# Is Government Debt Immoral?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Michael, May 26, 2012.

1. ### pjdude1219screw watergate i want to know about zaragateValued Senior Member

Messages:
15,281
Are you crazy. this whole everyone but ron paul and the even dumber people who follow him are the only one's who could possiblely know anything shtick was never that great to begin with and has aged very fast. could you for the sake of humanity bring the crazy down by like a thousand notches. shit your making the RANDIANS seem like well put together thinkers. there is nothing wrong with bonds being sold by the state. governments and states have been selling bonds and borrowing money in other ways from private citizens for thousands of reasons. hell the only reason your currently able to spout this nonsense is because the colonial powers borrowed money and were bank rolled by private entities for colonization.

3. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
The US government is not selling anyone's labor without consent. To say otherwise as you have done is nonsense.

Last edited: May 29, 2012

5. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
Michael is advocating the same economic policies in effect during the 17th century.

7. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
Using the Webster's definition of payment, the US government has never missed a payment on its debt. It is just that simple.

Your refusal to recognize answers to this question does not negate the fact that it has been answered several times before. You just don't like the answer/reality. China owns a small fraction of total US debt. And China does not invest in US debt because they are stupid. They do so because they see it as the best and safest place for their US dollars.

What backs the US bond is the full faith and credit of the US, the belief that the US government will live up to its end of the contract. No one is making anyone a debt slave. When I was born the US debt levels were much higher than they are today, US debt was more than the gross domestic product. But we managed to bring down the debt and experienced the greatest and most prolonged period of economic growth, more technology advancement, and improved standard of living ever known in human history.

It is more than a bit ironic in that the economic policies you are advocating would create unemployment similar to that the nation experienced during The Great Depression, unemployment in excess of 25% just like that currently experienced by European countries who went in the direction you are advocating. The problem we have globally is a lack of demand for goods and services. Your solution is less demand. That is not much of a solution. The solution for a man suffering from poisoning is not more poison

Last edited: May 29, 2012
8. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
You seem to be confusing a couple things.

1) Ethics is the study of morality. If stealing is immoral. Then, stealing IS immoral. Yeah, going and stealing stuff from people can make you more wealthy - it's still immoral.

2) Bonds ARE stealing when you have no voice in your labor is the productivity backing the value in the bond. That's slavery. It's immoral. There's nothing wrong with selling a bond or a share in a company. But, you can't FORCE someone to pay for a bond or a share in a company. That's immoral.

3) Calling people dumb or Paul-bots or O-bots or Randians or whatever doesn't change the fact that stealing is immoral.

I'm coming around to the idea that theists with their BIG Gods satiate their inherent insecurity by this belief and therefor don't need or want BIG government. Atheists and the like don't have these BIG Gods (or if they do they don't really play much of a role in their lives) and so they need BIG Government to pacify their inherent insecurities.

Obama is going to win POTUS. I mentioned before, I don't want a Libertarian in office when the shit that's going to hit the fan, hits the fan. If that happens then all the Cattle will moo moo moo it was all Paul's fault. Just as they (myself included) moo moo mooed it was all Bush's fault, or Clinton's or ... and on we go. Actually, I see now, it's the system itself that's set up to fail. So, we'll have to wait until it does fail before we can doing anything to change it. Just look to Greece. Let's see what they do. I heard some chemotherapy drugs ran out last week. How soon before they're part with an Aegean island or three? It seems pretty obvious to me that this was baked in the cake. AND it's going to happen in the US as well.

9. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
OK

HUH? You are not making any sense. Why don't you tell that to stockholders who were forced into bankruptcy by bondholders? That is just untrue, companies can be and are compelled to pay bondholders.

No one is arguing that stealing is immoral. The issue at hand is you are redefining the word stealing - misrepresenting the meaning of the word.

Absoutely nonsense, back to calling people names again I see.

10. ### BalerionBannedBanned

Messages:
8,600
No, what you are is a person in 1600s trying to call taxation slavery. You equivocate two phenomena that are not equal, and then stomp your feet when no one agrees with you.

I'm not saying there's safety in consensus, but at some point you have to ask yourself "Why am I the only one who thinks this way?"

11. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
No Michael's not. Michael is suggesting we take what was good and improve on the present.

This is quite simple, it starts with eliminating Income Tax and then introducing currency competition. IF your beloved USD is so wonderfully managed, people will continue to use it. If isn't and sucks (which it does considering it looses value per year) then people will have alternative(s).

