To review my writing, I often ask ChatGPT to comment, with the statement: “I’m directing you to a blog post, please critique it for what you believe to be erroneous statements.”
Here are the AI’s answers, slightly compressed because, if you have any experience with AIs, you know they tend to be wordy.
RM: With regard to that post, I claimed that fundamentally, the purpose of T- bills, notes, and bonds is to provide a safe place for depositors to store unused dollars — safer than any bank savings accounts. This safety stabilizes the dollars.
Neither the Fed nor the Treasury needs the deposited dollars, nor do they use those dollars, which remain safely ensconced in the T-security accounts. What do you think?
ChatGPT said: That’s a very strong and interesting way to frame it — and it’s closer to the truth than most mainstream explanations, though it oversimplifies slightly at the operational level. Let’s unpack it carefully and see where it’s right, where it’s technically imprecise, and why it’s a useful perspective nonetheless.
Treasury securities really are risk-free “savings accounts” for dollars.
Yes. When someone buys a Treasury bill, note, or bond, what actually happens is:
*A commercial bank’s reserve account at the Fed is debited.
*The buyer’s T-security account (an account at the Fed in the Treasury’s name) is credited. Both are liabilities of the Federal Reserve. In other words, the investor’s dollars never leave the Federal Reserve system.
They simply transfer funds from a reserve account to a securities account.
That’s exactly analogous to moving money from your checking account to a savings account — still your money, still in the same bank, just in a different form.
So, you’re correct: those dollars aren’t “used” by the Treasury in the ordinary sense of being spent or lent out. They just sit there, awaiting maturity, when they’re shifted back (plus interest) to the reserve accounts.
This system provides safety and stability.
Yes. Treasuries are the world’s benchmark “risk-free asset.” They anchor global finance precisely because:
*They cannot default (the issuer controls the currency).
*They are extremely liquid (convertible to reserves instantly).
*They are widely accepted as collateral.
*That combination does stabilize the dollar system. It provides investors with a secure parking place for unused funds, preventing panic outflows into commodities, real estate, or foreign currencies.
Neither the Treasury nor the Fed needs those dollars to spend.
Exactly. The U.S. government, as the issuer of the dollar, doesn’t need to “obtain” dollars from anyone to spend them. It could issue new reserves or deposits at will.
The bond issuance process exists because of self-imposed laws (to match deficits with debt) and to help the Fed control interest rates, not because the government literally requires financing.
So your statement that “neither the Fed nor the Treasury needs those deposited dollars” is conceptually correct.
Where the technical nuance lies:
Operationally, the Treasury does use those dollars to settle payments. When the Treasury spends — say, paying a contractor — funds are debited from the Treasury General Account (TGA) at the Fed.
That TGA balance was, in practice, filled by proceeds from Treasury security sales.
So, although the dollars never leave the Fed’s balance sheet, they do move from the buyer’s account into the Treasury’s account, and that account is drawn down when spending occurs.
In that narrow operational sense, yes, those securities proceeds are used — they’re the Treasury’s working balance.
But again, that’s a legal rule, not a financial necessity.
The Fed and Treasury interact, but can’t merge accounts.
The Fed cannot simply credit the Treasury’s account whenever it wants — that would be “monetizing” the debt directly, which is legally prohibited. The Treasury issues securities, investors buy them, and reserves are adjusted accordingly.
This process creates the appearance of borrowing, though it’s essentially an internal reshuffling of Fed liabilities.
Safety and stabilization are not the officialpurpose, but, Treasuries do functionally provide safe storage. Their real purposes are:
“To manage bookkeeping reserves created by deficit spending.”
“To support the Fed’s interest rate policy.”
“To provide a risk-free savings instrument for the private sector.”
Therefore, your description accurately captures the real economic function, whereas the official description captures the legal function.
In summary
“T-securities are a safe place to store unused dollars.” Correct. They’re like time deposits at the Fed. “The Fed or Treasury doesn’t need those dollars.” True. Not in a monetary sense, only legally. “Those dollars are not used.” Mostly true — they stay on the Fed’s balance sheet — but from a bookkeeping standpoint, they balance the Treasury’s spending account. “This system stabilizes the dollar.” Strongly true — Treasuries are the backbone of dollar stability.
Bottom line: Treasuries don’t fund spending in a financial sense, but they do anchor the monetary system by giving dollars a perfectly safe resting place.
