• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Random Politics Thread

Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,672
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Riddle me this: "Does the face of the coin matter as much as the stakes of the toss if its Heads they win Tails we lose?
But it's not a coin flip. There's a cause and effect in some sense, I think. I mean, people are already admitting that when they demand more laws against firearms. What if was possible to prevent something like that before it happened?
 
Last edited:

The Cat

Just a Magic Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,751
But it's not a coin flip. There's a cause and effect in some sense, I think. I mean, people are already admitting that when they demand more laws against firearms. What if was possible to prevent something like that before it happened?
You mean closing loopholes? Its almost always possible to prevent something like that before it happens. But it takes more focus outward and interacting more in ways most people these days have been conditioned not to engage in. Everyone loves hindsight, but they fear foresight.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,672
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
You mean closing loopholes? Its almost always possible to prevent something like that before it happens. But it takes more focus outward and interacting more in ways most people these days have been conditioned not to engage in. Everyone loves hindsight, but they fear foresight.
Except it seems like there warning signs. He was hanging out on some weird corners of the internet. Someone presumably noticed what he was up to (which is how we know about his internent haunts), and did nothing. Why?
 

The Cat

Just a Magic Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads.
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,751
Except it seems like there warning signs. He was hanging out on some weird corners of the internet. Someone presumably noticed what he was up to (which is how we know about his internent haunts), and did nothing. Why?
"That's when the Council first learned she was with them. Of course we could not reveal it then. And like all secrets long kept, we can not bear the shame of admitting it now."
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,672
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
"That's when the Council first learned she was with them. Of course we could not reveal it then. And like all secrets long kept, we can not bear the shame of admitting it now."
Wait, is this about Yaddle?

I'm not against regulating firearms, by the way. It was terrifying on July 4th, not knowing where this person is going to go next or what they were going to do. It made me think of it in a less abstract way, instead of as something that was part of some document handed down on high. It's not like anyone cares about any of the other parts of the Bill of Rights anyway; we just rely on norms and traditions for those which I'm sure will work out fine. Norms are something nobody can ever change which is why they are so reliable.

I think Highland Park killed the last bit of my quasi-libertarianism (relax, I voted for Mike Gravel, not Ron Paul); the date didn't help and really hammered home the point for me. I don't think that's what the 4th should mean for people; is this what America is really all about?

There's a problem with regulating firearms outside of where I personally stand on it, though, and it's simply that it's difficult to accomplish in any practical sense. Good on Joe Biden for getting something passed; I didn't see that coming.
 
Last edited:

ceecee

Coolatta® Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
15,923
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Yes I am talking about that, as well as various other such stories over those 8 years. I mean this was a general policy even before him and he only speed it up from what I understand. Therefore I am talking about the whole political doctrine, not just some random deal. What is extra problematic is that you guys don't have many of what is generally consider to be basic welfare programs around the rest 1th world. Therefore when you do mass outsourcing you will literally kill decent amount of people in the process. Because in US without money and income you are basically a dead man. This is why rural areas went crazy and in 2016 it happened what happened.


If someone wants to hate Republican politicians that is ok, but don't bring ordinary people into this unless you really have to. These people are mostly pretty traumatized and just leave them out of trashing talking points if possible. Or at least that is what I would do since nothing really constructive can come out of this. Alienation only makes things even worse.
Oh I agree alienation makes things worse but there is a big difference between alienating a working class person and alienating GOP politicians - and that is what I'm discussing. Why is there nothing to offer in rural areas? It didn't happen because of Obama but that's a convenient argument. It was happening for decades and frankly, the - we want to be left alone until I need someone to blame for my own life - starts wearing thin, even to the people most devoted to helping rural Americans.

