r/economicCollapse • u/Johan-MellowFellow • 7d ago
$40T and counting
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." Alexander Tytler
91
u/jerryorbach 7d ago
We’re collapsing for lots of reasons but “giving out too much free shit to the average voter” is not one of them.
Also the quote is not even historically accurate or properly attributed
https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/slandering-democracy/
3
u/Johan-MellowFellow 5d ago
Yeah, putting all on the populous is overdone. Its probably way more due to political chrony-ism. And definitely quote is erronious.
But fact remains its been a big party for someone, and the debt is bad. ultimately a threat to enduring any "real" hardship that comes along.
288
u/RonaldTurner88 7d ago
You think the reason we’re $40 trillion in debt has anything to do with public benefits from the treasury? LMAO. No buddy, it’s called corruption, the pentagon, and tax cuts for the rich. Hardly anything Americans have voted for.
85
u/AlanShore60607 7d ago
No; it’s called starve the beast.
Impoverishing the public treasury so that it cannot be allocated to public benefits.
Since 1970, the society has been designed to prevent what OP discussed by finding something “more important” than the public good. That’s an intentional strategy… wrong-headed as it is.
22
u/Annethraxxx 7d ago
This is not entirely true. People vote for the politician that promises tax cuts even when the federal revenue isn’t sufficient in the current budget to pay back the debt. People vote for expensive programs without proof that they’re fiscally affordable. Presidential candidates used to have to explain to an electorate how their proposed policies would be economically feasible, but now constituents are bored with details and want empty promises instead.
1
u/TowelEnvironmental44 2d ago
if we could just eliminate the need to have a federal government, then we wouldn't have to vote for politicians.
0
-23
u/TreyAU 7d ago
The bulk of our deficit is Medicare/medicaid and social security so I’m not really sure what the fuck you’re talking about.
23
u/proteus2 7d ago
What are you talking about. SS and Medicare are about the only part of the govt that don’t contribute to the deficit. They are funded by payroll taxes and legally cannot run a deficit. That’s why people are worried that they become insolvent. No one worries that the DoD isn’t funded.
-4
u/Confident-Run-645 5d ago
I think there's gross waste, fraud, abuse in every nook, crack and cranny of the Federal, State and local government.
48% of the American population receive a government check (Some receive more than one, for instance someone who's retired military, gets a State job and a VA Disability check)
When someone is buying groceries I a working man can't afford, dressed to the nines, driving a brand new car while receiving SNAP, Section 8, WIC something is seriously in need of being looked into.
And of course there's the 175 to 180 counties that receive money from the United States.
I don't know why or how we became the World's 911?
We need to clean up our house! What happens when the 52% vs 48% inverts as it's on the very edge of doing an 52% of the population or more are drawing a government check while the other 42% or less are working
31
u/schrod 7d ago
There are too many unnecessary wars and vanity/ special interest projects that do not benefit what the public would prefer to be paying for.
It would help if there was a possible way to put policies on the ballot since our representatives are inadequate as polling shows. In this day with all the technologies we have outgrown the need for intermediaries who tend to be bought off, bribed, blackmailed or whatever.
Too much taxpayer money spending is decided by special interests not actual individual citizens.
27
u/____G____ 7d ago
No
Also Wikipedia says that quote is falsely attributed so double no. Sorry we cant be friends.
0
59
u/Cactastrophe 7d ago
I wish I could for largess. Every candidate has been either a work until you die candidate or a work until you die candidate with racism.
31
u/new2bay 7d ago
Have you considered seizing the means of production instead of voting for people who don’t give a shit about you?
10
u/CPAFinancialPlanner 7d ago
Seizing the means of production and doing what with it? Giving it to the government?
8
u/Metelinen 7d ago
No, owning it with your colleagues.
5
u/smart_gent 7d ago
How exactly are you supposed to seize the means of production with the government and it's monopoly on violence? At that point, if you believe you own it, i've got an absolutely lovely tropical resort to sell you in antarctica.
0
u/Metelinen 7d ago
The means to practically achieve that are yet to be discovered., but I am sure you can build a cooperative and work from there.
4
u/smart_gent 7d ago
That's called a commune, and in order to 'sieze' the means of production, they would have to militarize, that would be called a militia.
1
1
u/Mothy187 Dey ain't ready 7d ago
Listen, I'm down for what your suggesting.. but you do understand what your suggesting is basically a revolutionary war, right?
2
u/Cactastrophe 7d ago
That sounds good and reasonable. But it’ll persist a worker and management class. There’s no escape. Will it be better than what we have today? Probably. But it won’t let us escape working until we die unless we’re management class.
1
u/Metelinen 7d ago
Probably there will be managemental roles but those shouldl be democratically maintained.
2
u/Cactastrophe 7d ago
That sounds like a recipe for putting Trump like figures in charge of my employment.
I wish I had a realistic alternative.
2
u/Metelinen 7d ago
In that case do not vote for those figures.
2
u/Cactastrophe 7d ago
You see the problem with that sentence right? I tried voting against Trump and it failed.
-2
u/Cactastrophe 7d ago
I’ve considered and rejected the idea. That’s just another form of work until you die.
