<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: National Debt &#8211; One Issue, Two Perspectives</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moneysmartlife.com/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moneysmartlife.com/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/</link>
	<description>Money Tips for a Better Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:29:02 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Morris</title>
		<link>http://moneysmartlife.com/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/comment-page-1/#comment-994</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin Morris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 01:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moneysmartlife.com/2007/02/14/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/#comment-994</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t really fault anything you say here.  Certainly I don&#039;t want the government to borrow towards foolish ends, or borrow excessively.  Unlike The Skeptical Optimist, I would be perfectly happy to see the federal gov&#039;t run a balanced budget.  Heck, during great economic times, I&#039;m all in favor of paying some of it down with the high tax revenues.

The whole debate about the national debt is framed incorrectly.  Future generations do not have to pay off the debt.  They merely have to service the interest on the debt, while continuing to roll it over.  This is what we are doing now and having been doing for hundreds of years already.  A growing economy, and thus growing tax revenues solve that problem. 

Furthermore, the economy need not grow continuously.  It can have short recessions as we do now.  As long as the long term trend is growth, we&#039;ll be fine. 

Picture this.  Let&#039;s say the gov&#039;t restores fiscal discipline and balances the federal budget for the next 10 years.  Right now we&#039;re paying under 10% of tax revenues to service the interest on the debt.  In 10 years, with probably a doubling of tax revenue, that portion will be less than 5%.  

OK, let&#039;s say the gov&#039;t doubles the debt, and we double our tax revenues in 10 years.  Then we&#039;ll be right where we are now.  We&#039;ll be paying 10% of tax revenues to service the debt.  

The national debt is not a big burden that future generations will have to pay off.  It&#039;s not the boogeyman that the alarmist media and politicians want us to believe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t really fault anything you say here.  Certainly I don&#8217;t want the government to borrow towards foolish ends, or borrow excessively.  Unlike The Skeptical Optimist, I would be perfectly happy to see the federal gov&#8217;t run a balanced budget.  Heck, during great economic times, I&#8217;m all in favor of paying some of it down with the high tax revenues.</p>
<p>The whole debate about the national debt is framed incorrectly.  Future generations do not have to pay off the debt.  They merely have to service the interest on the debt, while continuing to roll it over.  This is what we are doing now and having been doing for hundreds of years already.  A growing economy, and thus growing tax revenues solve that problem. </p>
<p>Furthermore, the economy need not grow continuously.  It can have short recessions as we do now.  As long as the long term trend is growth, we&#8217;ll be fine. </p>
<p>Picture this.  Let&#8217;s say the gov&#8217;t restores fiscal discipline and balances the federal budget for the next 10 years.  Right now we&#8217;re paying under 10% of tax revenues to service the interest on the debt.  In 10 years, with probably a doubling of tax revenue, that portion will be less than 5%.  </p>
<p>OK, let&#8217;s say the gov&#8217;t doubles the debt, and we double our tax revenues in 10 years.  Then we&#8217;ll be right where we are now.  We&#8217;ll be paying 10% of tax revenues to service the debt.  </p>
<p>The national debt is not a big burden that future generations will have to pay off.  It&#8217;s not the boogeyman that the alarmist media and politicians want us to believe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Smart Loans Fast</title>
		<link>http://moneysmartlife.com/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/comment-page-1/#comment-989</link>
		<dc:creator>Smart Loans Fast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 21:46:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moneysmartlife.com/2007/02/14/national-debt-one-issue-two-perspectives/#comment-989</guid>
		<description>To calculate the cost of your mortgage, use our free, easy mortgage calculator at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.smartloansfast.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;our loan site&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To calculate the cost of your mortgage, use our free, easy mortgage calculator at <a href="http://www.smartloansfast.com" rel="nofollow">our loan site</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