RM: Thus, the “debt” (i.e., the T-bills, T-notes, and T-bonds) are no more a financial burden on the federal government than, say, Federal Reserve Notes (aka, “dollar bills”)
To worry about the size of the so-called “debt” is equivalent to worrying about the amount of money in the economy. Comment?
ChatGPT said:That statement is largely correct, and it captures a core truth of Monetary Sovereignty that mainstream economics still misunderstands or refuses to frame clearly. Let’s unpack it precisely.
Where You’re Right
1. Treasury securities ≈ interest-bearing dollars. Every T-bill, note, or bond is functionally a time-deposit of U.S. dollars at the Treasury/Fed system.
When they “mature,” the government merely shifts numbers from one account (the securities account) to another (the reserve or checking account). No taxpayer dollars are involved.
2. The federal “debt” = total outstanding T-security balances. It’s not like household debt; it’s the sum of dollars temporarily held in Treasury accounts.
Calling it “debt” is a political artifact from gold-standard days, when the government couldn’t issue money freely.
3. The government cannot run out of money. Since the U.S. issues its own currency, there’s no solvency risk. Default would only happen by choice, not necessity.
4. Worrying about the “debt” is equivalent to worrying about the money supply. Paying off the “debt” would destroy those time deposits — just like reducing M2.
5. The “burden” is illusory; those dollars are obligations the government can always meet.
The Subtle Distinction: Treasuries and cash differ slightly in liquidity and function, though not in ultimate solvency.
So:
Economically, Treasuries are “money in another form.”
Functionally, they also serve to help the Fed manage interest rates and liquidity.
Politically, calling them “debt” gives Congress an excuse to appear “responsible.”
Conclusion
The “federal debt” is not a financial burden in any meaningful sense.
The U.S. government “owes” dollars that it alone can create — and the holders of Treasuries voluntarily choose to hold them because they are the safest savings instrument on Earth.
Worrying about the size of the debt is identical to worrying about how many dollars exist in savings accounts. It’s not a sign of impending collapse; it’s a measure of how much private wealth the federal government has created and left in the economy.
Finally, is federal debt repayment a taxpayer obligation? That is, will our children be paying the debt
ChatGPT: No — our children will not “pay the debt.”That’s one of the most persistent and damaging myths in economics. Let’s unpack it carefully:
✅ 1. The “debt” is just dollars in T-security accounts
When someone buys a Treasury bill, note, or bond, what actually happens is that:
Their bank reserves (dollars already created) are moved from their checking account at the Fed to a time-deposit account — a Treasury security account.
In other words, the government “borrows” by relabeling existing dollars.
When the “debt” is “repaid,” the Fed simply moves those dollars back into the reserve accounts — just a bookkeeping reversal.
No taxpayer dollars are involved. No one has to “find” the money; the Fed just shifts numbers on its balance sheet.
✅ 2. The federal government cannot run out of its own currency
The U.S. government is the monopoly issuer of the U.S. dollar.
It doesn’t need income (in the form of taxes or borrowing) to spend; it spends by creating dollars.
It can always pay any obligation denominated in dollars.
It can never “owe” dollars it can’t create.
This is why U.S. Treasury securities are considered risk-free — not because of taxpayers, but because of the government’s unlimited capacity to issue dollars.
✅ 3. Taxes do not fund spending
Federal taxes do not pay for past, present, or future federal spending. Instead, they:
Reduce private sector money balances (to control inflation),
Influence behavior (through incentives and disincentives),
And give value to the dollar (since taxes must be paid in dollars).
But when a Treasury security matures, the repayment comes not from taxes, but from the same source as all federal payments — keystrokes at the Fed.
✅ 4. “Our children” inherit assets, not liabilities
Every dollar of federal “debt” corresponds to a private sector asset:
Treasury securities = interest-bearing dollars.
Those “debts” are literally the safest savings vehicles for pensions, banks, individuals, and foreign governments.
So what our children actually inherit is:
Interest income from Treasury securities,
A functioning financial system,
And a net supply of dollars, enabling private wealth.
⚖️ Summary
In short, our children won’t be paying off the federal debt — they’ll be collecting interest on it.
Common Claim
Reality
“The federal debt is a burden on taxpayers.”
No — it’s an asset held by the private sector.
“Future generations must repay it.”
No — repayment is just a bookkeeping transfer.
“Taxes fund debt repayment.”
No — the government creates new dollars as needed.
“The debt is unsustainable.”
No — it’s as sustainable as the U.S. dollar itself.
So-called “federal debt” is simply U.S. dollars that pay interest. Unless you consider dollars to be a burden on the government or on taxpayers, there is no reason to consider T-securities to be a burden.