See how simple this is Joe? It's called economic freedom and goes hand in hand with political freedom.

As it stands now, we generally have two dipshits to choose from while the vast majority of the bureaucratic class stays in place year in and year out. This is really no different than living under a Monarchy. One could argue a Monarchy may even be preferable given there'd be some semblance of care regarding the country's future vis-a-vie dynastic inheritance.

Elect Obama or elect Mitt, it isn't going to make a damn bit of difference. Which is why I'm going for Obama in 2012. That would be the best course of action at the present. Sure, I feel sorry for Obama, but, meh.... he's a puppet anyway.

Last edited: May 30, 2012
12. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
Actually, history suggest that when you're with the majority, you're in the wrong.

Taxation without representation is what our nation was founded on. AND here we are, right back full circle. Taxing the unborn vis-a-vie Bonds. All so some douche politician can promise free this or free that or subsidized this or subsidized that. The people are equally at fault. They know, or should know, that someone is going to pay. They like to think it's the "rich". Which is a joke - it's them. They pay. One could think of it as just desert or karma.

13. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
Haa!

IOWs the Chinese know that when push comes to shove the US government will use FORCE against US Citizens to pay the Chinese back with our labor and, worse still, the promised labor of our children.

The Chinese are owed this much money: 1,200,000,000,000,000,000.00 plus interest. Who is going to pay them Joe?

Well? Will your children pay part of that bill? Yes or No?
We both know the answer is a big fat whooping YES.
Did they have any say in having to pay that bill? Nope.
That's called stealing Joe.

Imagine if I went down and used a credit card to buy a bunch of stuff. Then I sent you and your children the bill. Now, imagine the US government FORCED you to pay it. How would you feel about that? Well? Would you think something immoral had occurred? If so, and you would, why don't you think the same about shafting the next generation (including unborn) with YOUR bills? You think because you got to 'vote' on it that this makes immorality into morality? Well, it doesn't. Do you think because you call a peace of land "USA" that this then changes immorality into morality? Well, it doesn't.

What's immoral is immoral.

Now, I want to know. Suppose the US Citizenry went on mass strike and refused to make a single income tax payment. We do have that right you know? How would that affect the "The Full Faith and Credit" of the US government? Would it increase or decrease or have no effect? Would the Chinese still be interested in buying Bonds? Well, I can tell you right now NO they wouldn't. Why? Because it's our LABOR that gives value to those Bonds. IOWs what the Chinese are buying, what backs the value, what IS the Full Faith and Credit, amounts to one simple thing: Productive Labor.

Each Bond that's sold is simple selling more future labor with interest of American Children. Who'd have thought a great people like we once were could become so morally bankrupt as to not even recognize the inherent immorality in this system. Well, big f*cking shock there - welcome to Humanity at it's worse.

I'd argue we're only Americans in name now. There's little if any "American" about us anymore.

14. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
Here is the funny thing Michael, you are now claiming that you are not regressive while at the same time advocating the same economic policies that were the law of the land some 500 years ago.

Additionally, there is currency competition. Every day the US dollar along with a number of other currencies are traded just like stocks in public and open markets.

15. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
Michael this has already been explained to you ad nauseum. The US issuance of debt is not slavery, it is not bondage, it is debt. And there are several ways the US pays for its debt including taxation. And not all taxation is a tax on labor. Your representations here play fast and loose with fact and reason and play on cognitive biases.

The US has always had debt. The nation was born in debt. And it has never brought about the the disasters you are predicting.

16. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,869
It depends. Did you use the credit card to buy them a bunch of stuff, say protection from invaders, the roads they use, the Internet they send messages on? If so then it might be a good deal for them. If not, they could refuse to pay - and give up all those benefits. Up to them.

If I got good value for that payment? I'd feel OK. If I didn't? I might just leave.

Then the government would collapse, followed in short order by our economy, China's economy and the world's.

Suppose the US citizenry decided to just take what they needed from the evil corporations and refused to give those moneygrubbers a cent of their hard-earned money? Same effect.

So leave and find a place more to your liking.

17. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
Firstly, that's a logical fallacy. Just because a system was in place 10 million years ago, does not mean it's not a valid system. What is true is true.

Secondly, YOU are the one that is advocating going back in time. You want to chain us to a monetary system created by the rich to protect THEM from loosing their wealth. Which is why the rich continue to grow fatter off the productive labor of the rest of society.

