- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,066
- Reactions
- 12,642
So that's the accounting done, it doesn't say anything about the effect of debt on the economy, governments or individuals.
I am not sure what you mean.
a $1 debt is a liability to one person (claim on that persons future Labour) and an asset to another (promise of future labour) for every $1 liability that exists another entity has a $1 asset.
It’s just the way it is, like the laws of physics.
I am not sure what you mean.
a $1 debt is a liability to one person (claim on that persons future Labour) and an asset to another (promise of future labour) for every $1 liability that exists another entity has a $1 asset.
It’s just the way it is, like the laws of physics.
The laws of physics in this context state that if there was no net debt there would be no circulation of money
it doesn't say anything about the effect of debt .
You're saying the total sum of liability is equal to the total sum of assets, yes ?how so?
money will circulate when ever transactions occur or debts are settled.
You're saying the total sum of liability is equal to the total sum of assets, yes ?
I don't seem to remember anyone saying the economy as a whole is poorer ?
If the net worth of the planet is nothing how does that relate to the original point of slowing growth and increasing difficulty with meeting debt obligations ?
what?? Who said the net worth of The planet is zero.
Right here and now. Ten years ago Australia's Govt had no net debt. Now we have a net debt of around 400 billion dollars. Servicing that debt is money out of taxpayers' pockets. For every month of output we produce, we have one month equal to our debt. Obviously it's harder to service debt today than ten years ago when their was no debt.Where is the evidence that debt obligations are harder to meet on average now than they were ten years ago?
if you have something to say about it, just say it.
PZ99 pretty well summed it up at #1249.
The costs of servicing the debt inhibits people from spending on the products of business and therefore debt degrades economic consumption and contributes to falling economic growth.
Of course, some debt can be good if it results in an increase of capabilities like starting a new business, building productive infrastructure etc, but if you have to borrow just to stay alive then you are basically eating yourself and it won't end well.
I think the US has been in this situation for quite a while, and we could mention countries like Greece.
Right here and now. Ten years ago Australia's Govt had no net debt. Now we have a net debt of around 400 billion dollars. Servicing that debt is money out of taxpayers' pockets. For every month of output we produce, we have one month equal to our debt. Obviously it's harder to service debt today than ten years ago when their was no debt.
The post you were responding to when you said "no net debt" was about slowing growth and higher debts for economies - not consumers.
@SirRumpole, we both agree on
"Of course, some debt can be good if it results in an increase of capabilities like starting a new business, building productive infrastructure etc"
So i do not understand your stance on increasing budget deficit by giving away unproductive money bought on debt, sure the lower incomes will buy more fast food and Chinese made electronics at JBHifi
But overall, Australia looses,
We spend a billion plus per month just serving our debt interest, can you imagine the hospitals and productive assets we could build and serve with that.As per my usual rant, i saw a country sinking a generation ago following mistakes after mistakes in term of immigration, welfare and socialist ideology, it is very painful to see it replicated step by step here with sadly the same outcomes..surprise surprise..
LOL > I don't think Australia going into horrendous debt was a personal choice.that’s just like saying “John used to be debt free, but then he got a car loan, so now debt is harder to service because he has a monthly payment, when in the last he didn’t”
obviously the debt of any single borrower (including the government) will be harder to service if that borrower increases their level of debt relative to what They had in the past.
the fact is debt $1 Billion of debt is far easier to service today than it was 10 years ago, the fact you have debt now and 10 years ago you didn’t is irrelevant, That’s just a personal choice.
—————-
my point is within the global economy the net affect of debt is $0.
every dollar of interest paid by one person, group or entity is earned by another, its not lost, it is just shifted from one household, suburb, state or country to another household, suburb, state or country.
Being reasonable, we can agree that both labour post Howard years and LNP are doing a pathetic work debt wiseThe problem as I see it is that the LNP never considers additional sources of revenue it could gain from our mineral and gas resources which basically are being plundered by foreign conglomerates and avoiding tax in the process.
Norway put a 40% tax on their gas exports and the companies are still in business.
It's time we did similar.
If a person pays $1 in interest, that person has $1 less to spend.
however that $1 interest payment is going to land as income in some one else’s pocket, and they will have an additional $1 to spend.
so the net affect is $0, not bad not good it just is.
You can not win here without being pro welfare.either lower income welfare or middle class/retiree welfare....
No, as a owner of a company with your share or as a 50pc owner of the corner shop, you should not pay taxes twice.Would you agree franking credit rebates are welfare ?
No, as a owner of a company with your share or as a 50pc owner of the corner shop, you should not pay taxes twice.
Tax are evil and should be kept a minimum, the fight should always be to reduce output, not increase input..as gov are by nature inefficient..as are big corporate by the way, but they replace efficiency by bullying
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?