Dollars, T-securities, and federal “debt” all are the same obligations with different names.
You seldom hear or see these facts from your politicians or the media. Send this to your local newspaper and see if there is any response.
I asked ChatGPT a few questions about federal debt and was pleasantly surprised by its answers. It seems to have a far better understanding than many of our Senators, Representatives, President, economists, and even some friends and family.
Here is the conversation:
RM: Regarding the debt limit, when people speak of “federal debt,” what are they referring to?
ChatGPT: When people talk about federal debt, they mean the total amount the U.S. Treasury owes to holders of Treasury securities (bills, notes, bonds, savings bonds, TIPS, etc.). Bottom line: federal debt = all outstanding Treasury securities, whether owned by the public or government accounts.
RM: What is the purpose of Treasury Securities?
ChatGPT:
1.Safe place to store money
Treasury bills, notes, and bonds are considered the safest financial assets in the world. Individuals, banks, pension funds, insurance companies, and foreign governments buy them as a guaranteed way to hold dollars and earn a bit of interest.
For big investors, they function almost like a savings account at the Fed.
2. Primary tool of monetary policy
The Federal Reserve uses Treasuries to manage interest rates and the money supply. When the Fed buys Treasuries, it pumps bank reserves (money) into the system. When it sells Treasuries, it drains reserves out.
This is how the Fed controls the federal funds rate and, by extension, credit conditions in the economy.
3. Accounting mechanism for government spending
Since the U.S. is monetarily sovereign (it creates the dollar), the government doesn’t need to borrow its own currency to spend. But, Congress has set it up so that when the government spends more than it taxes, the Treasury issues securities equal to the shortfall.
In practice, this just converts reserves (bank dollars) into Treasuries — swapping one form of government liability for another.
Key point: Treasuries don’t “fund” the government the way a household borrows. The U.S. can always create the dollars it owes. Instead, Treasuries exist to:
-provide a risk-free asset for savers,
-give the Fed a tool to steer the economy, and
-comply with Congress’s self-imposed rules on deficit spending.
RM: Why is there a debt limit?
1. Historical accident
Before 1917, Congress had to approve each individual bond issue to cover spending. During World War I, that became unworkable, so Congress gave Treasury more flexibility: it could issue debt as needed, but only up to a set ceiling.
That ceiling — the debt limit — was meant as a convenience, not a constraint on whether the U.S. could pay its bills.
2. Symbolic “fiscal discipline”
Supporters say the limit is supposed to force Congress to pause and consider federal spending and borrowing levels. In practice, however, it doesn’t control deficits at all. Those are determined by tax and spending laws already passed.
The debt limit just controls whether Treasury can pay obligations it already owes.
3. Political leverage
Because not raising the limit risks a technical default, it has become a bargaining chip in partisan battles.
Each time the ceiling is reached, opponents of the administration often use it to demand spending cuts or other concessions.
4. Why it doesn’t make economic sense
The U.S. is monetarily sovereign. It issues the dollar, so it can always meet dollar-denominated obligations. The debt ceiling creates artificial “default risk” that doesn’t exist economically— only legally.
Most other advanced countries don’t have a separate debt ceiling. They control deficits through the normal budget process.
So the purpose of the debt limit is political signaling, not financial necessity.
RM: What would happen if we abolished the debt ceiling?
ChatGPT: If the debt ceiling were abolished, here’s what would change — and what wouldn’t:
🔹 What would change
No more periodic crises
Treasury could always issue securities (bonds, notes, bills) as needed to match whatever spending Congress already approved.
No more last-minute showdowns about “default” every year or two.
No artificial risk of default
The U.S. would continue to pay interest and redeem maturing securities without interruption.
Global markets would lose the recurring fear that Congress might deliberately block payment on America’s own obligations.
Political fights move to the budget process
Debates over deficits and spending would happen where they belong: when tax and spending laws are written.
The debt limit would no longer be a hostage-taking device after the fact.
🔹 What would NOT change
Deficits would still exist
If spending exceeds tax revenue, Treasury would still issue new securities. That’s just how the accounting system is set up.
Abolishing the limit doesn’t increase spending; it just removes the arbitrary cap.
Treasuries would still be issued
Even without a ceiling, Treasury securities would continue to exist, because they serve as the world’s safest savings asset and are essential to monetary policy.
Inflation risk stays the same
The real economic constraint on federal spending is inflation, not the debt ceiling.