Admit it, you want to rewind the clock. You're the one that wants to return to the past. The first thing you'd do is put Glass–Steagall Act back in place. Which is at odds with the Democraptic party you so cherish. Even though American standard of living has been decreasing for 40 years.

As I explained to you in the past: I'm the Progressive here. That doesn't mean I want to start anew. It means learning from the past, taking what was useful and creating something better. If that means reaching back to the Golden Age of Greece or the Enlightenment in Europe - I'll happily retrace our steps.

Does that mean I want to live under a Monarchy? No. Does that mean we can only use gold and silver as tender? Nope. It does mean repealing Income Tax and Central Banking Cartels.

Taking a person's property is stealing. This includes their labor - which is Slavery.

The unborn have had NO say in the way you are using their labor. You have sold their labor to your banking buddies so you can get a better grip around Uncle Sam's teat. That's immoral Joe. Selling your grandchildren's labor is immoral.

It's taxation without representation.
That's the reason why we fought the Revolutionary War.

So, it seems we've become that which we abhor the most. How fitting. How far from the principles of the US Constitution. Oh, but that's too "OLD FASHION" for someone like you to care about. Right Joe? I mean, it's 200 years+ old. THAT was your argument.

I wonder what you'd think if I take all you owned?

Which is better, you get all the roads, internet and protection you need at a cheaper price, better quality and WITHOUT me stealing from you? Wouldn't that be better than me using FORCE against you?

No. You don't get leave. There's no magical place for you to go. You must stay and you will pay with your labor.

So you DO agree it's our Labor that is what adds value to those Bonds being sold to China? THAT is the promise.

This of course means the government is selling our children's' labor to the Chinese. These Children have no say in the fact that when they grow to adulthood they'll spend most of their productive energy paying for Bonds on their labor that they did not see the fruits of. Those roads long deteriorated and money's frittered away on everything from Banker's Bonuses (well, if they're well connected to the Fed) and Bombs to blow up mud huts in war against other countries long forgotten.

You do understand that this is immoral? This is thievery.

These children will work day after day, week after week, year after year to pay back loans made against their labor - never having had a say. AND if they refuse to pay. Men in blue suits with golden badges and official titles like "Home Land Income Tax Defense" Double Plus Good Sargent Muppet. They'll point guns in these people's faces. They take their homes. They're destroy their lives, their families. They'll take their freedoms.

Unless they pay the Chinese. If they agree to shut up and give over their labor to the Chinese. Then they can live. Live like good little tax-Cattle slaving away in their stall.

AND you're OK with this? Because I'm not making it up. This is exactly what you support. Just try not paying your income tax. See how that works for you.

