US debt surpasses $23 trillion for first time

[TheCount]

The federal government's outstanding public debt has surpassed $23 trillion for the first time in history, according to data from the Treasury Department released on Friday.

Growing budget deficits have added to the nation's debt at a speedy rate since President Trump took office. The debt has grown some 16 percent since Trump's inauguration, when it stood at $19.9 trillion. It passed $22 trillion for the first time just 10 months ago.

Of the $23 trillion figure, just under $17 trillion was in the category of debt held by the public, which is a more useful gauge of the debt the government has to pay down, and the number typically used in calculating the nation's debt burden. The other $6 trillion comes from loans within government bodies.

Still, the $23 trillion figure marks a milestone.

“Reaching $23 trillion in debt on Halloween is a scary milestone for our economy and the next generation, but Washington shows no fear," said Michael A. Peterson, CEO of the fiscally conservative Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

"Piling on debt like this is especially unwise and unnecessary in a strong economy," he added.

High levels of debt can push up borrowing costs and interest rates, "crowd out" private borrowing and weigh down budgets. In the 2019 fiscal year, for example, the government had to devote $376 billion just to pay the interest on the debt, equivalent to nearly half the defense budget, and more than the amount spent on the combined costs of education, agriculture, transportation and housing.

The deficit for 2019 came in just under $1 trillion, at $984 billion, and is only expected to grow in coming years.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4...for-first-time

[Anti Globalist]

Imagine what the debt is going to be within 20 years.

[Anti Federalist]

I know what will solve the problem.

Import a couple million more semi-literate peasants from third world failed socialist states to go on the dole.

Yeah, that'll do it.

[juleswin]

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4...for-first-time

Say what you will about Trump, at least he tries to pay for his spending my stealing Syrian's oil. Yes, he continues to destabilize countries that would most likely lead to refugees at our border but he will think of ways to steal more of other people's property(OPP) to pay for new waves of refugees. Can't say this about the dems.

[Firestarter]

During Trump’s first 2 years in office, US federal government deficits have already driven the national debt up by $3 trillion – from $19.5 trillion to $22.5 trillion. That´s even faster than his predecessors, George Bush and Barack Obama.
The 2018 Trump tax cuts have reduced US government revenues by about $500 billion in 2018; add another $.5 trillion per year in the continuing of the Bush-Obama era tax cuts; another $.4 trillion in Trump war and other spending hikes during his first two years; and more than $.6 trillion in interest payments on the debt — and you reach the $3 trillion added to the national debt in 2017 and 2018.

When George Bush Jr. took office in 2001 the national debt was $5.6 trillion; it almost doubled in 8 years to approximately $10 trillion. When Obama left office in 2016 it had almost doubled again to $19.6 trillion.
Under President George Bush Jr. there were more than $4 trillion in tax cuts. The US army got several trillions additionally.
Obama cut another $300 billion in taxes in 2009 and then extended the Bush tax cuts, scheduled to expire in 2010, for two more years to 2012 (costing another $900 billion). Then came another $806 billion in tax cuts for business. In January 2013, Obama extend Bush’s tax cuts for another decade —costing a further $5 trillion until 2023.
Both Bush and Obama cut taxes by approximately $4 trillion each. And defense-war spending long term costs rose by $6 trillion in total. Roughly a $14 trillion increase to the $5.6 trillion debt of 2000.

To this Trump has since added another $3 trillion during, which adds up to the “current” $22.5 trillion.
The Treasury Advisory Committee recently warned the US Treasury that it will have to sell $12 trillion more US Treasury bonds, bills and notes, over the next decade, 2018-2028. That’s $12 trillion on top of $22.5 trillion national debt or a $34 trillion national debt by 2028!

In January 2018 the Trump tax cut provided $4.5 trillion tax reduction from 2018 to 2028, for businesses, multinational corporations, wealthy households, and investors. US multinationals alone get nearly half of that $4.5 trillion.
But starting this year, 2019, the middle class will begin paying for those tax reductions for corporate America, investors and the wealthy 1%. Already tax refunds for the average household are down 17%. The tax hike starts in earnest by 2022; middle class will pay $1.5 trillion in higher taxes by 2028.

