement.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I'm a fan of the concept of SS, but the design is deeply flawed. SS is collapsing, like all Ponzi schemes must. It worked (sort of) as long as there were enough "new" investors to pay out the "old" investors. When you start running low on new investors ...

 

[Tidewater]

I dont think so. Not at this moment. That is the problem. We are $38T in debt largely from general fund spending. I dont even think Medicare is contributing to the deficit because it is funded by dedicated tax receipts.

We can look at the amount of the debt and surmise a good bit of it was incurred from wars and covid and a bloated military complex.

Interesting question.
According to the Department of the Treasury, in FY 2025 (Year to date as of 29 SEP 2025) by agency was:
Health and Human Services: 27%
Department of the Treasury: 21%
Department of the Defense: 12%
Department of Veterans Affairs: 5%
Department of the Agriculture: 3%
Office of Personnel Management: 2%
Department of the Transportation: 2%
Department of the Homeland Security: 2%
Other Defense civil programs: 1%


By category, the numbers were:
Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 14%
Health: 14%
Net interest: 14%
National Defense: 13%
Income Security: 10%
Veterans Benefits and Services: 5%
Transportation: 2%

 

[Bamaro]

I'm a fan of the concept of SS, but the design is deeply flawed. SS is collapsing, like all Ponzi schemes must. It worked (sort of) as long as there were enough "new" investors to pay out the "old" investors. When you start running low on new investors ...

Its not a ponzi scheme. Its a poorly run insurance/annuity program.

 

[Bodhisattva]

Its not a ponzi scheme. Its a poorly run insurance/annuity program.

Right. It's not a Ponzi scheme when the government does it.

 

[75thru79]

Its not a ponzi scheme. Its a poorly run insurance/annuity program.

I don't necessarily think it is poorly run. You take out of working people's paychecks and send it to retirees. It's not that complicated and they seem to be doing a good job getting the money to the people receiving benefits without too much administrative waste. The issue, and we all know it, is that we don't have enough money coming in because of the demographics. That isn't on the SSA, it's on the politicians and voters.

 

[some_al_fan]

Here are SSA numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/qop.html

SSA currently (annually, since there are positive quarters) spends more $$$ than it receives.
However, it has $2.7 trillion on the books, which are invested into US Treasuries and part of the US debt

 

[JDCrimson]

Here are SSA numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/qop.html

SSA currently (annually, since there are positive quarters) spends more $$$ than it receives.
However, it has $2.7 trillion on the books, which are invested into US Treasuries and part of the US debt

The US Treasury owes its pensioners $2.7T who have no hope of ever being paid back. Decades ago, SS was a slush fund the government tapped to shore up its deficit spending.

Further the US national debt could be reduced by $2.7T if SS wrote it's investment in US Treasuries. But that act would weaken the full faith and credit of the US government.

What is interesting is the Alabama Republicans hsve been wanting to the same with the Alabama Retirement System but Bronner has fought them off on doing it. Now they are just waiting for him to die to try again...

 

[Bamaro]

The US Treasury owes its pensioners $2.7T who have no hope of ever being paid back. Decades ago, SS was a slush fund the government tapped to shore up its deficit spending.

Further the US national debt could be reduced by $2.7T if SS wrote it's investment in US Treasuries. But that act would weaken the full faith and credit of the US government.

What is interesting is the Alabama Republicans hsve been wanting to the same with the Alabama Retirement System but Bronner has fought them off on doing it. Now they are just waiting for him to die to try again...

I suspect that something will finally be done once checks begin to bounce. Until then the can will be kicked down the road by a gutless congress.

 

[some_al_fan]

I suspect that something will finally be done once checks begin to bounce. Until then the can will be kicked down the road by a gutless congress.

Checks will never bounce. That is the beauty of controlling your own currency.
The price of this borrowing and spending is inflation.

