Is the US national "debt" an illusion?

Matthew Libman

BANNED
Banned
I tend to agree with many of the forward-thinking viewpoints that are shared on internet forums. However, I feel there is misinformation being circulated regarding the US national debt. The core question that must be answered: What is the national wealth?

Private wealth in the US is almost $100 trillion. But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States. There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply. The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play. However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant. A brilliant scam that must come to an end in the United States, as it has in central banks throughout Europe and across the globe.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories. As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

This is serious business.

Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of a new hashtag.

Matthew Libman
Charleston, SC
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
I tend to agree with many of the forward-thinking viewpoints that are shared on internet forums. However, I feel there is misinformation being circulated regarding the US national debt. The core question that must be answered: What is the national wealth?

Private wealth in the US is almost $100 trillion. But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States. There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply. The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play. However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant. A brilliant scam that must come to an end in the United States, as it has in central banks throughout Europe and across the globe.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories. As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

This is serious business.

Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of a new hashtag.

Matthew Libman
Charleston, SC

very good points. i've tried to bring up the dollar and the central banks, rothschilds, federal reserve and the connections. i never took the time to researh deeper, but it is serious. my cousin got into mises institute, austrian economics and truly free market economies. the powers that be are heading towards a world currency. instead of 100,000 in the bank, one could wake up one day and have only 10,000 "patriot" dollars- the assessment of the overall wealth of the USA is difficult. good thread/post. welcome -
 

Tinark

Active member
very good points. i've tried to bring up the dollar and the central banks, rothschilds, federal reserve and the connections. i never took the time to researh deeper, but it is serious. my cousin got into mises institute, austrian economics and truly free market economies. the powers that be are heading towards a world currency. instead of 100,000 in the bank, one could wake up one day and have only 10,000 "patriot" dollars- the assessment of the overall wealth of the USA is difficult. good thread/post. welcome -

You left out the Illuminati, the lizard-men, the anti-Christ, and everyone having to get a 666 tattoo.
 

Mocking You

New member
But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

This "wealth" is known as static wealth. It's only realized if it is sold. Are you suggesting that the United States sell federal land to foreign nations and use the proceeds to pay down the national debt?

Or are you saying that our debt is really not that bad because if push came to shove we could always sell federal land to foreign nations?


There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

Never heard of this. Do you have a link(s) to information regarding this? I do know about his failed stimulus program where he gave away money and loans to solar energy companies that subsequently went bankrupt.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

This is somewhat true in that the U.S. is a continuous operation, it's not as if it has a time limit with which to pay off its debt. Contrast that with a family with a home mortgage, student loans, auto loans, etc. They have a finite time frame to pay off their debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply.

No, the purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the money supply.

The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

Yes, our currency is backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. As long as there is a taxable population there is a means to pay off debt.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

I agree with you that scarce metals is no longer a viable backer of currency. There simply is not enough gold and silver reserves within the United States to keep up with the population growth, growth of goods and services, and economic activity. I disagree with you conclusion that defining national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is social brainwashing.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play.

I like that phrase, monetary child's play. That is what a return to the gold standard would be.

However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant.

This money supply program was hardly kept from the view of the American public. Anybody who wanted to know about it could learn of it. Also, the raising of interest rates is one of the most widely anticipated events for the financial markets.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories.

Yes. Right winger gold bugs were proved wrong on just about every prediction they made regarding our economy over the past 5 years. I especially liked the prediction that when QE ended the stock market would crash and inflation would skyrocket. Or the chestnut that the only thing fueling the stock market run up was QE. Yet the past several times it was announced that the bond buying program was being tapered the stock market went up. Stocks increase in value because corporate earnings are increasing. Yes, QE provided a tail wind for the stock market mostly because traditional interest bearing securities (CD's, Bonds, etc.) had such low returns the only place to make decent money was in the stock market.

As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Possibly. That would depend on the health of other nation's currencies as well. Right now, the U.S. is the worlds leading economy (as far as economic growth, GDP, stock market valuation, corporate earnings, etc.) There is no need for QE4, QE5, etc.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

These entities received funds to lend under the QE programs and most of them didn't make many loans. So, the answer to this question is no.