Today’s $22.5 trillion, rising to $34 trillion, is just the US national government debt. Total US debt includes state and local government debt, household debt, corporate bond and business commercial & industrial loan debt, central bank balance sheet debt, and government agencies (GSEs) debt. Add these other forms of debt to the national debt makes the total debt in the US rises some $53 trillion. This lead to an estimated grand total US debt of more than $70 trillion by 2028 (the $900 billion a year in interest charges for the banksters is probably too low an estimate): https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/03...and-debt-bomb/
(archived here: http://archive.is/hzpeF)

[Ender]

I know what will solve the problem.

Import a couple million more semi-literate peasants from third world failed socialist states to go on the dole.

Yeah, that'll do it.

The answer is to get .gov out of welfare- which should always be local. Most "semi-literate peasants from third world failed socialist states" (usually caused by the US) are some of the hardest workers on the planet. And, most try to get to the US so they can work- not so they can live off the dole.

Just sayin.......

[bv3]

The answer is to get .gov out of welfare- which should always be local. Most "semi-literate peasants from third world failed socialist states" (usually caused by the US) are some of the hardest workers on the planet. And, most try to get to the US so they can work- not so they can live off the dole.

Just sayin.......

Do you think that as a program becomes more vital for the survival of more people it is: more likely to continue or more likely to end? AFA working: I think that, too. But then I realized that working people have children, and those children do not want to roof, harvest, clean houses, et al. So they go to school, 'higher' education, which--owing to something (probably federally administered student loans that are given in return for a form) is also grossly inflated in cost. So hardworking parents cannot afford to put these kids through higher education, period. Who gives out most college loans? Who is on the hook when no one can pay them back because the degrees are useless or the market is flooded (and flooded with nepotists)? What institution has the funds the give out loans that will never be paid back by the loanee? Who does that institution have the power to 'put on the hook'?

Don't get me started on medical care, inflated beyond the purview of the blue collar, how is that provided for?

So, while you are right, you are also wrong. Unless you expect these people don't have children, or shouldn't? That would be barbaric. Also barbaric: these people are told to look for a better life on a sinking ship. 23 trillion, dude. Let the number role off your tongue. Whats an interest payment on a 23 trillion dollar loan?

At this point if defies credulity to say that CIA activities in South and Central America were supported by the American people--unless one holds notions of collectivized guilt.

But don't worry, while we are all eating rats (and quite possibly each-other) we will have a delectable morsel for our consciences.

[Ender]

Do you think that as a program becomes more vital for the survival of more people it is: more likely to continue or more likely to end? AFA working: I think that, too. But then I realized that working people have children, and those children do not want to roof, harvest, clean houses, et al. So they go to school, 'higher' education, which--owing to something (probably federally administered student loans that are given in return for a form) is also grossly inflated in cost. So hardworking parents cannot afford to put these kids through higher education, period. Who gives out most college loans? Who is on the hook when no one can pay them back because the degrees are useless or the market is flooded (and flooded with nepotists)? What institution has the funds the give out loans that will never be paid back by the loanee? Who does that institution have the power to 'put on the hook'?

Don't get me started on medical care, inflated beyond the purview of the blue collar, how is that provided for?

So, while you are right, you are also wrong. Unless you expect these people don't have children, or shouldn't? That would be barbaric. Also barbaric: these people are told to look for a better life on a sinking ship. 23 trillion, dude. Let the number role off your tongue. Whats an interest payment on a 23 trillion dollar loan?

At this point if defies credulity to say that CIA activities in South and Central America were supported by the American people--unless one holds notions of collectivized guilt.

But don't worry, while we are all eating rats (and quite possibly each-other) we will have a delectable morsel for our consciences.

The whole purpose of the public school system was to turn everyone into compliant factory workers & it is a massive success. Gov also has no business in education & all "public" ed should be local & a choice. BTW- Most Hispanic moms are tough & their kids DO work or suffer dire consequences.