Also, who exactly do you think is outsourcing jobs? Who is fighting with all they have against working people, workers unionizing or any sort of humane treatment of workers? Who is pushing "right to work" and allowing foreign companies to take over American ones? This is 100% corporations and businesses that have extremely friendly legislatures doing their bidding. Nowhere in here am I blaming working people, never have. But if they keep voting for GOP politicians, especially at the state level, this will continue. It's up to them if they want to make a change or not. But civil and human rights - LGBTQI+ , trans, black and brown and women, voting.. are all being attacked in some way presently in this country. GOP voters don't get the right to act out on their imaginary grievances against any of these people. That sounds like a fairly obvious thing but I assure you, it isn't.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,872
Oh I agree alienation makes things worse but there is a big difference between alienating a working class person and alienating GOP politicians - and that is what I'm discussing. Why is there nothing to offer in rural areas? It didn't happen because of Obama but that's a convenient argument. It was happening for decades and frankly, the - we want to be left alone until I need someone to blame for my own life - starts wearing thin, even to the people most devoted to helping rural Americans.

Also, who exactly do you think is outsourcing jobs? Who is fighting with all they have against working people, workers unionizing or any sort of humane treatment of workers? Who is pushing "right to work" and allowing foreign companies to take over American ones? This is 100% corporations and businesses that have extremely friendly legislatures doing their bidding. Nowhere in here am I blaming working people, never have. But if they keep voting for GOP politicians, especially at the state level, this will continue. It's up to them if they want to make a change or not. But civil and human rights - LGBTQI+ , trans, black and brown and women, voting.. are all being attacked in some way presently in this country. GOP voters don't get the right to act out on their imaginary grievances against any of these people. That sounds like a fairly obvious thing but I assure you, it isn't.


Ok, but when someone is talking about "Republicans" I always picture it in a sense that this implies the voters as well. What is due to the mix of how party membership is decided in US and my local political culture. Plus there is that awkward "deplorables" speech made by Hillary. After all if we consider that she lost MI, WI and PA by less than a point it is quite possible that this is what spilled the glass.


It is just that my impression is that no one genuinely tried to talk to the rural people, with exception of people like Trump or Tucker. So now in those places there are plenty of people that sound like those two. Something that was probably avoidable all things considered. I also have the far right around the country and it is always strong in the places where the mainstream politics systematically messed up over the decades (and then they seem to have forgotten about the place). Plus if you rise democratic support in rural areas by just a few points that basically means that you are winning all the swing states. Therefore making a move here actually makes sense. I mean a good chunk of these people probably doesn't know for anything better and this is where a simple talk can probably make a difference.
 

Tomb1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
1,003
Since you got some likes for this I will give you my honest answer.

It is true that partisanship isn't fundamentally bad, after all I am fully for the honest political debate. However keeping the country at the edge of civil war for years just isn't smart thing to do. After all this has huge emotional and financial cost. What is the damage that is completely comparable to Iraq. Also Iraq didn't happen due to bipartisan reasons, it happened because there wasn't enough sane people at the table. What is exactly something that I would like to see changed and that is why I started to think out loud that this slow moving civil war perhaps isn't the smart idea (especially if you take a look at the wider global picture). Because if this continues you will have literal Iraq on your streets and backyards and that will surely be much worse than Iraq on the other side of the globe. After all as a foreigner I pay attention to both parties and in the both I see pretty much same paranoia. Yes, there are some pretty bad apples in the mix but I just don't see the point in this scale of drama on both sides. While in reality you are all just confused because you had a pretty lousy streak in life. Therefore people insisting on removing bad apples and solving concrete problems would make much more sense than current pushing for the rapture of the whole country. What means that there would be no winners or they would be various foreign powers. As that famous quote goes "the only way to win is not to play".


But as all of you wish, I wouldn't bother any of you anymore with this. I think that I was pretty clear over the last few posts.

That's a necessary response to Trump. Trump is playing ultra competitive and hard, so things get uglier than normal but the ugliness is a "good" in the long-run because appeasing doesn't work. Hillary tried that Michele Obama "when they go low, we go high" maxim for dealing with Trump. Chamberlain tried it with the Nazis.

