The fact is this: We are stuck with the National Debt until it causes a catastrophic financial collapse, which is inevitable if not subject to accurate forecasting. No President will ever take serious steps to address it before that catastrophe, and no political party will use its majority in Congress to do so either. Both parties and all of our Presidents since World War II are equally responsible for the irresponsible expansion of the Debt. Both parties are therefore ethically estopped from complaining about it. Yes, the debt contributes to inflation and acts as an anchor on the economy. But if it was magically cut in half tomorrow, and it can’t be, it would still be dangerously large. Donald Trump said he would eliminate the National Debt before he was elected President and before he knew what the hell he was talking about…Obama promised to reduce the National Debt, and of course he didn’t even try. Reducing the debt, never mind eliminating it and at this point even slowing its growth, is obviously impossible because to attempt it is political suicide. Presidents and parties want to do things. Reducing the debt means undoing things that have already been done. [Added: and even that is often expensive] It means not just trimming around the edges, like DOGE—even saving billions of dollars is now exactly trimming around the edges—but committing to wholesale elimination of major projects, entitlements and policies with huge constituents, and that means losing elections, power, all that politicians crave.
Trump’s “Make America Great Again” theme made eliminating the National Debt an impossibility, and that should have been obvious. His second term goals, which require undoing the disastrous results of Democratic Party policies like open borders and the projection of national weakness and fecklessness abroad, require spending a lot of money. The growing Far Left of the Democratic Party embraces policies that will require spending even more money the U.S. doesn’t have to spend: Medicare for all, banning fossil fuels, free college education, guaranteed housing, “living wages,” etc.
Conclusion: the National Debt will keep growing and eventually crush us. Both parties are committed to a “we’ll be long gone before that happens, so we don’t care” attitude, and there is no way to change it.
“Nah, There’s No Mainstream Media Bias!” Tell Of The Month: “Arrgh! The National Debt Hit $40 Trillion!”
Pages: 1 2
Ethics Alarms 
I give Clinton partial credit for having a budget surplus during his term; Congress gets the other part.
The problem is that, even if we get a surplus, they spend it or give it back to the people in the form of a rebate.
They never pay down the debt.
I saw a stupid meme of Elizabeth Warren that sounded so stupid that I have to believe she actually said it. It was something to the effect that if her wealth tax is imposed on Bezos’ 220 Billion dollars, she could pay for everybody’s insulin and school lunches and he would still have 214 Billion left.
Two observations: 1) that would never happen because 8 other politicians have earmarked those same funds for 8 other pet projects; and 2) politicians spend whatever money they have.
Bonus observation: money is power and politicians are in the power-business.
-Jut
Clinton and Congress didn’t do anything to get that surplus (and, as you imply, not adding to the debt isn’t reducing the debt.) It was all due to the dot-com boom, and pure luck. But yes, it happened on his watch, and he gets credit. Them’s the rules.
I would not say pure luck; it helped that Newt Gingrich was pushing his agenda to reduce spending. And I give specific credit to Clinton for his “pivot” after losing in the mid-terms; it was the move of a “politician.” I don’t believe Obama ever compromised (that I can recall); that was because he was always an “activist.”
-Jut
Should I fix that typo? You wrote “activist” when I think you meant “asshole.”
these days, they are largely synonymous with
-Jut
Clinton emptied the Social Security Fund into the general budget and let IOUs from the taxpayers, not merely a fortuitous set of circumstances.
Washington DC politicians talk the talk about the need to reduce the National Debt but none of them have individual control of the whole government to get the job done, it’s a genuine collective failure. Until there is a party that has a super majority in the House, and Senate and they have a President that will go along with it, nothing will be done to effectively reduce the debt. Then in 2, 4, 6, or 8 years after the debt reducing super majority and president lose their elections the next group of DC politicians will just start their over spending again.