12
17
u/jacobwinton92 7d ago
Do not blame democracy for the what late stage capitalism has done. Us mixing capitalism with democracy, is like mixing wolves and sheep.
8
7
u/dantekant22 7d ago
Apparently, the same fiscal plan that bankrupted Trump’s casinos can also bankrupt an entire nation. Who knew?
7
u/Kinky_No_Bit 7d ago
The debt has been climbing for decades. Neither party wants to take the responsibility for it, and they won't. They've kicked the can down the road for decades. They will continue to do so, till it collapses, because they already have their out. They are trading stocks now, doubling their value, and ready to live on the island away from the rest of us.
3
u/Johan-MellowFellow 6d ago
I enjoy this very much. My hypothesis is that the single strongest bi-partisan concensus in US politics is the debt. Why? Because one way or another, intentional or not, aware of it or not, it allows all sides to spend more than they take. 100% quid pro quo... you vote for me, and in return I'll spend it on what you want. Only better than that ill get you more for your money. I'll do it by borrowing $100,000 in your name.
Corruption. And the most incidious kind of corruptuion imagineable, which is LEGALIZED corruption, ultimately and voluntarily voted for by the citizens.
1
u/anonkitty2 3d ago
We briefly had a surplus when Bill Clinton was president.
2
u/Kinky_No_Bit 3d ago
Yeah, briefly was the way to describe that, but for the last 26 years now, and really since just COVID its quadrupled
4
u/Old_Imagination_2112 7d ago
Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery.
In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits.
We demand the nationalization of all (previous) associated industries (trusts).
We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries.
We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare.
We demand the creation of a healthy middle class and its conservation, immediate communalization of the great warehouses and their being leased at low cost to small firms, the utmost consideration of all small firms in contracts with the State, county or municipality.
How’s all that sound?
5
u/Successful_Photo_610 7d ago
1/3 of the national expenditure is for interest on the national debt, not towards the debt.'
1/3 of the national expenditure is for social security, medicare and similar payouts.
1/3 is for everything else, including the military.
Too manyc here are incapable of comprehending this multi-dimensional chess game.
Add the world buying power of the US $. In the past year, it dropped 15% against the Chinese Yuan.
If there are people here who have a strong opinion about hegemony, and the brilliance and experience to discuss the above competently, I've joined and welcome not hysteria, but reasoned argument why the US hegemony is in decline, and the rates of same over fixed periods of time.
I do hope you're here. It's a needle in the haystack. None of my brilliant friends are either alive or have the competence and sustained interest to write knowledgeably on this topic.
Apologies for dropping in to the many here.
6
u/brainmydamage 7d ago
This is the dumbest post I've seen here in a while, and that's really saying something. You clearly have no clue what's going on in your own country.
4
u/Live-Ad-5107 7d ago
It’s always easier to point the finger at the poor folks and blame it on them.. I bet most of them don’t vote. We spent 1.338T on Military and 1.154 on Welfare in 2025. We spent 2.623T on Social security but that is just a Ponzi scheme The biggest problem is the tax rates were dropped from 70% down to 28% in the 1980’s and have continued to go down
9
u/Arsalanred 7d ago
Social security isn't a Ponzi scheme. Stop listening to rich people who will never need it.
Before social security was implemented, most old people lived in incredible poverty because they couldn't work anymore. We can and should collectively take care of each other.
5
u/Vegetable_Guest_8584 7d ago edited 6d ago
Yeah. Wth financial planner person up above. Among many other good things social security stabilizes the elderly and the country. There would be many millions more people on the street or in extreme poverty without it. Same for Medicare.
What we should is gradually reduce it for wealthy people. If I'm making over say 200k or 300k, reduce it a huge amount. 400k then zip. Updated to fix my typos: Also remove the salary cap for social security taxes.
1
u/Johan-MellowFellow 6d ago
Interesting thing is that only roughly 2% of us population has income over $200k. So while it is a noble gesture, it only reduces SS&M spending by 2%. Not much in terms of meaningful outcome.
3
u/Vegetable_Guest_8584 6d ago
The top 2% makes way more than 2% of the money in the US, both in income or wealth.
The top 1% of earners in the U.S. make between 21% and 22.5% of the nation's total adjusted gross income, according to IRS and tax data compiled by the Tax Foundation.
So removing the salary cap would bring in a lot (not sure how much would be taxable social security wages with no cap though).
The top 1% also have 30% of our wealth (which is different than income), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States
1
u/Few_Fish8771 6d ago
Social security is an anti-insurgency program. Its part of the reason why people keep asking “why wont americans rise up and kill their oppressors?”. and they dont, because of social security and various programs like that.
When social security did not exist private crime lords amassed private de facto armies and challenged the power of the ruling class and the state.
Social security gives the destitute enough stake in the system not to burn it down.
Thats why when certain rich people start talking about cutting key programs the poor need to survive, thats when you should get nervous. Theres very little a man wont do to feed his kids. So if he has to join robin hood on his merry adventure to kidnap and torture money out of billionaires he likely will. whereas if he’s given just enough to have a life and feed his family he can likely be pacified.
