[3143]

But even eliminating the wars, spending is higher than revenue. And historically, we can see that the government does not finance its spending with revenue, it does so with borrowing, and it pays back its loans with more borrowing. Lower spending does not reduce taxes, nor does increased spending raise them. To say otherwise is to ignore the facts.

[1123581321]

Yes, the wars contribute to spending but it's not being argued they are the entirety of excess spending.

We do perpetually borrow but our finance charges steadily increase, and not all of that is able to be deferred. The deferral will eventually have to be repaid or there will be an enormous disaster. It's actually worse in the long run than steady expenses.

To use an everyday example, it is similar to saying a laptop is not expensive because it's on a credit card and the credit card payments are financed with another credit card and so on. The laptop eventually costs more for using such a scheme.

[3143]

Sure, but my point was that in the meantime, payments aren't actually higher, which is what was originally asserted. IOW, the average citizen such as myself isn't materially affected by this ballooning debt.

[1123581321]

You're right that during the deferment there isn't much effect. I'm not sure if that's all he was arguing, but of so he's not right.