$30,000 debt per person...
Monday, 20. February 2006, 15:37:09
...is about the amount that the current U.S. national debt of $8.18 trillion works out per person! That's a lot of money.
As thestreet.com article points out:
Something is not right here. Although I am very liberal in my social views, I tend to be highly conservative when it comes to cash. My family has been debt free for six years now (ever since we paid off the house, which we did in 7 years!) , and I don't see why governments can't do the same. If that means raising taxes, well so be it. Just throwing money away paying interest is a mug's game.
As thestreet.com article points out:
The U.S. will spend $217 billion this year to pay interest on the publicly held portion of the debt, according to the Congressional Budget Office, and that is more than will be spent on homeland security, education and transportation combined.
Something is not right here. Although I am very liberal in my social views, I tend to be highly conservative when it comes to cash. My family has been debt free for six years now (ever since we paid off the house, which we did in 7 years!) , and I don't see why governments can't do the same. If that means raising taxes, well so be it. Just throwing money away paying interest is a mug's game.
WIDGETIZE
Lagged2Death # 20. February 2006, 20:41
What's worse, of course, is that many (most?) US taxpayers will retire or die long before $30K of their income tax can be applied to debt principal. A youngster's real share will be a lot more than $30K. Maybe we should all buy Euros and hope for the collapse of the dollar.
I've always liked the phrase "a mug's game," but I feel like I'm not really allowed to use it becuase I'm not English. I feel that using slang that isn't a part of one's actual cultural heritage is... uh, an unprofitable endeavor.
ricewood # 20. February 2006, 22:21
The way I figure it, debt will keep you captured. Freedom is being free of debt - at least that´s one of the ways freedom could be described.
musickna # 21. February 2006, 03:42
Of course, you have to moderate this view somewhat - very few of us have enough savings to buy a house outright. But I really think its better in general to save up for something you want rather than take out a loan for it.
This has a number of advantages. Firstly, by the time you can actually buy whatever it is you want, it is usually cheaper than before!
Secondly, the wait gives you a lot of time to consider whether you actually need the item. It's astonishing how many things lose their apparent value when you actually consider what actual benefits they will bring you.
Thirdly, whatever you do get is often more meaningful than that impulse buy slapped on a credit card.
Fouthly, it helps you shake the reliance on buying things that is often used a psychological crutch to compensate for an emotionally and intellectually impoverished life.
So there's my pocket thesis on materialism!
Time,now, I think to return to Bach & his wonderful cantatas - one thing that I am very glad I saved for and bought!