Iraq did happen through bipartisan support. Even John Kerry and Hillary Clinton voted for the invasion. Whether they were sane or not is up for debate. They could have voted that way for interests that did not serve the General Will and if you look at it through the lens of their own interests, then their decisions were sane. Representative Democracy has its advantages but one disadvantage to a non-pure democracy is how easily the General Will can be corrupted by said representatives, so at the end of the day, the problem is just politicians in general having the seats at the table. From the bill directly parroting the outright lies that a very sane and well-educated Colin Powell calculatively spoon-fed the public on national television:

"Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;"
(BIG FAT LIE)
AND
"Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;"
(BIG FAT LIE)
"—The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to—"
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,872
I see that some here don't seem to get what I am saying. What is understandable since I am coming from completely different political system both in the terms of structure and paradigms. Especially since this is genuine multiparty system and thus constantly talking to the voters of other parties not only that is encouraged it is basically unavoidable. Since there is so much diversity that electoral games can't be nothing more than fluid.

Therefore for the sake of the argument here is how my own country currently looks in the terms of control at the country level (and parliament composition is similar to this).





So for me "Trump, this Trump that" doesn't really mean anything. Make a decent political propositions and offer that to his voters (or none voters in red districts). All of you are kinda talking about what is basically wining for the sake of winning. While that shouldn't be the point of politics. Since the idea should be to offer the best program by the standards of the voters. In my own political elections about 80 to 90 percent of the voters are what is considered to be "independents" by US standards. Therefore this is why I am telling you to drop the partisan stuff and treat voters simply as voters. Since most of the people are probably just that in the end. Hardcore partisan people are surely a minority. Therefore fighting with quality talking points is how this should be played. So that the other side has to play a catch up if they can even do that, if they can't they lose automatically (what is especially the case in a two party system).
 

SensEye

Active member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
516
MBTI Type
INTp
That article seems to contain more bias than I am used to from Politico. Many quotes from Republican's condemning Trump's planned "2020 election was stolen" re-litigation strategy (note: relitigate in the court of public opinion, not in an actual court). This means he can go full bore on falsehoods. They seem to think it won't work. I wonder if these are the same Republican's that six months ago or so thought that Trump would not win the Republican nomination?

You can criticize a lot about Trump. But if you underestimate his ability to manipulate gullible minds, you are playing with fire. It's his one gift, and he uses it well. It won him one election and everything he has got so far.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,872
That article seems to contain more bias than I am used to from Politico. Many quotes from Republican's condemning Trump's planned "2020 election was stolen" re-litigation strategy (note: relitigate in the court of public opinion, not in an actual court). This means he can go full bore on falsehoods. They seem to think it won't work. I wonder if these are the same Republican's that six months ago or so thought that Trump would not win the Republican nomination?

You can criticize a lot about Trump. But if you underestimate his ability to manipulate gullible minds, you are playing with fire. It's his one gift, and he uses it well. It won him one election and everything he has got so far.



2024 Republican Presidential Nomination


Objectively: if you take a look at RCP graph of Republican primaries it will suddenly become very clear to anyone that he WILL win the nomination (unless there are some legal shenanigan in the whole mix).

While in the general he is in a complete tie. Therefore since democrats need to win by at least +3 points in order to win the electoral college the odds are that he is actually ahead.
 

DiscoBiscuit

Meat Tornado
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
14,794
Enneagram
8w9
Foreign appetite for US treasuries is collapsing.

We managed to turn an economy that used to make things into one of bankers, financiers, managers and HR apparatchiks. The United States is a service economy (77.6% as of 2021).

The global demand for our debt (enforced by the requirement that foreign trade occurs in US dollars) is the only thing that has propped up our ability to deficit spend year to year on such a staggering level. This foreign demand has allowed us to print money the way we have in the past to get out of national financial jams.

We are funding a war with currency and materiel against a state that never got rid of its cold war munitions capacity while we did. The US can produce about 24,000 155mm artillery shells a month now while back in the 90's that number was somewhere north of 800,000 (and certainly higher during the height of the Cold War).

While engaged in this proxy war, we are rattling our saber over the defense of Taiwan against an opponent that has become the manufacturing hub of the globe over the last 30 years. We won WWII by getting companies like Chrysler to retro fit their factories to make tanks and planes, and we had the ship building capacity to match. China has enough capacity to build 23,250,000 million tonnes of warships compared with less than 100,000 tonnes in the US. A staggering 232.5 x 1 discrepancy.

