[Nuc1]

I believe inflation is behind many problems such as the loss of family farms, the present recession etc. Our inflation rate is wayyy past enough. Our government is completely irresponsible and has been for many decades.

[RobinOfKingston]

Kinda like asking just where things got out-of-hand as we waded through that case of Tequila.

[gorilla_warrior]

Split the country. The Free American side repudiates the debt. The liberal fascist side inherits the debt. Problem solved.

[blake6900]

During the mid-term elections of 2006 Democrats ran on two issues: ending the Iraq War and bringing down the $450 billion deficit. They accused the GOP of being "fiscally irresponsible".

What a difference three years makes...

[Don Corleone]

Want to see how insidious inflation is? Pull up some ads from the ‘30’s or ‘40’s and check the prices against todays. Then research the number of hours you needed to work to earn that amount.
Start here: Postage was 3 cents in 1940. Gasoline was in the ball park at 12 cents per gallon. A new car cost less than $1000.

Government loves inflation til it gets out of control and Zimbabwe’s the nation.

[wny]

To anyone out there that doesn't believe excessive govt borrowing isn't a problem, I pose the following question:

Why not have the govt borrow 300 trillion dollars and send every man, woam and child in the country a check for $1,000,000?

[JasonC]

The question has an actual numerical answer. When the debt to GDP times the average interest rate the government can borrow at exceeds the long run nominal growth rate of the economy, you've hit the debt wall. At that point the interest on the outstanding debt is the growth increment to the entire economy. Anything shy of that is sustainable. Doesn't mean I am recommending it, I'm not. That is just where the wall is, mathematically and macroeconomically.

It is not something to worry about seriously with debt to GDP at 40% or even at 70%, when interest rates are at 3.5%, or even if they go back to a more normal 6%. It is something to worry about if you see interest rates more like 8% and debt to GDP nearing unity.

The last adult on any of this was Gingrich. It is not a time to doom monger it or pretend the wall is nearby when it isn't. But it is definitely not a time to be adding trillion dollar new entitlements or socking the economic with giant new tax increases.

The way it ought to be addressed is spending should halt in its tracks, recent emergency measures should not be repeated, and the economy should be given time to absorb policies already in place and to recover. Which it will, more than enough has already been done. Some of the special measures will reverse on their own (repayment of TARP e.g.), and the fall in tax revenue due to the recession will also abate. Do not spend more as this happens. Just let it take its course, and freeze spending, cutting discretionary stuff outright to make room for colas and such on the entitlement side.

Doing that would bring the budget back to rough balance in about five years. Beyond that, entitlement reform that slows the growth of give-aways to the middle class are what is needed, not giant new giveaways to buy another round of votes with borrowed money. Bush was irresponsible on drug benefits and Obama is twice as irresponsible with his current health care proposals. We need the opposite on both, gradual means testing and voluntary privatization ideas.

Gingrich laid all of it out correctly 10 years ago, and was called a mean spirited hater for his pains. But everything needed to solve it is clear. Just, nobody is willing to actually do any of it. They'd rather believe fairy tales and sling mud at each other.