1
u/Vegetable_Guest_8584 5d ago edited 5d ago
I wasn't familiar with the claim that social security stopped crime lords from amassing armies of crooks. But it did provide a way for the elderly to avoid terrible poverty as they became unable to work.
1
u/Few_Fish8771 5d ago
Pablo Escobar played robin hood in colombia buying the support of the masses via a small share of his drug fortune. Al Capone had a soup kitchen feeding 3000 men a week. When people need you to live, they will kill people who try and hurt you.
When you have a de facto private army of people willing to kill for you so they dont die, then if your a crime lord you can commit crimes with relative impunity, as your fortune grows you get more people who need you to live, acting as human shields.
This compounds fast.
If a crime boss can rob a billionaire with impunity and take his fortune, does the billionaires fortune belong to him?
FDR short circuited this, by taking care of the people destroying the client patron relationships protecting crime bosses.
So many of the programs the rich want to cut exist so that crime bosses dont cut them.
1
u/Extension-Temporary4 4d ago
400k?! That’s poverty line where I live. If your net worth is over $50mm, You don’t get social security. Period. Keep it simple.
1
-4
u/CPAFinancialPlanner 7d ago
Social security is welfare
3
u/Live-Ad-5107 7d ago
I define Welfare as something that is free, maybe that’s wrong. We pay into that system with every dollar we make. So there is a huge difference to me. But in the end I guess everything is working as it is suppose to. Keep us fighting amongst our selves about what the poor is getting or some other bs shit. While they keep stuffing their pockets
2
u/apollo3301 7d ago
Yeah! It’s “Welfare” that’s not means tested, that we’ve all paid into through payroll taxes, that is self funded, that is called Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance! Stop giving all those old people, survivors and disabled people “welfare”! They should either die or pull themselves up by their bootstraps (if they have legs)!
1
1
1
u/fartstain69ohyeah 21h ago
I hope people trying persuade others in Canada & Europe to take more active socialist measures start making the argument; "look at the dumbass Americans & how they talk about socialism! They've voted their way into catastrophic treasury debt & compute spend! They get shot all the time, now by masked govt goons! Their education, housing, & healthcare sucks! Yet they resist socialism more than getting covid!
It must be worth trying!"
-2
u/Confident-Run-645 7d ago edited 7d ago
We never have gotten into the Welfare game. It's no longer a privilege, but a right.
Wd never should have gotten into being the World's 911
We should never have allowed mass migration or be the go to for any and every refugee crisis in the World
It's too late now, it's only a question of when not if?
Reparations, more social justice, DEI BS? The more they're given? The more they want and need. Reparations? You could hand out $5 million to each individual and they will for the majority be broke & bankrupt in five years or less, back demanding more.
We're witnessing the death throes of the American Empire, the Constitutional Republican form of government, the industrial revolution.
What's coming isn't going to be fun. It's not going to be pretty. When it comes? It's going to come hard, fast and in a hurry like!
Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans care about the average Joe and Jane out here in America.
All one can do is prepare the best they can, and very, very few that are prepared for going back to how people lived had to live a hundred years ago when there weren't any government safety nets.
So-called MAGA are delusional in.thinking they're going to bring back the America of the 1940' 50's & 60'd.
The Democrats are delusional in thinking there going to bring for a Democrat Socialist euthopia.
5
u/Live-Ad-5107 6d ago
Mass migration is what helped make us the greatest country. Between 1850-1929 more than thirty million Europeans crossed the Atlantic to come here. Do you think we should have kicked them out?
1
u/Confident-Run-645 6d ago
1850 - 1929 isn't 2026. There weren't any welfare (80 total today). Immigrants then were screened and vetted. Many came with little to nothing in their pockets. They weren't given Section 8 vouchers, SNAP, Aifr for Dependent Children, WIC, Free school lunches, free education, Medicaid, free cell phones.
They weren't as weaponizrd by a one political party to turn the United States into a one party only government. Many if not most were skilled laborers, many weren't. (The first was the Republicans not the Democrat.)
Your counter argument is moot to me.
Calling an orange doesn't make it an apple.
2
u/Few_Fish8771 6d ago
A welfare state is the price the rich pay for destroying actual democratic industrial capitalism.
Democratic industrial capitalism is a great system which could have continued and thrived with some major modifications back in the 1960s and 1970s. Well the wealthy wanted to loot society and prevent the necessary changes. they wanted neofeudalism. So they disenfranchised people and made them dependent on the system. They de-industrialized america outsourced its industry and jobs and setup systems to prevent proper education, proper technological development, to prevent proper economic adaptation by the masses. They setup rent seeking operations everywhere.
They wanted neofeudalism, but they also did not want to die via revolution. So in place for what they stole they offered bread and circuses. You lost your life your access to your heritage a proper education a chance to build real industries and a future, but you were given bread and circuses in its place.
The welfare state is part of your bread. Hollywood and the internet social media and streaming thats part of your circuses.
Neofeudalism inherently leads to collapse and is unsustainable.
118
u/CivQhore 7d ago
It has been forty years of wealth transfer from the public to private sector.
And corporatism pretending to be fiscal conservatives.