[MD] Dynamic Development at all costs?

[Platt Holden]

> [Platt]
> Check the red line in the Debt as a Fraction of GDP chart.
> 
> [Arlo]
> The "red line" debt is somewhat lesser than the black line debt, as 
> explained by the site.
> 
> "US Debt from 1940 on. Red lines indicate the public debt and black 
> lines indicate the gross debt, the difference being that the gross 
> debt excludes funds held by the government (i.e. the Trust for Social 
> Security)"
> 
> So I suppose if you exclude funds held by the government, the numbers 
> are a bit lower, but I'm not sure what the point of that is? Why 
> aren't you factoring in SS?

Because Bush et al are not responsible for it. It's now built into the 
system as are so many other welfare aspects of the debt. . 

> In either event, the page you provide also says this, "The total debt 
> is currently 66.5% of GNP." If that ratio is supposed to mean 
> anything, when should I become worried?
> 
> I think its also important to enumerate this by president, as in a 
> graph Krimel points to. 
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms)

I pasted the above into Google and got this result from the wiki page:

"There is no page titled "National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_term".

> You can see that for all presidents, beginning with Roosevelt and 
> Truman, the ratio between debt and GDP goes down (the only exception 
> is a practically irrelevant +.1% under Nixon/Ford). However, this 
> downward trend ends with Raygun who increases the ratio +11.3% in his 
> first term and +9.2% in his second. Pappy Bush's single term saw a 
> +13.1% jump. Both of Clinton's terms see a reduction, -.6% and -8.2%. 
> Then Bush Jr goes back to increases with +6.9% and a projected +3.9%.
> 
> If I should be concerned with this ratio, as you suggest, it is not 
> the republican presidents who have done good.

The ratio of debt to GDP went up to over 100 percent under Roosevelt, and
was higher in 1940 than the current Bush ratio under Roosevelt's New Deal. 
(red line).
 
> [Platt]
> I am not of the "better red than dead" school, or the current 
> situation, "better Muslim than decapitated."
> 
> [Arlo]
> Well, it didn't take long for this to revert to talk-radio rhetoric.

Just trying to put succinctly some of the justification for the debt 
increases. 

> [Platt]
> That the debt to GDP ratio is better going down than up I grant, but 
> not at the expense of losing liberty.
> 
> [Arlo]
> So the ratio can go up so long as its due to republicans telling us 
> they are protecting us from some evil boogeyman somewhere. Then its 
> okay. But when its democrats... wait... its never gone up under a 
> democrat. Oh well...

Except Roosevelt, the author of the gap between the black and red lines. 

But, I'm surprised you are pushing the bogeman of the debt. I thought you 
were the leader in criticizing fear-mongering. I hope you will continue to 
do so. It's certainly needed in today's political climate.