I do agree that the concept of Corporation is EVIL. It protects people like Corzine from loosing his property when he gambles the Farmer's land on bets against Currency Swaps. I read he collected another $3 million dollars in payouts after bankrupting MF Global. Did you know he has not even been questioned by a Federal Prosecutor. That he donated the MOST MONEY to Obama's campaign. This system was made to milk tax out of you. Interestingly enough, Americans pay way more labor than Serfs 500 years ago. Serfs would have NEVER accepted what we bend over and take. Which is interesting. I have moved. I've lived in numerous countries. They're all the same to varying degrees. But, I was born in the USA. I'm a natural Citizen. To tell me to move if I don't like the immorality - is admission of guilt. I wonder what the Founding Father's would have thought? Last edited: May 31, 2012 18. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member Messages: 9,391 LOL wut? Who are you kidding? You're a libertarian wingnut, not a "progressive." Sorry, who exactly is it that forces people to remain in the USA even if they decide they'd like to move elsewhere and renounce their citizenship? And who is it that forces people to pay taxes exclusively with "labor," rather than "wealth?" What a strangely Marxist proposition to hear coming from a libertarian gold bug... Back in the real world, there are other inputs to any production: capital and land are the big ones. In point of fact, they could perfectly well just vote in a Congress that would move to default on the debt, if they prefer that to paying it. There's no whip-weilding Chinese overlords who are going to force anyone's children into plantation slavery or anything. But that public education they received from those tax funds is still working for them. And the improved health and capability from having access to clean water and sanitary waste disposal systems continues to pay off. You can't simply discount the enormous benefits that people gain just from being born and raised in the system that we're paying for, here. Would you really rather be born in a country without all that infrastructure and services, but also without a debt load? Because if so, there are millions of starving African children who will happily trade places with you. And plenty of infrastructure lasts more than one generation. The Golden Gate Bridge just turned 75, for example. What a silly paranoid fantasy. It's like something out of Ayn Rand. Back in reality, voters would support either inflationary policies to devalue the debt, or simple default, before they'd submit to authoritarianism in the name of extracting cash to pay debts. The Chinese only hold a small portion of America's debt. Most of it is held by (drumroll please)... other Americans. Dude, you greatly underestimate nationalism. Voters would tell the Chinese to take their claims and go fuck themselves before they'd turn America into some kind of slave dystopia to pay money to China. Yes you are. This is nothing more or less than a paranoid fantasy you cooked up to illustrate your kooky misconceptions. It has no bearing on reality. That is possibly the most preposterously inane bit of fallacy that I've ever seen. You simply invent, whole cloth, a silly fantasy, assert that it's not made up, and then designate your opponent as supporting it. Is this second grade or something? Again, you are addressing a figment of your own imagination, and then demanding that others answer it. If you really think that a medieval European serf wouldn't switch places with you in a heartbeat, you have totally lost all perspective. But to point out that your having the freedom to leave if you don't like it implies that your claims of "force" and "coercion" are bullshit is just that. They would have thought that you are a deluded fool. 19. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member Messages: 18,164 I'm the only one here that seems to want to *gasp* advocate having the freedom to use multiple currencies and to end Income Tax. Yeah, I get it, change makes people poo poo in their pants - for some reason change's never worried me enough to drop a load in my pants. :shrug: Just where the hell do you think you're going to go? Japan? Do you think you just get to walk in to their Farm and set up shop? Australia? Haaa! Wrong again Bob (yes, that was Cenk from TYT) Most Citizen's generate their wealth through their labor. I'm not a gold bug. Although I do think having some gold is a good investment and hedge against inflation. However, no one can know what the Federal Reserve is going to do. Or the military for that matter. If they raise interest rates next year, gold will drop like... a bar of gold. If they do QE4,5,6 it will continue to go up. If they set a new currency with debt monetized to gold. They'd have to set each ounce to around$67,000. That's unlikely.

So, as we don't live in a free society - we really don't know what will happen. We live in a Oligarchy where the Bankers make the decisions for us. Why people like you enjoy being told what to do is beyond me.

Who needs Chinese overlords when you have a near Police State that can enforce the law. It's a neat little trick TTYTT. When you get the Cattle to police themselves. And as life gets worse, the Cattle actually turn on one anther. (see: this conversation)

Interesting isn't it?

Who would have thought we'd have TSA doing searches INSIDE the USA or f*cking drones or watching our internet space. You think Americans will take a stand. HAAA!!! Never was their a fatter Cattle ranch. The god damn Japanese even stand up more for their right compared with Americans. I'd only put Australian Cattle as a slightly fatter dumber more docile lot. But, it's a close call.

And there's millions of starving North Koreans who will happily trade places with you.

See how silly that sounds?

It's immoral to sell the labor of children. Children who have no say in how their labor is spent. That IS stealing. Stealing, as your mother taught you, is wrong. We fought a Revolutionary War over taxation without representation. The irony would be uncanny if it weren't so sick.
Sorry, you still don't get to steal and say it's moral. You can make it legal, but, like rape, stealing will forever be immoral.
You do understand that inflation is stealing? What part of stealing DON'T you support?!?!?
:bugeye:

You might be forgiven for thinking Americans would not submit to authoritarianism. I disagree. They are and will continue to do so.

Until the Feds 'Quantitative East' (aka: stealing) that $1.2 Trillion was a significant portion of our debt. Not that is matter. It's immoral to sell Bonds against the next generations' labor. This was clearly articulated by Thomas Jefferson. “It Is Incumbent On Every Generation to Pay Its Own Debts As It Goes - A Principle Which If Acted On Would Save [Half] The Wars" I stated they paid less then we do in terms of labor. Unfunded liabilities are approximated$45.6 Trillion. A child born today would owe approximately \$520,000.00. If you add up all the tax, we're working 5-7 months of the year FOR the banks.

You may think that's moral. I find it disgusting.

And you know what, you probably think things are going to go back to normal. They're not. We're going to get used to a new normal. One where people have much much less economic opportunity. Less Civil rights. Less education. Less access to medical. Less of a chance to retire and enjoy their last few years. Just take a good look at Greece. There's the future.

