Check your privileges

[rah]

Yeah, kind of takes the fun out of drinking.

 

[civver_764]

No, it redistributes wealth by giving poor people proportionally more than they had before.

*sigh* And then it takes money from the same poor people when inflation kicks.

Repeat after me: federal spending isn't paid for by taxes

Ok, replace "raise taxes" with "borrow more money". You can't just keep borrowing money forever, eventually it will collapse.

No one is going to be paying off the federal debt ever. Every time we try the economy crashes and the budget goes deep into deficit.

So you think we can just borrow as much money as we want and there will be no consequences? It's amazing to me that you don't see a problem here.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

This changes everything

Well, a lot of things. Growth rate of my criminal record being one of them.

@rah...I don't impose my limit on anyone else. Most people who go out drinking with me have no problem having fun.

 

[Lexicus]

*sigh* And then it takes money from the same poor people when inflation kicks.

Okay, I conclude this subject is beyond your mental capacity. We'll move past it.

So you think we can just borrow as much money as we want and there will be no consequences? It's amazing to me that you don't see a problem here.

I certainly didn't say that though...what I said is that there is no need to pay back the federal debt (quite the contrary in fact, attempting to pay back the federal debt causes ruinous deflation) so your stated moral objection to the government borrowing money (that our children will be subject to higher taxes to "pay it back") is based on a falsehood.

The federal government cannot borrow as much money as it wants without consequence. But we can borrow considerably more than we are now without any consequences worth mentioning.

 

[civver_764]

Okay, I conclude this subject is beyond your mental capacity. We'll move past it.

That's a funny way of saying "I can't refute this, but I refuse to accept it."

I certainly didn't say that though...what I said is that there is no need to pay back the federal debt (quite the contrary in fact, attempting to pay back the federal debt causes ruinous deflation) so your stated moral objection to the government borrowing money (that our children will be subject to higher taxes to "pay it back") is based on a falsehood.

The federal government cannot borrow as much money as it wants without consequence. But we can borrow considerably more than we are now without any consequences worth mentioning.

Ok, let's keep this simple.

1. A situation with more federal debt is worse than a situation with less federal debt.
2. Knowingly making the situation worse for our children is immoral.
3. Increasing the federal debt is immoral.

Whether they pay for it with higher taxes or fewer services for their tax dollars, they're still paying for it.

 

[Lexicus]

That's a funny way of saying "I can't refute this, but I refuse to accept it."

Whatever you say buddy

1. A situation with more federal debt is worse than a situation with less federal debt.

False and thus 2 and 3 are also false.

Whether they pay for it with higher taxes or fewer services for their tax dollars, they're still paying for it.

Also false.

 

[civver_764]

False and thus 2 and 3 are also false.

A higher federal debt is not worse than a lower federal debt?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Ok, let's keep this simple.

Why? There is nothing to be gained for the rest of us by not taking it out of your obviously limited depth.

A higher federal debt is not worse than a lower federal debt?

BINGO.

Now, when you understand why that is true come on back and we'll continue the conversation.

 

[Lexicus]

A higher federal debt is not worse than a lower federal debt?

That is correct.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

That is correct.

Next he will ask for a free education courtesy of a social forum on the internet.

 

[civver_764]

That is correct.

So then we should borrow $100 trillion dollars and hand it out to everyone, right?

 

[Lexicus]

So then we should borrow $100 trillion dollars and hand it out to everyone, right?

No.

 

[civver_764]

Why not? I thought a higher federal debt didn't matter?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No.

Apparently I persueded him not to ask for the free education and he opted to prove the rule "there are no stupid questions" by providing the exception.

Oooops, now he is asking for the free education.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why not? I thought a higher federal debt didn't matter?

You thought wrong. Come back when you've learned enough to ask an intelligent question. It is not our job to teach you the basics.

 

[Lexicus]

Why not? I thought a higher federal debt didn't matter?

When did I say that?

 

[civver_764]

When did I say that?

Why does a higher federal debt matter if it's not worse than a lower federal debt?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

When did I say that?

You didn't. What you did say could be confused with that if you have absolutely no education in the subject matter.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You thought wrong. Come back when you've learned enough to ask an intelligent question. It is not our job to teach you the basics.

Why does a higher federal debt matter if it's not worse than a lower federal debt?

Too soon. Go learn.

 

[Lexicus]

Why does a higher federal debt matter if it's not worse than a lower federal debt?

Let's draw an analogy that might make things easier. If we were talking about cooking, and you were to say "less salt is always better than more salt" and I were to say, "that isn't true," nowhere have I committed to the position that there's no such thing as too much salt.

You didn't. What you did say could be confused with that if you have absolutely no education in the subject matter.

I don't think this is even a matter of education so much as basic logic.