 

[mdb-tpet]

One of the greatest societal coups of the last 60 years was the wealthiest convincing politicians and voters to lower their taxes well below the local and national spending rates, then getting government to sell bonds back to fund infrastructure project to those same people and THEN pay them interest. In effect, instead of just taxing the wealthiest and investing in the country, now we can't pay for the infrastructure we need without paying interest to the very people we used to tax. It's a true win win for the wealthy, and a true lose lose for the public good. That's REALLY what the $37 trillion is largely made up of. We could have EASILY paid all of our bills with the tax rates that were on the books in the 1950s to 1970s, but instead we've been funneling our tax dollars back into the pockets of the investor class. You can see 14% of our country's taxes are simply paying for interest already. Net interest: 14%! It's $1.22 trillion paid for interest just this year. This is a totally, completely, unnecessary waste of taxpayer dollars simply going straight to the wealthiest and foreign investors. And FYI, I hold plenty of treasury bonds in my portfolio, so I'm not just pretending to understand this.

 

[75thru79]

One of the greatest societal coups of the last 60 years was the wealthiest convincing politicians and voters to lower their taxes well below the local and national spending rates, then getting government to sell bonds back to fund infrastructure project to those same people and THEN pay them interest. In effect, instead of just taxing the wealthiest and investing in the country, now we can't pay for the infrastructure we need without paying interest to the very people we used to tax. It's a true win win for the wealthy, and a true lose lose for the public good. That's REALLY what the $37 trillion is largely made up of. We could have EASILY paid all of our bills with the tax rates that were on the books in the 1950s to 1970s, but instead we've been funneling our tax dollars back into the pockets of the investor class. You can see 14% of our country's taxes are simply paying for interest already. Net interest: 14%! It's $1.22 trillion paid for interest just this year. This is a totally, completely, unnecessary waste of taxpayer dollars simply going straight to the wealthiest and foreign investors. And FYI, I hold plenty of treasury bonds in my portfolio, so I'm not just pretending to understand this.

So, you are saying the reason we have all this debt is because we don't tax enough. Fair enough, but you are totally ignoring spending levels. Spending is totally out of control because the one's spending the cash have no idea how to create a budget and stick to it. I would be willing to pay a little higher taxes if the federal government would show just an ounce of fiscal responsibility and stop with the clandestine NGOs.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

One of the greatest societal coups of the last 60 years was the wealthiest convincing politicians and voters to lower their taxes well below the local and national spending rates, then getting government to sell bonds back to fund infrastructure project to those same people and THEN pay them interest. In effect, instead of just taxing the wealthiest and investing in the country, now we can't pay for the infrastructure we need without paying interest to the very people we used to tax. It's a true win win for the wealthy, and a true lose lose for the public good. That's REALLY what the $37 trillion is largely made up of. We could have EASILY paid all of our bills with the tax rates that were on the books in the 1950s to 1970s, but instead we've been funneling our tax dollars back into the pockets of the investor class. You can see 14% of our country's taxes are simply paying for interest already. Net interest: 14%! It's $1.22 trillion paid for interest just this year. This is a totally, completely, unnecessary waste of taxpayer dollars simply going straight to the wealthiest and foreign investors. And FYI, I hold plenty of treasury bonds in my portfolio, so I'm not just pretending to understand this.

What's "funny" (sad really) is the government spends like we're already taxing the rich their entire income. They're completely comfortable spending money we don't have. I can only imagine the out of control spending they'd do if they thought they had more money coming in.

Disclosure, I'm for raising taxes on the rich, but when someone will spend like a drunken sailor when they don't have the money, it only tells me what they would do with "more money".

 

[mdb-tpet]

What's "funny" (sad really) is the government spends like we're already taxing the rich their entire income. They're completely comfortable spending money we don't have. I can only imagine the out of control spending they'd do if they thought they had more money coming in.

Disclosure, I'm for raising taxes on the rich, but when someone will spend like a drunken sailor when they don't have the money, it only tells me what they would do with "more money".

I hear you, but until you AND I start electing politicians who SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE INCOME/EXPENDITURE EQUATION and stop drinking out of the golden goblets of the ultra wealthy, we're not going to fix this issue.

