US national debt nears $31T: What it means and why it's a concern
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • 2 years ago • 147 commentsBy: Aislinn Murphy (Fox Business)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The U.S. national debt is steadily approaching $31 trillion, according to the data released Friday by the Treasury Department.
The federal government's total public debt outstanding sits at about $30.9 trillion as of Friday, with roughly $24.3 trillion of it being held by the public and $6.6 trillion in intragovernmental holdings, which include federal trust funds and other accounts. The U.S. national debt previously hit a milestone in February 2022, when it surpassed $30 trillion for the first time.
The national debt is the "accumulation" of the federal government borrowing money by selling marketable securities to pay its deficits and the "associated interest owed to the investors who purchased these securities," according to the Treasury Department.
The Treasury Department releases the fix interest rate for Series EE bonds every May and November. (iStock / iStock)
A deficit occurs when the government spends more than it collects in revenues in a given fiscal year. The national debt gets larger as the U.S. racks up more deficits, the Treasury Department said.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) warned in its latest long-term budget outlook that the rising debt could have ramifications for the U.S. economy.
Debt that is high and rising as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) would "raise borrowing costs throughout the economy, reduce private investment, and slow the growth of economic output over time," the CBO said in its July report. Increased interest costs related to the debt would "drive up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt, decreasing the nation's net international income," the agency added.
With "persistently rising" debt, investors could lose confidence in the federal government's ability to pay off its debt, which could result in interest rates or inflation suddenly rising, according to the CBO.
The CBO said other potential risks include creating widespread expectations of higher inflation, reducing confidence in the U.S. dollar or making securing financing for public and private activities in foreign markets more challenging. It could "cause lawmakers to feel more constrained in their policy choices" as well, according to the agency.
The federal debt could rise to 185% of GDP in 30 years, the agency projected in its report.
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Somebody tell Joe Biden ...in a rare moment when his brain is functioning
Donald Trump is off topic.
[removed]
[deleted]
Yesterday I had a person running for State Rep show up at my door. I have to say I was surprised. I don't ever recall a candidate canvassing showing up at my door. He said the top two concerns are inflation and abortion. People tell him that they are highly concerned about the future of their financial security and others tell him that they are seriously suffering under Biden's economy.
I had a similar experience. A person showed up at my door running for the US House version. He handed me his campaign card & spoke of inflation and crime. Before he spoke, I had two enormous clues that he was a Republican:
1) He properly listed the two main issues on most people's minds.
2) There was no party affiliation listed on his campaign card.
Same here. I had to ask him what party he was running on and he said he hated that question...lol.
Old habits die hard. That was the old GOP.
It's a natural occurrence here, I am beginning to think it's just because people want to see my back yard.
Doesn't matter which party, they always knock, introduce themselves and ask for a photo op "out back".
Texas is just special that way.
Eileen Filler-Corn is my state delegate. She was the first Jew and first woman to be speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates. She didn't knock on doors, but on the weekends and early evenings she would walk her neighbor hoods and engage others out walking and those walking pets. It was a friendly, non-obtrusive way to campaign. I always enjoyed our conversations.
2 years of fucking stupid Democrat policies have caused high gas prices; inflation; recession; high crime by releasing criminals and defunding the police (violent crime in the case of Democrat bastion of stupidity cities); record setting illegal immigration; record setting drug deaths for US citizens and profits for the Chinese and Mexican drug cartels; a market it flux; and weaponizing the IRS, FBI, and DOJ against their political opponents.
Everyone saw this coming. Everyone is affected by it.
But Democrats expect to be reelected at midterms. Proving just how stupid and out of touch with reality they really are.
Right, let's just pretend a global pandemic didn't happen, environmental disasters aren't surging due to global climate change, oil and gas never reduced production in response to the pandemic and that the massive political divide hadn't culminated in an attempted insurrection by right wing conservative extremists determined to violently install their Dear Leader in power. Sure, sure, blame everything on the Democrats because it's way more convenient than the truth.
Sure, why not?
Some folks are pretending that massive spending bills didn't add to inflationary woes (which economists predicted) and then this Administration and Democratic Congress doubled down on those same massive spending bills.