Birth rates across industrial society are collapsing for reasons both economic and cultural.

Arguing about our politics at this point is like discussing the drapes while Rome burns.

Our current political spasms, from Trump (or maybe 2008) onwards, can be seen as a growing intuitive public awareness that American life everywhere is getting worse. My generation at least were promised good jobs as long as you went to college and got a degree. I graduated college in 2008 and was slapped in the face with the fact that....

1692265699160.png


Home ownership while at least a marginally attainable dream for my generation has now become a complete fantasy for the young. We are now in the most unaffordable housing market.... ever. Home prices are 560% of the average income with mortgage rates on a 30 yr hovering around 8%.

While not an immediate threat to national employment on a grand scale, AI LLM's will gouge job opportunities in the bullshit email jobs economy we've made for ourselves. This includes coding, law and anywhere that requires text or contracts written but no true originality. If you're writing the next great American novel I wouldn't be worried but if your job involves spreadsheets or sending forms back and forth or writing banal emails be worried.

In one of the greatest lies ever told, we convinced the American people that a college degree and higher education was the ticket to the good life, while the rigor and academic performance of our higher institutions languished... awash as they were with money that would never stop coming. We so fundamentally brainwashed our people that they would rather the pride of making 40k a year in an office at a computer than the dishonor of making 80k as a plumber or welder. The only thing that held this monumental bullshit jobs program afloat for so long was the free money of zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and the huge hiring it allowed companies to undertake.

Now that inflation has finally struck, with foreign economies no longer willing to absorb the colossal number of treasury bills that make it all possible, and interest rates climbing at never before seen rates, the house of cards that is the Global American Empire is finally crumbling under its own weight.

We are rapidly losing the ability to turn on the money printers to fix the problem the way we have in the past. Its only a matter of time before we face a crisis that is beyond our diminishing capacity to surmount.

Social Security runs out of money in 2033.

There isn't going to be a universal basic income.... or trillions upon trillions for a green new deal. We will be lucky if we can find the money to maintain some semblance of the gov't systems of support we've got. If we can't keep such a politically potent program as Social Security afloat I'm not optimistic for much else. Old people do vote.

The good part about all this is that our government and those that run our economy will finally have to face the music. They've been able to play fast and loose with everything because of how successful we've been. Those past successes and the equity they've built in the American system have enabled the stupid profligacy we've seen. Congress has all but abjured its duty to govern meaningfully for the past 40 years to both the executive and legislative branches and more worryingly to the administrative state (via the Chevron deference). All of this will need to change in some fashion once the free money printer has run out of juice.

The bad part is that in the process 100's of millions of Americans will have to suffer mightily. And this process will take decades.

So we can argue politics, but in the face of this its kind of moot.

The only meaningful political question is who takes ownership of this colossal problem and who takes ownership of its solution.
 
Last edited:

Tomb1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
1,003
I see that some here don't seem to get what I am saying. What is understandable since I am coming from completely different political system both in the terms of structure and paradigms. Especially since this is genuine multiparty system and thus constantly talking to the voters of other parties not only that is encouraged it is basically unavoidable. Since there is so much diversity that electoral games can't be nothing more than fluid.

Therefore for the sake of the argument here is how my own country currently looks in the terms of control at the country level (and parliament composition is similar to this).





So for me "Trump, this Trump that" doesn't really mean anything. Make a decent political propositions and offer that to his voters (or none voters in red districts). All of you are kinda talking about what is basically wining for the sake of winning. While that shouldn't be the point of politics. Since the idea should be to offer the best program by the standards of the voters. In my own political elections about 80 to 90 percent of the voters are what is considered to be "independents" by US standards. Therefore this is why I am telling you to drop the partisan stuff and treat voters simply as voters. Since most of the people are probably just that in the end. Hardcore partisan people are surely a minority. Therefore fighting with quality talking points is how this should be played. So that the other side has to play a catch up if they can even do that, if they can't they lose automatically (what is especially the case in a two party system).
I look at it this way. If Trump lost in 2016 and Hillary won, Roe v. Wade would still be law today. So winning matters. Its much harder to make a can of beans out of "political propositions" without winning elections. Very interestingly, political scientists in the US did numerous studies on voter reactions to positive ads versus negative ads and the results overwhelmingly indicate that too win an election requires attacking your opponent's record to some degree. It doesn't assure victory by any means but there's no victory without it, as a practical matter.