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

It's called consolidation. Companies buying other companies to make bigger companies.

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

What?....

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

Ahhh, and you were doing so well. First post and all that.


Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Reagan was right about a lot of things but I don't recall him advocating a new currency.

Good post. Welcome to TOL.
 

Matthew Libman

BANNED
Banned
Thanks for the great responses. It is amazing how much more sense this stuff makes after reading the bible - Torah, King James, or otherwise.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
monopoly_money_500.jpg
 

oatmeal

Well-known member
I tend to agree with many of the forward-thinking viewpoints that are shared on internet forums. However, I feel there is misinformation being circulated regarding the US national debt. The core question that must be answered: What is the national wealth?

Private wealth in the US is almost $100 trillion. But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States. There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply. The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play. However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant. A brilliant scam that must come to an end in the United States, as it has in central banks throughout Europe and across the globe.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories. As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

This is serious business.

Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of a new hashtag.

Matthew Libman
Charleston, SC

Maybe you get a foot amputated? what do you mean missing a foot? your foot is only a small percentage of your entire mass.

Debt is debt, debt is unnecessary, spend less, live within your means
 

Nimrod

Member
I tend to agree with many of the forward-thinking viewpoints that are shared on internet forums. However, I feel there is misinformation being circulated regarding the US national debt. The core question that must be answered: What is the national wealth?

Private wealth in the US is almost $100 trillion. But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States. There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply. The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play. However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant. A brilliant scam that must come to an end in the United States, as it has in central banks throughout Europe and across the globe.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories. As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

This is serious business.

Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of a new hashtag.

Matthew Libman
Charleston, SC

M3: The Sucker's Statistic. Why Inflationists and Deflationists Have Repeatedly Been Sucked In.
By Gary North
"The Bible speaks of a dog returning to its vomit. The vomit in question here is M3..."

Read Gary's article on why M3 is useless.

When I read your post. I envisioned vomit coming from a liberal mind. Your idea of what money is pathetic.

Pretty simple solution to your ignorance. Read Murray Rothbard on Money. http://mises.org/library/history-money-and-banking-united-states-colonial-era-world-war-ii

Those who hate Gold standard are pro-Big-Government.

The debt the government has is towards to people of the USA.
The younger generation having to pay for the older generation. This is a pyramid scheme. Evil. But you are all for it....Just like most of TOL posters. You will fit in well.
 

Tinark

Active member
Maybe you get a foot amputated? what do you mean missing a foot? your foot is only a small percentage of your entire mass.

Debt is debt, debt is unnecessary, spend less, live within your means

Unnecessary for what?
 

Kdall

BANNED
Banned
I tend to agree with many of the forward-thinking viewpoints that are shared on internet forums. However, I feel there is misinformation being circulated regarding the US national debt. The core question that must be answered: What is the national wealth?

Private wealth in the US is almost $100 trillion. But dig deeper: What is the mineral wealth in our national parkland? What are the Rocky Mountains, Mendocino County, and ANWR worth? What is the aggregate oil wealth in public lands? What is the value of the US military in the jungle of international relations?

I argue that the $18 Trillion national debt pales in comparison to the national wealth of the United States. There is no better example of this than the revenue generated from Obama's successful energy exploration campaign.

When you take a look at the massive swaths of valuable land held by the federal government, it becomes clear that the total federally-owned real estate, oil, minerals, etc. within the borders of the USA could be valued in the quadrillions of dollars.

One thing has become increasingly clear to me: the United States HAS debt, but it is really not IN debt.

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to govern the people through the money supply. The threat of hyperinflation or deflationary depression is exaggerated. The resource wealth of the United States - as well as the large, rich, taxable population - provides a backstop that keeps our currency strong, even in expansionary environments.

I believe this backstop is far more valuable than prior generations' use of precious metal reserves. I concede gold and silver are more tangible, but defining the national wealth by reserves of scarce metals is nothing more than a form of social brainwashing intended to keep resource-rich Americans feeling poor.

