Can Trump Salvage The Sinking US Ship?
When Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack O’Bomber, was sworn into office on January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10.62 trillion.
The United States currently has a national debt total of over $19.9 Trillion according to the US national debt clock as of the writing of this blog. That’s an astonishing 87% increase in less than an 8 year period.
However, this past summer, during the US republican primary race, Dr. Ben Carson made a good point in mentioning that the $19 trillion dollar debt figure was actually quite misleading.
Most people never take into account that there is something called the Fiscal Gap, which at this point sits well over $210 trillion. Given the current approximated population in the US of 315 million tax slaves, that is $666,666.66 per person!
This number includes all the unfunded liabilities owed by the government which are not put on the books such as the expenses of social security, medicare, medicaid, and departmental program funding etc vs the expected revenues from taxes. The two numbers should be equal or roughly balanced much like you balance your checkbook. When they are not in alignment it is referred to, politely, as a gap.
The only reason the United States is able to sustain such a massive gap and debt is because the dollar is a world reserve currency and as such, has the ability through the Federal reserve, to print infinite amounts of money.
In the past, we have seen how destructive the renunciation of a nation’s debt can be. For example, in the case of Brazil in 1982, when it announced that it was unable to make payments on its debt, the US Treasury responded by extending a direct loan of $1.23 billion to keep those checks going to the banks while a more permanent solution was negotiated through the IMF.
Of course, these restructurings never end up working which is evident because five years later, Brazil once again was forced to default on it’s then even larger $121 billion debt, a massive amount for the time, which rendered it so impossibly broke that it couldn’t even buy gasoline for its police cars. (Not a particularly bad thing in and of itself)
The result of a default or restructuring is always the same – the burden rests upon the shoulders of the taxpayers.
The same was true of Argentina in 1982 when they too could no longer service their debt. As always, their creditors immediately began negotiations for rollovers, guarantees, and new IMF loans which would inevitably plunge them even further into debt. By 1988, after the extension of new loans in the years prior, Argentina once again fell behind and stopped payments.
Getting back to the US, Trump is sending more mixed signals than a quarterback with Tourette’s.
On the one hand, Donald Trump has appeared to have expressed interest in returning to a precious metals standard through his meeting with the former CEO of the bank BB&T, John Allison, who stated “the US should go back to a banking system backed by a market standard such as gold.”
On the other hand, it was just confirmed that ex-Goldman Sachs banker Steven Mnuchin, is Trump’s pick for Treasury Secretary. This is incredibly ironic considering Donald’s staunch criticism of Killary’s acceptance of money from the bank for speaking engagements. This, along with many other potential appointments makes it seem as though Trump is just refilling the swamp, not draining it.
The truth is though, that this is all noise. Trump has no real viable plan for debt reduction, which is the biggest problem facing the nation. Even a return to a gold standard, which would be the best case scenario, would cause the biggest worldwide depression in world history as it would necessitate a reneging on the current debt which mostly underpins the world’s financial system.
In other words, something major must be broken if you want the debt to stop piling up. There must be a washing away of sorts.
That said, Trump brings a whole array of unknowns with him and there are sure to be plenty of shake-ups, which spell opportunities for speculators. We’ll be analyzing many of them in the next issue of TDV to subscribers (see more info on subscribing here) set to go out later this evening.
We’ll soon find out exactly what Trump is up to… but in the meantime it appears he is already getting the hang of being a dick-tator:
Here was my polite, freedom friendly response to it:
Flagged because once again you're reaping large rewards and refusing to engage with the community. Until you start participating I'm going to continue flagging your posts.
I agree bernie.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with both of you and have voted this article up.
I believe that posting a well considered article is sufficient engagement to warrant rewards and that a celebrity reward multiplier is a reasonable expenditure for the platform to attract celebrity of the stature of @dollarvigilante.
To respond to the content of the article, @dollarvigilante is completely justified in his suspicion of Donald Trump's intented actions. There is absolutely no practical way to establish any monetary policy that deviates from a gradual reduction of the present runaway money printing. It's good that Trump has decided to harness the expertise of banking insiders, because, if they are worth the money that taxpayers are paying them, they will explain that abruptly reducing the rate of money printing will most likely have catastrophic effects on the economy.
My prediction is that Trump will delegate monetary policy to those hired to formulate it and that the national debt will continue to explode as a result. From a libertarian perspective of free markets and fiscal responsibility, this outcome is not desirable, but is is likely the least worst option. It is arguably better than wholesale economic collapse that would accompany an abrupt adoption of an otherwise responsible monetary policy.
Thanks for the read Jeff. It is going to be very interesting to see what DJT does with the debt. We already see what doing nothing accomplishes..more debt.