Can you in any way relate that crap to inflation and the effects it had on inflation?????
Every POTUS has issues to deal with. Most have done it without blaming and whining, but not Biden
Are you seriously claiming rightwing conservatives aren't "blaming and whining"? It seems that's all I've heard from conservatives since November 2020.
Ffs, he specifically mentioned the President, so why are you twisting his words?
JFC, that's all I've heard since 2016 - perpetually got their panties in a bunch.
Are you saying the former President wasn't "blaming and whining" after the election results in 2020? Not only was he "blaming and whining" then, he's still "blaming and whining" two years later.
No, I am saying you deliberately tried to make it seem his post said something it didn't, which is just a cheap attempt at deflection.
The posts are right there, but I have no idea what you "think" you read.
If that is what you took away from my post, get someone to explain what it really says!
He claimed nothing of the sort. Why even ask that dumb question when it is quite clear he didn't?
Then you probably haven't been listening too closely.
Maybe it is just you don't understand what they are saying.
My response was about the POTUS not anyone else.
You are spot on again.
He deliberately mischaracterized your post. Something he chastises others for.
Pot meet kettle.
Oh the irony.
Very good, you caught that in my post about someone doing exactly what they accuse others of.
No, I caught that in your post accusing others of what you do quite regularly.
Thanks
Quote me doing exactly that then, and when you can't, clam up!
So, are You, claiming rightwing conservatives AREN"T...?
What exactly are y'all READING????
Words.
Sometimes it is hard to tell that.
Maybe I should have asked what y'all are comprehending from what you claim to have read.
End results are the same either way.
Got those quotes of mine yet?
There's clearly no point in engaging with that nonsense.
I've witnessed too many of your pointless "arguments" that lasted three days or more
playing word games and just being downright disagreeable for no gain.
Just like in this article, you interpret the same words differently from many, many other
people; hopefully it's deliberate and nothing else.
Perhaps it is best if you stop making (false) claims about me if you are incapable of backing them up.
No, I read the articles and the comments and don't pretend someone says something they didn't.
Instead of stupid memes, what I would LOVE to see is one single person who bitches about 'trickle down' tell me what any Democratic President or Congress has EVER done to change one damn thing besides whine and cry and bitch.
The hilarious thing about that is the fact that by far the greatest "trickle down" president in US history was Barack Obama.
Cutting taxes while spending like crazy on the military did not produce the promised growth to pay for it...
Voodoo Economics resulted in our massive debts.
"Bush added $4.9 trillion to debt. Former President Obama left office having added $9.3 trillion to the national debt, according to numbers from the Treasury Department."
That's how it began. It had everything to do with spending.
Biden has taken it to a whole new level. It will hurt us all.
In 8 years. Trump added $7.8 trillion in 4 years.
Trump had to deal with the start of the Covid pandemic.
We can compare how much Brandon will have increased the national debt in 4 years. Ukraine alone will blow anything Trump did out of the water. Not to mention the trillions in unfunded Democrat spending on green energy and social engineering projects.
But at least Brandon has ended Covid like he promised./S
Obama had to deal with a global financial crisis.
BTFW, that 'Brandon' bullshit is childish.
It's beyond childish. Most children don't act as immature as those who refer to President Biden as 'Brandon'.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Steaming pile of shit fits as does trumpturd when referring to #45.
[Deleted]
I'm sure 'Brandon' would agree with your sentiment.
Who is "Brandon" and why would he agree?
Equally childish.
Fuck off.
Children repeat the propaganda they are taught to believe. In this case, Biden, the "Unifier-in-Chief", has taught his spineless adult followers to meekly follow him by vehemently accusing 74+ million US voters as:
In my many decades of voting, I've never seen a POTUS so deliberately and hatefully attack his fellow Americans who didn't vote for him.
So I take it falsely accusing the 81 million Americans who didn't vote for him of election fraud and declaring that they were trying to "destroy our country" shouldn't be considered a "deliberate and hateful attack"?
ORLANDO, Fla. — President Donald Trump accused Democrats of trying to "destroy our country" as he officially kicked off his re-election campaign with a packed-house rally at the Amway Center here Tuesday night.
