
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Two Moons on 19 November 2012 - 02:11
Try skipping out on a debt in Las Vegas, you will find that they except not just cash and will get their pound of flesh.
Never borrow what you can't pay back, especially from a loan shark.
You can't rob Peter to pay Paul for very long before it lands you in trouble.
by beetree on 19 November 2012 - 14:11
When we take on debt it is not affected by the "confidence" factor. So it always just adds up. Profits, or fortunes are different in that they can change in the blink of an eye solely because of this "confidence". So no wonder the debt realistically can never be paid back. Those so called "adjustments" aren't applied at the same time to debt. Eventually this catches up and really, forgiving the debt if or when it gets to that would be the simplest, bloodless thing to do. One needs to appreciate society, though, too, for this to work. IMHO

by Two Moons on 19 November 2012 - 14:11
by beetree on 19 November 2012 - 14:11

by Two Moons on 19 November 2012 - 14:11
We are the ones who borrowed their money, do we not owe it back?
They are not the only ones we owe money to.
by beetree on 19 November 2012 - 14:11

by Micaho on 19 November 2012 - 16:11
And Bee, thanks for donating those 35 years of FICA payments when the debt is forgiven. I hope you have good investments, a job you can work at till you die, and/ or family to live with if you're not expecting to get any benefits!
I personally think that the government will have to go into the energy production business and try to finance itself and debt repayment off the profits. Right now it is supposedly illegal for our government to own or operate a business because of possible corruption, LOL. However, government run energy production is successful in Germany and one of the Scandinavian countries. With all the energy resources recently identified, we might be able to combine profitability and environmental safety. I don't like the idea, because our government does not do much well. But even revenue from leases, etc. would help. I don't think we have many other options.
by beetree on 19 November 2012 - 18:11
Do you know what is interesting? How inviolate debt is. I just did a quick little wiki-read, that supported my suspicions. Did you know it was the trading of agricultural debt that began the idea and created what is now our stock market?
Also, what you describe I would also agree with, should the debt be called in, sounds like a nightmare! But that just makes it a double edge sword, in a way. What do you think China wants to do with the owning of our debt? Now, think too, if their economy is so robust they have no need to call in a debt, or do you think they do?In 12th century France the courretiers de change were concerned with managing and regulating the debts of agricultural communities on behalf of the banks. Because these men also traded with debts, they could be called the first brokers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market
...that's all I have time for now....

by Micaho on 19 November 2012 - 19:11
You are right that nothing has happened yet, and may not. Still, I would like to see the debt reduced so the axe will not be hanging over our heads. The principal is bad enough but the interest on the loans is obscene! The amount of money the US takes in on taxes should be adequate to support a constitutionally limited government's expenses. Before income taxes, it is my understanding that the government functioned on only the revenue from liquor sales. Amazing!
by beetree on 20 November 2012 - 17:11
Debt it would seem is the more powerful of the two... its opposite, being the other: proft. I really didn't know that. So what should an enlightened society do? Do they hang onto the sanctity of debt at the expense of Society? And even if we could take the absolute power away from debt, something else would have to take its place.
Now as far as the old guys wanting to raise the ceiling for debt, well, I think it is because they aren't going to be around for the implosion, so it really isn't a problem. Only if the debt gets called in, does it become a real disaster. I actually knew an auto Exec. in finance who used this thinking for maxing out credit cards. So long as you keep the minimum payment going, the actual debt means nothing, you only need to plan on continuing the practice for your lifespan. I am not like that at all personally, but I can see how one will justify debt in that way.
It would be great if in times of "prosperity" our thinking would be to save for the rainy day. My example's for my own state that ignored their former prudence, would include the squandering of the Tobacco settlements and casino revenue from slots. Seems even the casino's are having trouble making the money they were used to.
This is all the time I have to share on this subject at the moment. I would like to hear about what other people think about Debt in any of its contexts.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top