And how many households have mortgages, car payments, or credit card debt? They might have 53 Trillion dollars in stuff, but sure as hell not in liquid assets.
"Net worth" means "assets minus liabilities." In other words "value of house, car, cash, equity" minus "mortgages, car payments, and credit card debt."This is the source
. If you go to page 104, you'll see a breakdown of what American households own and what they owe. Americans own stuff worth $67 trillion - that means houses, bank deposits, stocks - and they only owe $14 trillion.
Nothing lasts forever, and since there is nothing in the foreseeable future that will suggest debt will be curtailed, and there is no such thing as a free lunch.
It depends what you mean by "curtailing" debt. If you mean reducing the national debt in nominal terms, then no, that doesn't usually happen. But what does happen is that the US economy grows, inflation eats away at the debt, which means that as time goes on the debt becomes less and less burdensome.
And it was only ten years ago, after all, that we were in that situation.
But if you want to know what would
cause the government to go bankrupt, doing nothing is a great way to do it. That would cause deflation, unemployment, and massively lower tax revenues; that would make the debt more burdensome far more quickly than anything Obama's done.
The problem with that is the entire banking system is totally rotted with Fractal reserve banking. There is no such thing as a "Good bank" in the current US banking system. Almost all of them have nearly nothing in the "Valuts" besides a promise from the Fed that they can borrow more from them (because they can print it) to cover any demands on deposits. This entire depression was caused by the fact banks have no real assets, and when the high risk loans failed, what little they had was sucked away.
How does a bank make investments if it has to keep all the cash it has on hand? How does investment happen? How does progress happen?
The development of banking and the development of modern society was not coincidental.
So? Debt needs to be payed off.
"Even if the US were not able to borrow money (which it can) it could print it. And as I've pointed out, printing money does not necessarily cause inflation."
That's exactly what it does. When you make more of something, its worth falls, its the same for money.
No, I'll say it again:
If the public sector takes money out of the economy faster than the government puts it in, the amount of money in the economy will fall. Prices will fall.
That is how you have deflation. And again: if you don't believe me, how the hell do you explain why we had deflation last year when the government was raining money on the economy? I agree - someone must have been taking money out. And it obviously wasn't the government.
When money is taken out of the system, and there is not a thing wrong with deflation.
When you have deflation, prices fall, and wages fall. That means that you take a pay cut. But your banks and credit cards don't cut the amount that you owe them.
Can you see how deflation might be a bad thing?
I don't recall any time in history, besides war, that had the wild market fluctuation that we see today.
And the only reason that we're seeing the amount of volatility that we are now is because people tried to do the exact thing that you wanted them to do - nothing. They thought that things would be OK if they let Lehman brothers go; instead thirty million Americans are out of work.
If you want an example of a successful intervention like this, go look at the dot com crash, the largest destruction of American financial assets since the Great Depression. But the Fed lowered interest rates and pumped money into the economy. Did we get rampant inflation? No. Did we go into a depression, like we did when the Fed did nothing in 1929-1933? No. We went into a shallow recession.