"Our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice and rage ," " They want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country as we know it. "
Trump, launching re-election bid, says Democrats 'want to destroy our country' (nbcnews.com)
Not only did he accuse them of fraud after he lost, and continues to accuse them without a lick of evidence, he spent much of his time on the campaign trail pre-convicting them of election fraud.
" T he only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged " - DJT
Trump: ‘The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged’ | The Hill
I didn’t vote for Trump in either election and I don’t believe that there was any significant voter fraud. I don’t think anyone that believes that there was significant voter fraud is accusing 81 million Biden voters. Where did you get that idea?
Then who are you and what have you done to the MAGA Drinker of the Wry we all know?
Because, that fella is a 100% Pure MAGA...
While never POTUS (thankfully!), Hillary was a real trendsetter, wasn't she?
That's just your biases running away with you again, jbb.
You can't find a single instance were I supported Trump, that's all in your head.
If you are going to flag my comment as off topic because I cited, he who shall not be named, you've a crap load of other comments to flag in this seed Vic.
You just haven't paid attention.
It's worth noting that a refusal to get carried away with brainless Trump fearing hysteria does not actually equate to support for the man.
All true
Your projection, deflection, and denial are fucking monumental.
Remember
It is nice to be important
But it's more important to be nice.
The denial and alternate reality where some reside is fucking mindboggling.
How does "Trumpturd" refer to any member here?
45 added $7.8 trillion in just 4 years, thankfully we did not get to see what 8 years would have been.
And please don't bother to flag.
Trying to make this solely about Biden, but allowing comments about other former Presidents, then making comments about other former Presidents yourself makes Mr. Trumps performance fair game.
No surprise there, his business model was based on continued borrowing. In that sense he fit into DC well and continued the norms of the modern presidency.
You're the boss.
The rest of this thread was removed for off topic. Get back on topic, only warning.
Surprisingly, neither Clinton nor Obama fixed this, when will Biden fix it?
Clinton cut the deficit to zero.
Bush blew it up to two trillion.
Obama cut Bush's deficit in half.
Trump had three trillion dollar deficits.
Biden's deficit this year will be one trillion.
What is up with that? The gop always blows up our deficit and Democratic Presidents cut it.
Oh bullshit. President Bush took office in 2001. He racked up $3.293 trillion in deficits during his two terms, a 57% increase.
President Obama had the largest deficits . By the end of his final budget, FY 2017, his budget deficits totaled $6.781 trillion over his eight years in office. That's a 58% increase from President George W. Bush's last budget.
[EDITED - OFF TOPIC]
President Biden's end result is set to be much higher with the $58 Billion sent to the Ukraine, several "stimulus packages". Sadly we are only 2 years into Biden's term.
It was true in 2014 when Obama claimed that.
Perhaps if you had provided the link to your quote everyone could continue to read why during a Depression Obama and Congress approved such measures to pull us out of the economic nosedive Bush left us with.
Or how Trump came in #2 when handed a solid, but lethargic economy.
U.S. Budget Deficit by President (thebalancemoney.com)
My source for that information is in YOUR link.
But you would know that if you read it.
A "depression"? Really. When was the recession changed to a "depression"? Oh, wait, it was done to in a failed attempt to make the person whose budget deficits totaled $6.781 trillion look good.
Did the huge gains in the stock markets, and the dot-com bubble, bring in hundreds of millions in unanticipated tax revenue? If we only had Al Gore inventing the internet every couple of years or so.
How much did of the budget surplus have to do to the Social Security tax on payrolls. If that surplus was for future recipients, should it have been counted as a surplus?
Why do folks simply refuse to acknowledge that a President actually has little to do with what Congress actually appropriates and spends?
Congress controls spending.
Look at who controlled the pursestrings.
I sit corrected, the article calls the recession, the "Great Recession",
not a depression.
I did read the link I provided for your article, thanks for the sarcasm.
My point is that accurately quoting a snippet of text that you think makes some sort of partisan victory is just the lowest form of keyboard warrior chickenshit on social media.
The article clearly points out that Obama tallied $6.781 Trillion in 8 YEARS.
The article further points out that Trump tallied $6.6 Trillion in just 4 YEARS.
