Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throw1234651234 977 days ago
I am always working under the assumption that if we "got spending under control", this trend could be reversed. Is that fair or naive?
3 comments

It's fair. It's not politically feasible, however. Yes, that means we're doomed to catastrophic financial hell.

We're already at the cliff's edge, watching interest rates climb while trillions of US short term debt turns over. It would only take a couple more points of interest to make all of the US Treasury spreadsheets go from the bright red they're already at to flashing red with klaxons.

And they'll do what they all, always do: monetize. Blow out the currency. That's our fate, and it's inexorable at this point. The only question is when.

"It would only take a couple more points of interest to make all of the US Treasury spreadsheets go from the bright red they're already at to flashing red with klaxons."

This is hyperbole: if you increase rates by even 2x debt will still be serviceable.

I think that is fair. But, getting spending under control means cutting welfare programs and military spending. Both are currently political suicide. Another option to get it under control is growth. The easiest way to do that is removing regulations that make growth difficult and get government out of the way.

Ultimately growth will just lead to higher spending. A complete solution is a bit of both. Cutting spending or capping it, and growth. Without cuts or a cap Congress will just see growth as a sign they can spend more money we don't have.

It's a fair assessment, but naive to assume it can be reasonably accomplished.