In the US, 90 percent of the voters absolutely do not identify as members of the independent party. Independent candidates are huge longshots
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,872
I look at it this way. If Trump lost in 2016 and Hillary won, Roe v. Wade would still be law today. So winning matters. Its much harder to make a can of beans out of "political propositions" without winning elections. Very interestingly, political scientists in the US did numerous studies on voter reactions to positive ads versus negative ads and the results overwhelmingly indicate that too win an election requires attacking your opponent's record to some degree. It doesn't assure victory by any means but there's no victory without it, as a practical matter.

In the US, 90 percent of the voters absolutely do not identify as members of the independent party. Independent candidates are huge longshots

Ok, but I think you missed my point. Which is that the best way to win the election is by pushing for the policies that are most likely to help people. From what I understand the structure of electorate in US is something like 30% Democrat, 30% Republican, 40% independent. Therefore if you manage to present good enough policy you can win up to 70% of the electorate and that on the map will look as a pure landslide. Feel free to take a look at the map of how Johnson won in 1964 and Regan in the 80s. Results like that don't happen on itself and US right now needs one victory like that. Since that will make things more clear and the new administration will have the mandate to take things into it's hand in order to try dig the country out of shit. While the current victories just aren't that, 0.2 point win in Michigan, 0.3 point in Arizona, 0.25 point in Georgia ..... etc. Plus the senate is 50:50. What just lacks ideological clarity even if there is some kind of formal result.


My point was that it would perhaps be smart to think less in the term of partisan label are more in the aspect of policy. Since that is how you will much more easily attract those 40% that are completely tired of the partisanship. Plus that is how you get none voters to show up (half of the people doesn't even vote). I am from multi party system and thus I have anything from the leftists that smear LGBT people to far right that has environmentalist wing. So when you watch from that perspective maybe it would make sense to try win huge amount of the electorate with more constructive message. Since constructive and round up message is the only thing that can't really attract huge amount of various social groups. Since in the end you are trying to win over a fairly diverse group of people.


Therefore why going to some totally partisan race that in the end will surely be close since it was build om the premise of winning instead of content. While on the other hand you can try shooting at much wider audience and at those that feel forgotten. After all it is kinda the rule that the higher turn out is helping the democratic party. So if you are Democrat you should think about the ways how to increase the turnout (since that means winning almost by default). However increasing turnout is best done by proposing policy in more detail and what I don't see being done enough (if we judge by my book at least). In other words you can explain your plans in detail and still slam the opponents. But in US this is almost always done in some form of social shaming instead of getting into details. Abortion: make sure that president puts the nation in front of TVs and then you give the mic to some doctor that will try to rationally explain in 15 minutes why banning abortion is horrible policy, Especially since there is something called medically justified abortion. I simply miss that kinda of "juice" in US campaigns. There is almost always that lack of "Why" in the arguments. What makes shallow debates and that in the end decreases the turnout.


Plus we seem to have different cultural understanding of what it means to be independent. For me that simply means that you don't belong to a party and you will vote for whoever offers you the best deal by your standards (since I usually have about 20-30 parties to choose from). For me being a independent voter doesn't mean that you will actually vote for the independents (but you can do that as well).


Just my 2 cents I suppose.
 

DiscoBiscuit

Meat Tornado
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
14,794
Enneagram
8w9
Foreign appetite for US treasuries is collapsing.

We managed to turn an economy that used to make things into one of bankers, financiers, managers and HR apparatchiks. The United States is a service economy (77.6% as of 2021).