Already addressed, thanks.
Ironic coming from a die hard Trump excuser.
Your point is that you tried and failed to make me look the fool.
Congratulations. You CAN read. And I was questioning your ability. BTW, who the hell is "Trumo"?
Don't worry yourself about that, you do just fine without any help from others.
The portion of the federal budget for the military has significantly decreased from near 60% in the 50’s to around 13% today. Entitlement spending has significantly grown to over 60% today.
You get the A today sir!
And yet the Democrats tout government largesse and "freebies" for just about everyone...to be paid for by taxing the"rich" and corporations.
Government Largesse? As in cutting taxes on the rich and big multinational corporations?
No as in giving $10,000 dollars of US taxpayer money to those that choose not to repay their college debts by EO. So much for Congress holding "the power of the purse" when Brandon is in the White House.
Exactly, for 2018, the first year after Trump’s tax law, the top 10% earned 47.66% of the nation’s income and paid 71.37% of the federal income tax paid.
We just want them to pay their fair share.
The only real answer as to what "fair share" means to a liberal that I have ever gotten is simply "more".
Replacing private wealth with public wealth is still trickle down economics. Government taxes only transfers money to government and, supposedly, the money collected by government trickles down, too.
You do understand that Biden's student loan forgiveness is trickle down economics. The tax incentives and subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act is trickle down economics, too. Just because the government transfers the money from the rich to its own coffers doesn't change how trickle down economics works.
Biden is spending money like crazy on the military, too. Democrats only use the military to trickle down money to other countries.
No, the only people for whom $10,000 in student loan forgiveness is life changing are the poor low paid workers. A semester at a state college costs that much. It is a drop in the bucket for most...
How is it life-changing when they haven't been paying on them anyway?
That simply doesn't make any sense at all.
Why are they poor with a college degree?
And that money trickled down. Those with student debt didn't do anything that was life changing; it was done for them. The government acting as sugar daddy doesn't empower anyone.
You know, the government taxing the rich only transfers money to the government. Democrats aren't demanding that the rich send money directly to the poor. The government taking that money from the rich doesn't change anything. The money still has to trickle down.
Good question, and one which will go ignored, just like an explanation of how something is life-changing even though they haven't paid on the loans in 2 1/2 years.
I am positive it is because 'greedy' corporations refuse to pay them living wages......................or some other such nonsense.
Couldn't possibly be because degrees in gender studies and basket-weaving are virtually worthless.
Get Real! They generally don't have degrees. Most either dropped of flunked out before getting a degree. Ten grand will not even pay for one semester at most state colleges...
People haven't paid in 2 1/2 years on those loans, how is this 'life-changing' for them when they will do absolutely nothing differently?
There are some states with easily affordable tuition rates.
Here is a list:
The Average Cost of College Tuition in Your State | Move.org
So what you are saying is we are paying for their failure.
Mine cost me far less than 10 grand a semester. I also was smart enough to get my degree in something useful. I'm at zero balance on student loans but then again, I wasn't dumb enough to take out 10 grand for 1 semester.
Yes, thanks to dumbass Joe.
And liberals cheer this shit on!
Less than half of those with student loans graduate with a college degree.
And you think that we as a country should bear the brunt of their personal failures.
Crazy shit there.
Then they shouldn't have taken massive loans out.
I feel no obligation to pay for dumbass 'mistakes'.
Frankly I think that graduating with a degree or at least a certificate of some sort, should be a prerequisite if this program goes through. Period.
But that would mean there would have to be some personal accountability. These people know nothing of that.
What was I thinking LOL
Absolutely!
No, but it will more than cover two years and an entire Associate's Degree at the vast majority of community colleges.
The forgiveness plan is simply people who made responsible decisions subsidizing those who didn't.
It's actually just over 60%.
Still, it's a very problematic number, and addressing that should certainly be central to any long term student loan reform.
What Percent of Student Loan Borrowers Never Graduate? - OneClass Blog
And their lack of commitment to see things through shouldn't be costing me any money because they were dumb enough to obligate themselves to loans.
Interesting.
They both say they're using DoE figures, but neither article links to them.