[oyarde]

What was the debt when Obama took office , ten trillion ?

[TheTexan]

"Piling on debt like this is especially unwise and unnecessary in a strong economy," he added.

Piling on debt signals to the world that our economy is strong enough to handle it.

It's when we're not piling on debt that we should be worried.

[Swordsmyth]

The answer is to get .gov out of welfare- which should always be local. Most "semi-literate peasants from third world failed socialist states" (usually caused by the US) are some of the hardest workers on the planet. And, most try to get to the US so they can work- not so they can live off the dole.

Just sayin.......

Unfortunately they vote to keep and expand welfare instead of ending it.

And your statement is dubious in the extreme that they are mostly the hardest workers on the planet and so is the claim that 3rd world hellholes are the way they are because of the US, even those where the US has meddled were behind the rest of the world before that and many cultures throughout history have risen above such challenges.

[bv3]

The whole purpose of the public school system was to turn everyone into compliant factory workers & it is a massive success. Gov also has no business in education & all "public" ed should be local & a choice. BTW- Most Hispanic moms are tough & their kids DO work or suffer dire consequences.

I'm not doubting that. But no kid wants to grow up to be 'among the hardest workers in the world' when the work is menial labor and menial labor can no longer can put a kid through college--so the kid must take loans. And, nature being what it is, a vast majority of the people currently in higher education are literally just wasting their time, using borrowed money, to pay for a useless certificate. So now the kid is saddled with a debt that he or she can NEVER repay: because the humanities degree they received is worthless. Worse case scenario, the kid becomes a teacher, thus functioning, effectively, as an integral step in a positive feedback loop driving early (read important) education further into farce.

Bad education------>Poor teachers----->Worse education------>Worse teachers.
Government financed loans------>bad education------>default------->Government financed bailout. On a massive scale.

What happened the last time a enormous amount of loans went into default simultaneously? Did the big money consolidate further? Yeah, I think that happened.
Gov. should have no business in education--that is truism. Reality: not only do they have business in education, they have BIG business in education.

These people could be martians, it makes no difference. 23 trillion. What is the interest payment on that?

[bv3]

Imagine what the debt is going to be within 20 years.

0.

[Zippyjuan]

The money from tariffs will pay off the debt. Trump said it will be gone in eight years after he takes office. On the other hand, he also calls himself "the King of Debt".

[Zippyjuan]

What was the debt when Obama took office , ten trillion ?

Trump wants to bet Obama at everything. Look for record debt (we are well on our way).

[Republicanguy]

I'm not doubting that. But no kid wants to grow up to be 'among the hardest workers in the world' when the work is menial labor and menial labor can no longer can put a kid through college--so the kid must take loans. And, nature being what it is, a vast majority of the people currently in higher education are literally just wasting their time, using borrowed money, to pay for a useless certificate. So now the kid is saddled with a debt that he or she can NEVER repay: because the humanities degree they received is worthless. Worse case scenario, the kid becomes a teacher, thus functioning, effectively, as an integral step in a positive feedback loop driving early (read important) education further into farce.

Bad education------>Poor teachers----->Worse education------>Worse teachers.
Government financed loans------>bad education------>default------->Government financed bailout. On a massive scale.

What happened the last time a enormous amount of loans went into default simultaneously? Did the big money consolidate further? Yeah, I think that happened.
Gov. should have no business in education--that is truism. Reality: not only do they have business in education, they have BIG business in education.

These people could be martians, it makes no difference. 23 trillion. What is the interest payment on that?

That could be true, but progress creates that type of society, where want to do what somebody did a century ago if still possible, with the way the future is going, with new tech on the horizon, takes away that interest for those. Society costs money, home, the car, and so on. Everybody knows that.

Everything is inflated for number of reasons.

[Madison320]

During Trump’s first 2 years in office, US federal government deficits have already driven the national debt up by $3 trillion – from $19.5 trillion to $22.5 trillion. That´s even faster than his predecessors, George Bush and Barack Obama.
The 2018 Trump tax cuts have reduced US government revenues by about $500 billion in 2018; add another $.5 trillion per year in the continuing of the Bush-Obama era tax cuts; another $.4 trillion in Trump war and other spending hikes during his first two years; and more than $.6 trillion in interest payments on the debt — and you reach the $3 trillion added to the national debt in 2017 and 2018.