The global demand for our debt (enforced by the requirement that foreign trade occurs in US dollars) is the only thing that has propped up our ability to deficit spend year to year on such a staggering level. This foreign demand has allowed us to print money the way we have in the past to get out of national financial jams.

We are funding a war with currency and materiel against a state that never got rid of its cold war munitions capacity while we did. The US can produce about 24,000 155mm artillery shells a month now while back in the 90's that number was somewhere north of 800,000 (and certainly higher during the height of the Cold War).

While engaged in this proxy war, we are rattling our saber over the defense of Taiwan against an opponent that has become the manufacturing hub of the globe over the last 30 years. We won WWII by getting companies like Chrysler to retro fit their factories to make tanks and planes, and we had the ship building capacity to match. China has enough capacity to build 23,250,000 million tonnes of warships compared with less than 100,000 tonnes in the US. A staggering 232.5 x 1 discrepancy.

Birth rates across industrial society are collapsing for reasons both economic and cultural.

Arguing about our politics at this point is like discussing the drapes while Rome burns.

Our current political spasms, from Trump (or maybe 2008) onwards, can be seen as a growing intuitive public awareness that American life everywhere is getting worse. My generation at least were promised good jobs as long as you went to college and got a degree. I graduated college in 2008 and was slapped in the face with the fact that....

View attachment 29221

Home ownership while at least a marginally attainable dream for my generation has now become a complete fantasy for the young. We are now in the most unaffordable housing market.... ever. Home prices are 560% of the average income with mortgage rates on a 30 yr hovering around 8%.

While not an immediate threat to national employment on a grand scale, AI LLM's will gouge job opportunities in the bullshit email jobs economy we've made for ourselves. This includes coding, law and anywhere that requires text or contracts written but no true originality. If you're writing the next great American novel I wouldn't be worried but if your job involves spreadsheets or sending forms back and forth or writing banal emails be worried.

In one of the greatest lies ever told, we convinced the American people that a college degree and higher education was the ticket to the good life, while the rigor and academic performance of our higher institutions languished... awash as they were with money that would never stop coming. We so fundamentally brainwashed our people that they would rather the pride of making 40k a year in an office at a computer than the dishonor of making 80k as a plumber or welder. The only thing that held this monumental bullshit jobs program afloat for so long was the free money of zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and the huge hiring it allowed companies to undertake.

Now that inflation has finally struck, with foreign economies no longer willing to absorb the colossal number of treasury bills that make it all possible, and interest rates climbing at never before seen rates, the house of cards that is the Global American Empire is finally crumbling under its own weight.

We are rapidly losing the ability to turn on the money printers to fix the problem the way we have in the past. Its only a matter of time before we face a crisis that is beyond our diminishing capacity to surmount.

Social Security runs out of money in 2033.

There isn't going to be a universal basic income.... or trillions upon trillions for a green new deal. We will be lucky if we can find the money to maintain some semblance of the gov't systems of support we've got. If we can't keep such a politically potent program as Social Security afloat I'm not optimistic for much else. Old people do vote.

The good part about all this is that our government and those that run our economy will finally have to face the music. They've been able to play fast and loose with everything because of how successful we've been. Those past successes and the equity they've built in the American system have enabled the stupid profligacy we've seen. Congress has all but abjured its duty to govern meaningfully for the past 40 years to both the executive and legislative branches and more worryingly to the administrative state (via the Chevron deference). All of this will need to change in some fashion once the free money printer has run out of juice.

The bad part is that in the process 100's of millions of Americans will have to suffer mightily. And this process will take decades.

So we can argue politics, but in the face of this its kind of moot.

The only meaningful political question is who takes ownership of this colossal problem and who takes ownership of its solution.
I should have added, that the biggest financial issue is rising service on sold debt. That cost alone is slated to overtake defense spending on a yearly basis by 2029 to give you a picture of how much this is going to cost the taxpayer. The FED as always will be the buyer of last resort with US treasuries, in the crisis in 2008 it bought 4 trillion in bonds to paper over the financial crisis. Foreign ownership of treasuries only amount to about 30% of total outstanding debt. Domestic holders make up the rest of the balance.
 
Top