Last edited: May 31, 2012
20. ### pjdude1219screw watergate i want to know about zaragateValued Senior Member

Messages:
15,281
gasp and most people would assume your an idiot for wanting the use of multiple currencies. as when we did do that it was a royal cluster fuck. it doesn't work. and you probably like most people who want to end the income tax simply because you dislike the notion of paying taxes rather than some alleged moral outrage. the fact that your trying to redefine words and just flat out making shit up makes you kind of a well nutter.

21. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,164
We use multiple currencies now. Not to mention it worked perfectly fine then as most currencies were simply backed by silver. The only time it didn't work was when a bank issued too much currency relative to the amount of silver they had. Or there was a new mine found and silver/gold increased in circulation.

The United States was built on those currencies.

As for paying taxes, I have absolutely no problem with paying tax - if it's voluntary. There are ways of making not volunteering to pay tax a huge social cost ... AND still make it voluntary.

For example: Suppose you were expected to pay a certain amount towards the military. Once paid, you were issued a card. Don't pay. No card. Pay and you get a card. Suppose you go to the grocery store. If you have the card, you get served. Don't and either you do not get served OR perhaps you have to pay a much higher price for your groceries.

See, now that took about 5 minutes thought and we just went from using force to not using force. From immorality and a bloated unaccountable government to small government and moral social contract.

The truth is, most people cannot change the way they were raised to think. It's why most systems don't change until it's too late - and then they collapse. It's happened everywhere from the Romans to the Japanese. If you were to ask people 250 years ago, most would call you a 'nutter' for even suggesting Slavery was not moral. AND that's a fact.

22. ### joepistoleThe WallValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,789
Yes you are invoking another logical fallacy, another straw man. I never made that argument Michael. That is you making stuff up again.
I don’t have to go back in time Michael, you do. We are using the monetary system that has helped keep us out of another Great Depression for almost a century. I am advocating the economic and monetary policies that have been in place and remain in place for nearly a century, the same policies and institutions that have seen the expansions of the largest expansion of the middle class and living standards in the history of mankind.

I am not the one advocating let the rich do whatever the hell they want to do by getting rid of regulation, that is what you and your fellow Libertarians are arguing – going back 500 years in history.

Why should I want to rewind the clock? The repeal of Glass-Steagall was a huge mistake. Democrats and Republicans both do not want to reinstate Glass-Steagall. But here is the difference Michael, Democrats have reinstituted regulation of the banking industry to mitigate the risk incurred by the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Republicans on the other hand have fought that reregulation tooth and nail.

I can only repeat what others have said in response to this statement, WTU? 

Now you are back to the slavery stuff.

At least you are getting better with your American history.

How have we strayed from the principals of the Constitution? Slavery was written into the Constitution.

What does this have to do with anything?

If you want to use the infrastructure here in the US, there is a price for it. It’s called taxation. As others have pointed out to you, if you don’t like it, you are free to leave so that you will not be burdened with paying for the infrastructure and expenses of this country. The choice is yours.
There is nothing stopping you from leaving and renouncing your citizenship.

No Michael this is pretty much fantasy. We have been through all of this before. Repeating your claims without evidence or reason ad nauseum will not improve your argument. People living today in the US have a life that is far better than medieval surfs to say otherwise as you have repeatedly done Michael is just sheer fiction. Corporations are not evil. Sometimes the men who control corporations are evil/corrupt.

23. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,869
That would depend on what you gave me in return, of course.

Sure! Unless you owned them all and it was your way or (no) highway.

No, you mean you don't WANT to leave. That's fine. But that's your decision, and you get to live with the consequences.

It is our economy that gives value to those bonds. Our labor is one part of that economy.

I support paying our debts, yes.

Why would I do that? I use the roads, and the Internet, and the patent office, and air traffic control, and benefit greatly from them. Thus I pay for them.

If you get no benefit from them, then you can leave and go somewhere where such things are not provided to you; you then incur no debt by using them (or incur debt only to the people you prefer to pay.)

Yep. That's capitalism in a free society. It scares the sh*t out of some people. (Sounds like you're one of those people.)

I said nothing about immorality. I said that if you don't like where you are, move. If you choose to stay, then you are supporting the US's economy and government of your own free will.

So are you a supporter or not?

They would have told you to leave as well. They wouldn't have tried to keep you in a free society that you want no part of.