USA Debt Surges At Alarming New Rates, $400B In A Single Month

[Economy 52,844]

https://dailyhodl.com/2023/07/28/us-debt-explodes-392750000000-in-30-days-as-cato-institute-warns-unsustainable-spending-hindering-national-security/

 

US debt increased by nearly $400B in a single month ($392B to be exact).

 

Although increased spending without equivalent tax increases to back it up partially explains the surging deficit, Interest rate increases from rock bottom lows that are now closer to the historical norm are part of the story as well. Even 1% increase in interest rates is a massive amount of increase when the debt is over $32 Trillion

 

Of course some months are worse than others for Governments depending on time of the fiscal tax year and $400B won't necessarily happen every month from here on end, but the fact that it occured at all is worrying to some

[Economy 52,844]

I still find it fascinating that history has proven over and over again that when debt loads get unbearably high a financial crisis or currency collapse or hyper inflation of some sort is what ends up happening and nobody seems to care.

 

In fact, some ppl outright ignore such events and say government debt doesn't matter even tho mathematically it is impossible for it to keep compounding faster than economic growth and have nothing happen indefinitely 

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,940]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

I still find it fascinating that history has proven over and over again that when debt loads get unbearably high a financial crisis or currency collapse or hyper inflation of some sort is what ends up happening and nobody seems to care.

 

In fact, some ppl outright ignore such events and say government debt doesn't matter even tho mathematically it is impossible for it to keep compounding faster than economic growth and have nothing happen indefinitely 

I feel like people ignore it because either you can't do anything about it or you can but it's lining your pockets. Yeah it might matter but what's the point in caring if you can't do much. 

[Economy 52,844]

9 minutes ago, TortureMeOnReplay said:

I feel like people ignore it because either you can't do anything about it or you can but it's lining your pockets. Yeah it might matter but what's the point in caring if you can't do much. 

Well, they can do something about it. It would just be difficult and politically unpopular. So it's easier to ignore it

 

But I wasn't so much talking about the politicians tho when I made the comment. I was referring more to this curious belief some everyday ppl now have that it doesn't matter 

 

There seems to be this modern (and unfounded) rehtoric that's taken off lately on the internet that government debt doesn't matter if you control your currency because you can't default

 

There's a number of different reasons why it's not as simple as that. 

 

Yes it's technically true u could print as much as you want and not default, it doesn't mean you won't suffer the many consequences high debt loads have on sucking up useful capital for refinancing government debt instead (hurting investment and productivity), surging interest rates that Ripley thru to the private sector credit market as well such as the banking system and in turn mortgages, car loans etc, and the inevitable high inflation if ur gonna print money

 

The alternatives are either defaults, or tough austerity

 

There's basically 3 different roads and options a country can go with once it's hitting the absolute limit of debt they can handle with different types of pain and outcomes... But not 1 of the 3 is pretty and all 3 are painful in their own way

 

So ppl gotta stop spreading the lie that debt doesn't matter. It's simply not true. I feel like a few ppl theorized that and ppl read it and now spread it. It's like Facebook health misinformation and snake oil only its for the economy instead 

[gemein3 1,449]

This article is straight out of a DeSantis/Conservative election memo. “Reforms to entitlement” aka let’s strip Medicare and social security. 
 

Dubious article that’s main talking point is ^ That website alone screams the potential for unreliable source. The debt is always a complaint when it’s an election year approaching — yet both sides are equal players. 
 

*and I’m not suggesting the debt doesn’t matter. I’m saying this article fails to acknowledge the nuances of this issue, and instead is just a conservative economic ideology memo attacking Medicare and SS, as if that’s the only reason the US wastes wild amounts of money and takes on sickening debts. 

[Economy 52,844]

9 hours ago, gemein3 said:

This article is straight out of a DeSantis/Conservative election memo. “Reforms to entitlement” aka let’s strip Medicare and social security. 
 

Dubious article that’s main talking point is ^ That website alone screams the potential for unreliable source. The debt is always a complaint when it’s an election year approaching — yet both sides are equal players. 
 