I think the difference may be the 60% number I cited (used by Elizabeth Warren) includes kids who finish (or don't) within 6 years. It appears the OneClass number simply records any kid who discontinues classes as a drop-out. But there isn't really any way to tell without the actual data.
Regardless, either figure is damning. At some point we need to start talking about the predatory practices and complete lack of accountability among of some of our previously hallowed institutions.
What, and place some responsibility on people instead of on government?
Not when Democrats can wave their little magic wand and simply erase debt for people who make bad decisions?
Trickle down? Money defies gravity and flows uphill.
Biden’s Student Debt Relief uses trickle down, otherwise why would the eligibility ceiling be set at $250,000 per household?
It uses the terminology, both parties play that game. Sip carefully Wry, folks will soon be calling you 'woke'.
I see little evidence that anyone in Washington is concerned about it.
It is a fact taught in every ECON 101 Class in the world that governments only have two ways of stimulating economic growth.
One - Cut Taxes.
Two - Increase Spending.
Either party could balance the budget at any time given the will and the determination to deal with a non-stimulated economy for the length of a down cycle and a temporary recession. Staying in power is motivation enough to spend and borrow. Good governments use restraint, unlike Trump's gop did.
We spent and borrowed like drunk sailors during good economic times. Now, when the economic cycle changes, we cannot afford to do very much.
It truly is a conundrum.
Where did you take Econ 101?
There is also Monetary Policy and Regulatory Policy.
Money policy and regulatory policy are just different words for taxing and spending...
They are about tax policies and regulations.
And, my personal information is off bounds.
[removed]
Definitely not the same place you learned that forgiving loans which weren't even being paid on is life-changing.
That's not how that works.
And we haven't even mentioned regulation.
No:
Undergrad at Ohio State University, grad school at Clarian University.
It's highly unlikely that the national debt will ever be an actual problem for the United States, even if it keeps going up. There are a number of online articles explaining why this is so.
The national debt as an issue is basically a way for conservatives to say we have cut back on social safety net spending.
In 2021, interest on the debt the government almost $400 billion dollars, as debt grows and interest rates increase, that cost will grow. That's about 8% of all federal revenue collections and roughly $3,055 per household. Is half a trillion in annual interest costs an "actual problem", is $600 billion a problem??
Advice on the US National Debt from a British comedian is well, funny.
Used to be liberals seemed to have gotten their news from late night US comedians.
Kind of nice to see them broadening their horizons a little, albeit no better a source for news.
Maybe because they have clowns leading their party, they find other clowns to be real geniuses.
It is stupid to say that we shouldn't listen to Jon Oliver because he is a British comedian.
We should pay attention to him because he is intelligent and points out the facts and truths that the alleged conservatives and gop/gqp/republicans find so inconvenient.
I thought comedians were supposed to be funny?
His humor is as bad as the old crew's on [removed]
I didn't say that you shouldn't listen.
Did you hear John say, "“But right now, most economists actually agree that with interest rates at historic lows," I didn't hear him address inflation and rising interest rates. Maybe it was pre-recorded before rates began rising.
I agree and while he called it an obsessions, the infrastructure bill passed as did the COVID bills with bipartisan support.
Oliver implies that growth rates in the economy will always be greater than interest rates, so no need to worry about the debt, or a continual rise in the debt-to-GDP ratio. I remember when the Fed Fund Rate hit 20% in 1980. That year US GDP dropped to -0.3%.
The long term concerns on national debt aren't about an investment like the infrastructure bill, it's about structural deficits that are annual and growing.
See 8.1.3
See 8.1.4
Again, see 8.1.3.
He's not speaking as a comedian. He's speaking as a person. [Deleted]
Yet you continue to spout nonsense. You and your thumbs up little buddies.
Stupid nonsense, as usual.
Is the CBO a conservative group"
Facts like that can't matter or get in the way of the liberal mantras.
They use "math". The bastards.
In 1981 the national debt crossed the one trillion mark. And here we are 31 years later crossing the $31 trillion mark. Seems that both parties have done their fair share of spending.
You got that right, both Parties care far more about re-election that helping the American people understand the pros and cons of investment and debt decisions in the long-term.
Servicing the debt will be $400 billion this year.