Now I know why we had a larger deficit in May

Yeah, no. Bloomberg Terminal isn't perfect but it's pretty much the Gold Standard when it comes to data aggregation. While it isn't perfect, I'd certainly trust it more than someone who is using Google as their textbook.



The time stamp on this chart shows July 12th, which is the most recent update for this data and this information provides 2019 statistics. Whatever you're looking at is either inaccurate or hasn't been updated yet... Substituting general knowledge for a search engine may work sometimes, but it can't teach you how to do research.

 

EUDB60DE:IND
Eurostat Germany Govt Debt as a % of GDP
60.90
https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/EUDB60DE:IND

Come on, you can do it. Just admit you're wrong. It's not that hard.

 

The bottom line is the interest payments on the public debt equates to 9% of outlays, and 12 cents of every dollar raised in revenues.

FY2019 projected Net interest; $400 billion
FY2019 projected Outlays; $4.5 trillion
FY2019 projected Receipts; $3.4 trillion

Thus, a high percentage means less money for "other things", such as;

a. building a wall​

​

 

I wonder is that indexed for future spending or does it go with current spending levels?

 

I'm beginning to think you haven't learned much. This is from almost a year an a half ago.

 

Yeah, I'm sure in the last year and a half, Germany has been adding a lot to their debt.

Germany closed 2018 with record budget surplus
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-closed-2018-with-record-budget-surplus/a-47626726-0

Oops.

Look, you're new here, you just got schooled...learn from it. Check your facts next time.

 

Oh look. Another outdated article...

I don't know where you got this either, but this is not as near as recent as anything I pulled up. I guess you're going to keep Googling information until you get something, but I suppose you have to learn somewhere.

 

What, that stupid chart you posted?

The top personal income tax rate is 47.5 percent (including a 5.5 percent surcharge). The federal corporate rate is 15.8 percent (effectively above 30 percent with other taxes). The overall tax burden equals 37.6 percent of total domestic income. Over the past three years, government spending has amounted to 43.9 percent of the country’s output (GDP), and budget surpluses have averaged 0.9 percent of GDP. Public debt is equivalent to 64.1 percent of GDP.
https://www.heritage.org/index/country/germany

I grow weary of this. Maybe this isn't the right forum for you.

 

I mean, it was only sourced, recent and time stamped accurately, so I guess it is stupid...

First you show me sources which claims debt to GDP is 60.9, now apparently is 64.1%. Which is it?

Do you understand what I'm trying to teach you about research now?

If you're the standard for intellectual inquiry, perhaps you're correct about something after all.

 

I figured out what you did wrong. You know who has a Debt-to-GDP ratio of 80%, like you were claiming? The EU.
https://www.google.com/search?q=eu+...7j69i60j0l2.3055j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

You got Germany mixed up with the EU. It happens. And see? you learned something!

 

Right...

Except the chart in question presents data as early as 2017, while the data I presented from Bloomberg presents data as early as...

July 12th, 2019.



Is there anything else, I'm supposed to learn from you?

 

In this order...

• Social Security: 33%
• Medicare: 28%
• Defense: 16%

 

You are right but speak for yourself. I worry about it right now.

 

You're new and I don't know your political leanings, but I really don't care. What I do like is your approach with facts and real sources. You are a solid addition to this forum.

I've agreed with virtually everything you have shared in this thread. It's not about ideology. It's about a piss poor system that could be adjusted to better serve the American people, but we have so many establishment hacks and braindead that believe crap sources it has become an uphill battle to do the right thing.

 

This is correct.

Historically we have spent 20% on Defense. We have cut that spending. We should be able to cut it even more. Easy cuts for defense:

• Foreign Bases and Defense
• Redundant Weapons Programs
• Failed or Dated Weapon systems
  
• Tanks/Supplies that the Defense Department does not want, but a local Congresscritter wants the procurement by the billions

Those are easy and sensible cuts.

Medicare abuses alone can save the nation Billions

Social Security reform is far more complex. We should be gradually raising the age for benefits as Americans are living longer, healthier lives. About 25% of Public Employees DO NOT pay into the system and should not be receiving benefits. They already have pensions set up.

 

Allow people to opt out of SS so that they can take what is currently being confiscated out of their check for SS and put that money in their 401K on top of what they already invest.

 

Completely false and to be honest, your analogy doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

I agree with a lot that you say here and in general but I struggle with the underlined statement. I believe a US military presence actually helps deter war and conflict on many occasions. The other side of that coin that rarely ever gets mentioned is that a US presence also helps 3rd world economies and disaster relief and crisis. So while the money spent on the military is substantial, in a lot of ways it helps keep the world from killing itself and causing the US to get muddled in long drawn out wars, such as WW1 and WW2.

Not every conflict the US has had, I agree with or think should have been undertaken, but I like our presence around the world. I trust the US and other allies more than I trust other nations, to keep the peace.

Our Federal, State and local gov'ts biggest problems are it's leaders that fail to pass laws and maintain their vigilance for it's own taxpayers.

 

Since the only open soured data you presented turned out to be for the EU and not Germany...
Maybe you could compare this one to yours and tell us where the difference is.

Source: The German government, report this gross debt under the Maastricht Treaty guidelines.

https://commodity.com/debt-clock/germany/

 

You are right but I don't really care if the rest of the world goes to war with itself. I'm concerned about our national security not world security. It is too expensive and too prone to failure. Third world countries need better government managers, not American troops. Our military is trained and deployed to break things and kill people. That is as it should be.

We should not have been in any conflict since WWII except for the conflict against bin Laden. In those cases we defended the nation from attack. I'm OK with assisting allies who are attacked militarily.

Of course. The problem is politics. We could clean that up overnight with single term limits.

 

I do because America would get dragged into the conflict in the same way we got dragged into WW1 and WW2. Maybe you are right though, maybe we should just let these countries overrun each other and destroy the world as we sit back and watch. Because that is what would happen.

I would add Korea to the list as well as Gulf War 1 and a number of other smaller operations like Earnest Wills to the list. My big issue with Korea is we didn't go far enough. We should have hammered China until they left Korea, period.

That would be a good start.

 

The German debt is lower than 60% of the GDP and at the end of year 2019 it is expected to be at 58.75%.

German Treasury Department: https://www.bundesfinanzministerium...nanzen/entwicklung-oeffentliche-finanzen.html

The shock of the debt crisis forced the German politicians to introduce the "Schuldenbremse" (debt brake) into our constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debt_brake_(Germany)

 

I don't think so. The political map may change but that wouldn't hurt the US or the world. If we are dragged into a war because we are attacked militarily then war is appropriate and our military is being used as it should be used.

North Korea and the Chinese attacked South Korea, not the United States. I was living in Cuba during the Korean war so I'm not very knowledgeable about it. If we were assisting a true ally then I would also add it to the list.




That would be a good start.[/QUOTE]

 

I think your buddy left.

 

To isolationist for me. But I understand your point of view, I just disagree.

North Korea attacked South Korea and the Chinese attacked US troops after the North Koreans were driven out and almost all the way the Yula (going from memory here) river. Korea was a UN action and I think they were worth fighting for.