*and I’m not suggesting the debt doesn’t matter. I’m saying this article fails to acknowledge the nuances of this issue, and instead is just a conservative economic ideology memo attacking Medicare and SS, as if that’s the only reason the US wastes wild amounts of money and takes on sickening debts. 

Yes I noticed the article had a conservative leaning tone, but I also think to the point and issue at hand it's irrelevant and doesn't really matter. My OP is strictly about the debt load and how fast it grew, not a rant about how to tackle it and so I don't have to necessarily agree with the articles implied suggestions about what the US needs to cut back on in order to post the main point

 

If u want a different source on the debt jump cuz u don't trust the numbers and wanna cross reference there is this other one below that shows debt totals monthly. And in addition I myself do remember back in April-May when I ran into stuff about US debt it was like $31.5T so I do not think the numbers are fabricated as u suggested. At the most they are cherry picking the numbers from the worst 30 day timeline window available (but I did disclaimer in my OP that deficit size wasn't typical for a month period or regularly re-curring so no one can accuse me of being sensationalist)

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/273294/public-debt-of-the-united-states-by-month/

 

Of Course I'm sure for political reasons they are gonna highlight the worst month, and not just that but the worst 30 day window between two months to make it more dramatic. Fair enough, politicians on both sides of the political spectrum cherry pick data that best suits their narrative. But regardless of having that in mind, I still find it pretty eye popping

 

 

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,606]

If we were a sane nation, we could take care of it almost completely within a couple decades by reducing military spending by like 25% and holding them accountable with audits. 

[Economy 52,844]

4 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

If we were a sane nation, we could take care of it almost completely within a couple decades by reducing military spending by like 25% and holding them accountable with audits. 

I mean, the deficit and debt has gotten too large for a 25% military cut to fix it.

 

Deficits are well $1 trillion a year... And a 25% cut in a $800B military budget would be only $200B...

 

Not in anyway enough on its own to make US finances sustainable much less solve a problem in 2 decades

 

But it's a good start tho. But to get the deficit  to a more sustainable path (I'd say below $600B so that economy can grow at least as fast as the debt), more would have to be done besides a 25% military cut

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,606]

10 minutes ago, Economy said:

I mean, the deficit and debt has gotten too large for a 25% military cut to fix it.

 

Deficits are well $1 trillion a year... And a 25% cut in a $800B military budget would be only $200B...

 

Not in anyway enough on its own to make US finances sustainable much less solve a problem in 2 decades

 

But it's a good start tho. But to get the deficit  to a more sustainable path (I'd say below $600B so that economy can grow at least as fast as the debt), more would have to be done besides a 25% military cut

Oof. I was thinking we were at a little more than 7 trillion in debt and 200b a year for 2 decades would be 4 trillion which would bring our debt down by more than half..... but then I looked and saw that 7-ish trillion was only our federal debt. Disregard me; I'm not educated enough about this to weigh in anymore lol 

[Economy 52,844]

6 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

Oof. I was thinking we were at a little more than 7 trillion in debt and 200b a year for 2 decades would be 4 trillion which would bring our debt down by more than half..... but then I looked and saw that 7-ish trillion was only our federal debt. Disregard me; I'm not educated enough about this to weigh in anymore lol 

I mean, I do agree with u tho that military is where they should start above all else, but just that $200B cut isn't enough to fix it on its own 😅

[Emvee 8,826]

2 hours ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

If we were a sane nation, we could take care of it almost completely within a couple decades by reducing military spending by like 25% and holding them accountable with audits. 

What would really fix it is raising taxes on the ultra rich. There’s just really no way around this. But isn’t it funny how the first thing these people target is social safety nets? And then those same people have the audacity to complain about crime rates or labor activism?
 

Unfortunately the rich have a disproportionate influence on legislative, judicial, and media agendas. The onus is not on the average American voter whose only choice is between a socially progressive corporate party and a socially reactionary corporate party. The onus is on the system that the political and business elite in this country prop up. If you have a problem with the growing debt in the country, blame them. 