Conspiracy theorists and John Birchers who measure the national debt against gold reserves are engaging in monetary child's play. However, the Federal Reserve's ability to spend the past decade in crisis while hiding the money supply (M3) from the American public is brilliant. A brilliant scam that must come to an end in the United States, as it has in central banks throughout Europe and across the globe.

The strength of the dollar in FOREX markets in the wake of QE3 invalidates many conspiracy theories. As a market student and participant, I believe the dollar is legitimately strong and would remain strong through QE4, QE5, and QE6.

Is it time to end the myth of false scarcity? Is the easy answer - a dramatic increase in the debt ceiling to fund the Small Business Administration, Farm Service Agency, and regional banks - the best path for the US economy?

Recently an interesting statistic was released. The USA has fewer corporations today than 40 years ago, despite having three times as many citizens. If "corporations are people," do we just need more "people?"

Or is a multi-decade Japanese-style depression a better way to break the will of American men, break the daughters of the revolution into prostitution, seize American's weapons, and ultimately rejoin the British Crown and join the New/Old World Order?

I ask that question only half-sarcastically, because that appears to be the the intent of the current world order, and the path the United States is headed. Especially if either Hillary "Forester de Rothschild-RHODam" Clinton, or Jeb "Lehman is now Barclays" Bush are elected president.

This is serious business.

Sure, a new monetary system would be nice. But is a total revolution possible? Perhaps it is time to submit to reality, and finally admit that Reagan was right.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of a new hashtag.

Matthew Libman
Charleston, SC

When China demands their money back this debt is gonna get very real
 

Mocking You

New member
When China demands their money back this debt is gonna get very real

What do you mean--demand their money back?

The debt that China holds is in the form of US Treasury securities of various denominations and maturations. Things such as 30 day, 60 day, 120 day, 6 month, 1 year Treasury Bills and 2 year, 3 year, 5 year, 7 year, and 10 year Treasury Notes. There are also 30 year Treasury bonds.

China cannot simply bluster into the US Treasury and demand that they get full and immediate payment for these securities. The procedure for redeeming them is clearly spelled out.
 
Last edited:

Mocking You

New member
Those who hate Gold standard are pro-Big-Government.

What a simplistic statement without any kind of cause/effect.

The gold standard was great when the US population was smaller and most other countries on earth used it as well. Nowadays, it makes no sense to tie our money supply to a finite resource we dig up out of the ground. If we can't find more gold, we can't expand our economy.

Consider also if another country decided to hoard gold, started buying it up in volume. Then there would be a scarcity of money in the U.S. We'd be back to runs on banks for currency, stagnant economic activity, and deflation. No thanks.

Then there is the problem of the exchange rate and people playing with the spread between paper money and gold currency. Read up on Black Friday, September 24, 1869.

I don't see the logic of digging a mineral out of a hole in the ground, placing it in a hole in the wall, and then stationing guards around it 24/7, and calling it our "money supply".
 

PureX

Well-known member
I think the problem begins with the concept of debt, itself. I think it's a disingenuous distortion of reality. It's an illusion created by investors to try and protect the money they invest, by calling it a "loan" and insinuating it must be paid back regardless of the insecurity of the investment. It's a way of trying to place all the risk on the 'other guy'.

In reality, there is no such thing as a "loan". When one person gives money to another, with the intent of gaining a profit on it's return, they are investing that money in the other person's ability to increase it. Plain and simple. And if that investment does not pay off, as will sometimes happen, then the money is lost. It is not "owed".
 

Mocking You

New member
I think the problem begins with the concept of debt, itself. I think it's a disingenuous distortion of reality. It's an illusion created by investors to try and protect the money they invest, by calling it a "loan" and insinuating it must be paid back regardless of the insecurity of the investment. It's a way of trying to place all the risk on the 'other guy'.

I think you have the definition of "loan" and "investment" conflated and confused.


In reality, there is no such thing as a "loan". When one person gives money to another, with the intent of gaining a profit on it's return, they are investing that money in the other person's ability to increase it. Plain and simple.

No, when a person makes a loan they are trusting in the ability of another person to pay it back.

And if that investment does not pay off, as will sometimes happen, then the money is lost. It is not "owed".

An investment and a loan are two different things.
 
Top