Its not really fair to lay the debt increase at Obama's door. At 87% over 8 years he has one of the lower per year increases in modern times (percentage wise). Bush II had over 100% over 8 years. Clinton was super low (i think the best in modern times). Bush 1 was something like 35% in 4 years (which would have translated to around 82 percent in 8 years). Reagan was almost 200% in 8 years. Carter was around 30% in 4 years (8 year equivalent of about 70).. the 8 years before carter (some combination of ford and nixon) were a hair under 100%.
Trump comes from the business world, so he understands there is nothing wrong with carrying debt. ANd honestly i think you have to go all the way back to ike to find a GOP president with a good record on debt reduction. Even you admit:
So if it aint broken don't fix it. Contrary to what the melodramatic pearl-clutchers on fox news will tell you, theres no real problem. The US can pay its debts.
If i had to guess, id say trump is going to be a reagan rerun as far as spending goes and taxes go, i really wouldnt be surprised to see the US flirting with 30T by the time trump comes up for re-election.
If you dig deeper into debt-based currencies you'll find they are literally impossible to pay off. We don't just owe other contries and bond-holders debt, but also to the private federal reserve. At the most simple example starting with no money in circulation, if I create $100 out of thin air and loan it to you at 10% interest - there's still only $100 in circulation, how could you pay me back $110?
Aside from your use of the term "debt based currencies" which is a meaningless tautology, I understand this completely. Im not saying "dont worry, before long well have this debt paid off". Im saying "don't worry, there is nothing wrong with carrying a lot of debt, so long as that debt isnt expanding very much faster than GDP"
A big part of your problem is that youre assuming a dollar is the same as a dollar bill. Its not. A dollar, like a bitcoin, is an entry in an electronic ledger.
The answer to your question is that you're starting from a false premise. If you loan me $100 at 10% interest, you haven't created $100 out of thin air. You've created $110 out of thin air. Currnecy is debt. his ledger shows a $110 recievable asset. yours shows a 110 debt. The universe works.
Here's the tricky part -- unless he can take that $100 and use it to make something worth 110 or more, youre little two person economic system is fucked.
Interesting explanation, I was just commenting on your one statement that the US can pay its debt is all - I still don't know how that's true, especially if interest payments are as large or larger than the income.
I expressed that poorly. What i should have said is "the us can make payments on its debt obligations according to terms". Which is to say, we're able to make our payments on time. I wasn't thinking we could actually pay the debt off. Its kind of the same difference as me saying "I can pay my mortgage" versus "i can pay my mortgage off".. i only meant to imply the first.
Ah OK, I misunderstood. BTW, not to get off topic, so far in my short time here I've had a few good discussions, this being one of them, and am very glad I signed up and started browsing. Nice to have a discussion and even be corrected in an intelligent and articulate manner. I've been so used to responses to what started out as a mere discussion on a political or economic topic that end with plain disregard for any semblance of discourse for so long on pretty much every other platform - nice change to find some intellectually honest people.
didn't Clinton change some accounting rules to remove some of the deficit? I can't remember but he was very adept in the political sleight of hand that confuses us all.
Yep, he moved all that money from the SS fund and left it piled high with IOU's...That's how he 'balanced' his budgets...
oh yeah that was that lockbox nonsense... i forgot about that one.
Fiscal Gap is a grossly misleading statistic. -- one that was created to grab headlines and alarm people.
Basically, what fiscal gap does is project the cost of the governments financial obligations foward, in some cases as much as 40 years, but assumes that the government will continue to collect the same amount of taxes in absolute terms.
That is to say, it assumes that not only will the government take the same percentage of the GDP as tax revenue, but that GDP will actually stay the same, and that percentage will actually be the same absolute dollar amount. needless to say, this is not true, especially for expenses projected far in the future (which is where the the bulk of the fiscal gap lies)
Bring on the world of Bitcoin, Zcash, and STEEM!
#TrueStory
Jeff berwick on reality check :)
Hahahha woooo, Fuck yea Dollarvigilante. "Burn all the flags" is something I've felt for a while. Tis cool that you feel the same way haha. I get confused when people say "Our soldiers died for that flag" because a flag is just a colourful rag to me. I've seen people use them as tea-towels or napkins for fuck sake. If people are truly fighting and dieing for a flag, good riddance to the stupid fucks.
If anyone thinks burning a flag "is just a flag" tell that to the parents who got one folded up instead of their child coming home!!
Trump is an absolute wildcard, but I think he has a plan to shake things up for the better. This election has given me a beacon of hope because the corruption has been unveiled.
Trump cannot salvage the sinking US ship; first we must salvage ourselves, THEN we can salvage America.