To me, the REAL issue is lack of pay at the bottom end of the economic ladder creating a dire NEED for SNAP and other government programs even for full time working employees. If you can't pay your employees enough to live on a 40 hour a week paycheck, then something is unholy wrong with the industry/your business. Any industry can always race pay to the bottom, and pay people next to nothing for their work for an entire industry, but our GOVERNMENT should be stopping that practice, especially when some folks are raking in the dough hand over fist while handing out SNAP forms to their new employees (see copious instances at Wally World for the best example).

I almost bought a small Star buck espresso drink this weekend at an airport, which would have cost $8.15. But that's ridiculous since it was more expensive than an hour's pay at minimum wage. When will our purchasing power be indexed to inflation, since we're no longer on a gold (or any kind of reasonable) standard?

 

[Bamaro]

What's "funny" (sad really) is the government spends like we're already taxing the rich their entire income. They're completely comfortable spending money we don't have. I can only imagine the out of control spending they'd do if they thought they had more money coming in.

Disclosure, I'm for raising taxes on the rich, but when someone will spend like a drunken sailor when they don't have the money, it only tells me what they would do with "more money".

Unfortunately, 'starving the beast' doesn't work either

 

[Bamabuzzard]

I hear you, but until you AND I start electing politicians who SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE INCOME/EXPENDITURE EQUATION and stop drinking out of the golden goblets of the ultra wealthy, we're not going to fix this issue.

To me, the REAL issue is lack of pay at the bottom end of the economic ladder creating a dire NEED for SNAP and other government programs even for full time working employees. If you can't pay your employees enough to live on a 40 hour a week paycheck, then something is unholy wrong with the industry/your business. Any industry can always race pay to the bottom, and pay people next to nothing for their work for an entire industry, but our GOVERNMENT should be stopping that practice, especially when some folks are raking in the dough hand over fist while handing out SNAP forms to their new employees (see copious instances at Wally World for the best example).

I almost bought a small Star buck espresso drink this weekend at an airport, which would have cost $8.15. But that's ridiculous since it was more expensive than an hour's pay at minimum wage. When will our purchasing power be indexed to inflation, since we're no longer on a gold (or any kind of reasonable) standard?

You're preaching to the choir on this one. My daughter is working (while going to college) and we make her pay for her rent, gas for her car, insurance, groceries etc. She works a 12 hour day and barely GROSSES $100 for the day. There are times she barely has $20 in the bank after paying SOME of her bills. Granted, if she got into a bind, we step in. But it has to be a true bind before we step in, because we want her to FEEL the value of a dollar and learn how to make it when things are thin. But I told my wife the clinic she works for is screwing over those college students and basically getting not that much above free labor. I feel for the ones who don't have a safety net like she does and if the "$20" runs out there's nothing to turn to.

Regarding my job, they haven't given us a raise in over five years. They like to say they give us a cost of living raise per year. But the problem is, inflation is more than 1.2% and has been for a while. So any "COL" raise we get is automatically eaten up by inflation. My purchasing power per month has dropped close to $1,000 less per month since 2020.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Unfortunately, 'starving the beast' doesn't work either

And giving it more doesn't make the deficit go down either. We both know if they were given "more money" they'd spend more than the "more" coming in. We both know that...

 

[crimsonaudio]

What's "funny" (sad really) is the government spends like we're already taxing the rich their entire income. They're completely comfortable spending money we don't have. I can only imagine the out of control spending they'd do if they thought they had more money coming in.

Disclosure, I'm for raising taxes on the rich, but when someone will spend like a drunken sailor when they don't have the money, it only tells me what they would do with "more money".

100% this. And this is why I will fight tooth-and-nail against ANY increase in federal taxation until they prove they can cut spending.

 

[Bamaro]

100% this. And this is why I will fight tooth-and-nail against ANY increase in federal taxation until they prove they can cut spending.

Well, if somehow we could tie spending to taxes, ie if you want it, pay for it, the deficit would soon disappear.