When George Bush Jr. took office in 2001 the national debt was $5.6 trillion; it almost doubled in 8 years to approximately $10 trillion. When Obama left office in 2016 it had almost doubled again to $19.6 trillion.
Under President George Bush Jr. there were more than $4 trillion in tax cuts. The US army got several trillions additionally.
Obama cut another $300 billion in taxes in 2009 and then extended the Bush tax cuts, scheduled to expire in 2010, for two more years to 2012 (costing another $900 billion). Then came another $806 billion in tax cuts for business. In January 2013, Obama extend Bush’s tax cuts for another decade —costing a further $5 trillion until 2023.
Both Bush and Obama cut taxes by approximately $4 trillion each. And defense-war spending long term costs rose by $6 trillion in total. Roughly a $14 trillion increase to the $5.6 trillion debt of 2000.

To this Trump has since added another $3 trillion during, which adds up to the “current” $22.5 trillion.
The Treasury Advisory Committee recently warned the US Treasury that it will have to sell $12 trillion more US Treasury bonds, bills and notes, over the next decade, 2018-2028. That’s $12 trillion on top of $22.5 trillion national debt or a $34 trillion national debt by 2028!

In January 2018 the Trump tax cut provided $4.5 trillion tax reduction from 2018 to 2028, for businesses, multinational corporations, wealthy households, and investors. US multinationals alone get nearly half of that $4.5 trillion.
But starting this year, 2019, the middle class will begin paying for those tax reductions for corporate America, investors and the wealthy 1%. Already tax refunds for the average household are down 17%. The tax hike starts in earnest by 2022; middle class will pay $1.5 trillion in higher taxes by 2028.

Today’s $22.5 trillion, rising to $34 trillion, is just the US national government debt. Total US debt includes state and local government debt, household debt, corporate bond and business commercial & industrial loan debt, central bank balance sheet debt, and government agencies (GSEs) debt. Add these other forms of debt to the national debt makes the total debt in the US rises some $53 trillion. This lead to an estimated grand total US debt of more than $70 trillion by 2028 (the $900 billion a year in interest charges for the banksters is probably too low an estimate): https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/03...and-debt-bomb/
(archived here: http://archive.is/hzpeF)

Your basic premise is wrong. Tax cuts don't cause debt. Spending does.

[Zippyjuan]

Your basic premise is wrong. Tax cuts don't cause debt. Spending does.

Debt is taking in less money than you spend. Cutting taxes reduces how much you take in. If you were earning $100 and spending $150, your debt for the year is $50. If your wages get cut (taxes the government collects) to say $90, your deficit is now $60 - a higher amount, even though spending was not increased. (Increasing spending will also increase deficits- the debt is the sum of all deficits over time).

Cutting taxes adds to the deficit. Increasing spending also adds to the deficit. Unless the tax cuts were offset by reductions in spending or the spending increase was offset by higher taxes either will increase your deficit.

If your theory is true, we could get rid of all taxes and not increase our debt.

[Swordsmyth]

Debt is taking in less money than you spend. Cutting taxes reduces how much you take in. If you were earning $100 and spending $150, your debt for the year is $50. If your wages get cut (taxes the government collects) to say $90, your deficit is now $60 - a higher amount, even though spending was not increased. (Increasing spending will also increase deficits- the debt is the sum of all deficits over time).

Cutting taxes adds to the deficit. Increasing spending also adds to the deficit. Unless the tax cuts were offset by reductions in spending or the spending increase was offset by higher taxes either will increase your deficit.

If your theory is true, we could get rid of all taxes and not increase our debt.

Cutting taxes increased revenue, it was additional spending that increased the deficit, the economy is dynamic and our tax rates are still so high that they suppress it and further cuts would still increase revenue.