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,606]

3 hours ago, Emvee said:

What would really fix it is raising taxes on the ultra rich. There’s just really no way around this. But isn’t it funny how the first thing these people target is social safety nets? And then those same people have the audacity to complain about crime rates or labor activism?
 

Unfortunately the rich have a disproportionate influence on legislative, judicial, and media agendas. The onus is not on the average American voter whose only choice is between a socially progressive corporate party and a socially reactionary corporate party. The onus is on the system that the political and business elite in this country prop up. If you have a problem with the growing debt in the country, blame them. 

I agree with you 100%

[Economy 52,844]

6 hours ago, Emvee said:

What would really fix it is raising taxes on the ultra rich. There’s just really no way around this. But isn’t it funny how the first thing these people target is social safety nets? And then those same people have the audacity to complain about crime rates or labor activism?
 

Unfortunately the rich have a disproportionate influence on legislative, judicial, and media agendas. The onus is not on the average American voter whose only choice is between a socially progressive corporate party and a socially reactionary corporate party. The onus is on the system that the political and business elite in this country prop up. If you have a problem with the growing debt in the country, blame them. 

 

3 hours ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

I agree with you 100%

The rich need to pay more taxes for sure but just like what I said about the military, I don't think any 1 thing on their own will fix the problem. A combination of stuff is required

 

- tax the rich more

- cut back military spending

- find other wasteful spending/new efficiencies to tweek out a little more unnecessary spending

 

If u combine it all, u can get it under control.

 

If we didn't have all this debt... Taxing the rich more might be enough to sustainably keep spending going. But now that this much debt exists, you also loose over a third of the budget just on interest payments alone which is insane. And interest rates have been at rock bottom lows for over 15 years (which means most US debt is still financed under low rate terms despite the recent spike in rates because it was locked in before the increases). If rates stay higher for longer, that's gonna strain the budget further

[PartySick 172,482]

44 minutes ago, Economy said:

 

The rich need to pay more taxes for sure but just like what I said about the military, I don't think any 1 thing on their own will fix the problem. A combination of stuff is required

 

- tax the rich more

- cut back military spending

- find other wasteful spending/new efficiencies to tweek out a little more unnecessary spending

 

If u combine it all, u can get it under control.

 

If we didn't have all this debt... Taxing the rich more might be enough to sustainably keep spending going. But now that this much debt exists, you also loose over a third of the budget just on interest payments alone which is insane. And interest rates have been at rock bottom lows for over 15 years (which means most US debt is still financed under low rate terms despite the recent spike in rates because it was locked in before the increases). If rates stay higher for longer, that's gonna strain the budget further

No US politician will ever be (re)elected on the promise of raising taxes and cutting the military budget tbh.

That's kind of the thin line politicians have to walk. They can chip at the debt but if they do anything to actually fix it, they lose their next election to someone who'll make it 10x worse.

So, our two choices seem to be "don't fix the problem" or "make the problem much worse"

[PartySick 172,482]

10 hours ago, gemein3 said:

This article is straight out of a DeSantis/Conservative election memo. “Reforms to entitlement” aka let’s strip Medicare and social security. 
 

Dubious article that’s main talking point is ^ That website alone screams the potential for unreliable source. The debt is always a complaint when it’s an election year approaching — yet both sides are equal players. 
 

*and I’m not suggesting the debt doesn’t matter. I’m saying this article fails to acknowledge the nuances of this issue, and instead is just a conservative economic ideology memo attacking Medicare and SS, as if that’s the only reason the US wastes wild amounts of money and takes on sickening debts. 

What I find interesting is that Republicans always charge at Social Security as if it's the government's money when it isn't. It's a fund directly paid into by tax payers to support people after retirement or in the event they're unable to work. Period.

It's not an entitlement, it's a loan from ourselves to ourselves, and it actually had a surplus in the billions until like 2021, I believe.

But the point is, that is not their money to touch. But they try anyway. They literally want to steal from our public retirement fund to help pay for their $1.5 trillion tax cut for the rich and nearly $1 trillion military budget.

And all the 65+ crowd that rely on that money to survive vote for them anyway