Thread

10-year Treasury yield climbs above 5.3% to a level not seen in 24 years

122 points · 193 comments · kaycebasques

valleyer · 1790820524 · focus · HN ↗
Oy. I'm no fiscal conservative, but the US federal government absolutely needs to balance its budget. Otherwise, it's bound to either choke on interest payments, devalue the dollar, or both.
Unlike most Trumpists, I see the the problem as a revenue issue, not expenditures; unlike many non-Trumpists, I doubt "tax the rich" is going to be enough to plug the hole.
Government healthcare payments would be a good start -- it seems likely that the amount most employees already (effectively) pay for health insurance could fund equivalent government coverage with some money left over to help pay for other government expenses.
1. consumer451 · 1790820661 · focus · HN ↗
  I am getting way too old for this. No more "both sides." Look at the data. If you want a balanced budget, there is one party to avoid.
  1. valleyer · 1790821404 · focus · HN ↗
    I don't feel like I "both sides"ed it that much, but I guess reasonable minds can disagree. But: neither party has balanced the federal budget, or even made (sane) noises about doing so, since the Democrats in the 90s. I haven't heard much about it from Democrats this election cycle -- perhaps reasonably so since there are much more critical issues at the moment.
    y1n0 · 1790821727 · focus · HN ↗
    If you look at the record, republicans out match democrats 3 to 1 for balanced budget years.
    But it doesn’t matter. Those historical parties have nothing in common with their namesake parties today.
    valleyer · 1790822223 · focus · HN ↗
    The last Republican to balance the budget was Eisenhower. Yeah, Clinton is pretty old today too, but almost no one alive today was of voting age during the Eisenhower administration.
    So, I agree with your conclusion.
    <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD" rel="nofollow">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD
    consumer451 · 1790821891 · focus · HN ↗
    Sorry, I was not aiming that directly at you, more like an old man yelling at clouds. I kinda give up on all of this. Nobody wants to hear or debate actual policies in the public. Politics is now just an exercise in campism. Nobody plays that game better than the current party.
    valleyer · 1790822367 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah, it sucks. Thanks for clarifying :(
  2. y1n0 · 1790821576 · focus · HN ↗
    There hasn’t been a balanced budget for 25 years. Today’s parties aren’t the same.
    matthewdgreen · 1790822815 · focus · HN ↗
    What’s the point of one party balancing the budget if the next party just blows it up? That’s been the pattern since Clinton.
  3. bryzaguy · 1790822026 · focus · HN ↗
    Since Bill Clinton and Lyndon B Johnson were the only two presidents to see a balanced budget I can guess which party you mean.
    consumer451 · 1790827054 · focus · HN ↗
    Sorry for misspeaking. What I should have said is that "If you want anything approaching a balanced budget in modern times..."
    The facts are that surpluses were routine before the 1960s, under both parties. Since then, not so much.
    1998 was the first year the United States government recorded a budget surplus since 1969 [0] (Clinton with a GOP Congress).
    Since 1981, the deficit deepened under Republican administrations and shrank under Democratic ones [1]
    That aligned with the creation of a right-specific media system where "Republicans don't fight Republicans" - so there can never be any internal accountability.
    [0] <a href="https://clintonwhitehouse3.archives.gov/WH/New/html/19981028-13004.html" rel="nofollow">https://clintonwhitehouse3.archives.gov/WH/New/html/19981028...
    [1] <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/fact-check-us-deficit-grown-110000769.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/fact-check-us-deficit-gr...

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.