[Zippyjuan]

Cutting taxes increased revenue, it was additional spending that increased the deficit, the economy is dynamic and our tax rates are still so high that they suppress it and further cuts would still increase revenue.

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxv...ay-itself-2018

[Swordsmyth]

Propaganda.

[Zippyjuan]

Propaganda.

Darned facts! Always getting in the way of things!

[Swordsmyth]

Darned facts! Always getting in the way of things!

There are no facts there.

[Madison320]

Debt is taking in less money than you spend. Cutting taxes reduces how much you take in. If you were earning $100 and spending $150, your debt for the year is $50. If your wages get cut (taxes the government collects) to say $90, your deficit is now $60 - a higher amount, even though spending was not increased. (Increasing spending will also increase deficits- the debt is the sum of all deficits over time).

Cutting taxes adds to the deficit. Increasing spending also adds to the deficit. Unless the tax cuts were offset by reductions in spending or the spending increase was offset by higher taxes either will increase your deficit.

If your theory is true, we could get rid of all taxes and not increase our debt.

If we only spent what we could collect voluntarily we'd have no debt.

Cutting spending is the only sure way to cut debt. Increasing tax rates, especially when we're near the peak of the laffer curve does NOT increase tax revenue proportionally and may even REDUCE tax revenue.

The idea that we owe 23 trillion because of tax cuts is a joke. We're squeezing out as much as we possibly can in tax revenue. The problem is spending.

[Madison320]

Darned facts! Always getting in the way of things!

You do realize that behavior changes when you increase rates, don't you?

Here's a quiz:

How much revenue would the government collect with a 100% tax rate?

Answer:

0.

[Danke]

Seems legit.

[Zippyjuan]

If we only spent what we could collect voluntarily we'd have no debt.

Cutting spending is the only sure way to cut debt. Increasing tax rates, especially when we're near the peak of the laffer curve does NOT increase tax revenue proportionally and may even REDUCE tax revenue.

The idea that we owe 23 trillion because of tax cuts is a joke. We're squeezing out as much as we possibly can in tax revenue. The problem is spending.

The problem is that we spend more than we collect in taxes. It isn't one or the other (revenue or spending), it is both. When they aren't in balance, you run a surplus or deficit. Politicians like to promise things without pain- they promise programs but don't worry about how to pay for them because spending is popular among voters and taxes to actually pay for them is not popular. If you don't want to cut things like Social Security and Medicare (because they are so popular- even Ron and Rand Paul avoided talking about reducing them), you cannot eliminate the budget deficit by cuts alone. Unless you are willing to cut $1 trillion from this $1.19 trillion:

[Firestarter]

Your basic premise is wrong. Tax cuts don't cause debt. Spending does.

Your basic premise is wrong; that was one of the points in the article I posted, so not MY "premise"...

It wasn't me that promised to get rid of the US national debt either, but Donald Drumpf.
It's obvious that, bankruptcy or using the US military to kill the banks not withstanding, that the only "normal" ways to lower debt is to lower spending and/or increase income!

Trump has increased spending and lowered tax income.
Just like his predecessor presidents, since Reagan, making the US national debt skyrocket.

With the average American family having to pay more than $5000 in taxes per year only to pay off the increase of the debt through interest.

[oyarde]

Trump wants to bet Obama at everything. Look for record debt (we are well on our way).

I think to top the last guy he would need to get to 40 trillion .

[oyarde]

The problem is that we spend more than we collect in taxes. It isn't one or the other (revenue or spending), it is both. When they aren't in balance, you run a surplus or deficit. Politicians like to promise things without pain- they promise programs but don't worry about how to pay for them because spending is popular among voters and taxes to actually pay for them is not popular. If you don't want to cut things like Social Security and Medicare (because they are so popular- even Ron and Rand Paul avoided talking about reducing them), you cannot eliminate the budget deficit by cuts alone. Unless you are willing to cut $1 trillion from this $1.19 trillion:

It would just be nice to see all that other crap eliminated and cut for starters. I would accept that as sincere . Education , housing , food , foreign aid , energy , agriculture etc are not iitems that should be listed as federal tax dollar expenditures