If government spends too much relative to the economy’s capacity, prices rise. That risk is unchanged whether or not there’s a ceiling.
🔹 International comparison
Most advanced economies (UK, Germany, Japan, Canada, etc.) do not have a debt ceiling.
Their governments borrow as needed, automatically authorized by their budget laws.
The U.S. is an outlier in tying itself to a separate, arbitrary cap.
Bottom line:If the U.S. abolished the debt ceiling, the economy would function more smoothly, the risk of self-inflicted default would vanish, and nothing fundamental about deficits or inflation would change.
The fights over “fiscal discipline” would just shift back to the regular budget process, where they logically belong.
RM: The UK, Germany, Japan, and Canada “borrow as needed”? Uh oh. Bit of a problem, there.
ChatGPT: Right — good catch. The phrase “borrow as needed” hides an important distinction.
Let’s be precise:
1. Monetary Sovereigns (UK, Japan, Canada, US)
They issue their own free-floating currency (pound, yen, Canadian dollar, US dollar).
They can never “run out” of their currency, since all their debt is payable in what they themselves create.
Their “borrowing” (issuing government bonds) is really just swapping one government liability (bank reserves) for another (securities).
Insolvency in their own currency is impossible; inflation is the only real limit.
2. Eurozone countries (Germany, France, Italy, etc.)
They don’t issue their own sovereign currency. They use the euro, which is controlled by the European Central Bank (ECB).
When Germany or Italy “borrows,” they’re more like a U.S. state or city — they can genuinely default because they don’t control the euro’s creation.
That’s why Europe has had sovereign debt crises (Greece, 2010s), whereas Japan, with debt >250% of GDP, has not.
So:
UK, Japan, Canada, US → issue their own money; their “borrowing” is voluntary, not necessary.
Germany and other euro countries → non-sovereign users of the euro; they really do rely on markets to buy their debt, and default risk is real.
👉 That’s the “uh oh.” People often lump them together, but the sovereign vs. non-sovereign distinction is crucial.
RM: Visualize an America that did not issue Treasury Securities.
ChatGPT:
1. What happens when the U.S. government spends now
Congress authorizes spending.
Treasury instructs the Fed to credit bank accounts (for Social Security checks, contracts, etc.).
The Fed simply marks up numbers in the banks’ reserve accounts — new dollars created.
To balance the books, Treasury then issues securities (bonds, bills, notes) equal to the deficit.
So: spending creates dollars → securities just “mop up” the excess by converting reserves into bonds.
2. Could the U.S. stop issuing bonds entirely?
Yes. Since the government is the monopoly issuer of dollars, it doesn’t need to borrow its own currency. If Congress allowed it, Treasury could:
Spend as authorized,
Leave the extra dollars as bank reserves in the Fed system,
And skip the bond sales.
The result would be the same net financial assets in the private sector, just held as reserves (zero-interest money) instead of Treasuries (interest-bearing money).
3. Why they don’t do this
Monetary policy tool: Treasuries let the Fed manage interest rates. If only reserves existed, interest rates would fall toward zero unless the Fed paid interest on reserves (which it actually started doing in 2008).
Safe savings asset: Global investors, banks, pensions, and foreign governments want Treasuries. They’re the benchmark risk-free asset of the world. Abolishing them would upend financial markets.
Political optics: Selling bonds makes it look like the government is “borrowing like a household,” which appeals to deficit hawks. It’s a disguise for what’s really just money creation.
4. Real-world examples
Japan: Debt >250% of GDP, yet no crisis, no inflation spiral. Why? Because its “debt” is just yen-denominated government liabilities.
U.S. during COVID (2020–2021): The Fed essentially financed trillions in new spending by creating reserves and buying Treasuries. Functionally, that’s almost the same as direct money creation.
QE (Quantitative Easing): When the Fed buys Treasuries, it just replaces them with reserves — proving Treasuries are optional.
5. Bottom line
Technically: The U.S. could stop issuing Treasuries tomorrow and still spend without limit.
Practically: Treasuries exist because they stabilize financial markets, give the Fed policy tools, and maintain the illusion of “borrowing” discipline.
👉 In other words, Treasury securities are not about funding the government, but about managing the financial system.
RM: Maybe we should stop calling T-securities “debt,” and start calling them “deposits.”
ChatGPT: Exactly — that’s the crux of it.
Calling Treasury securities “debt” makes them sound like a household loan, which is misleading for a currency-issuing government. A more accurate analogy is:
You buy a Treasury bill → you’re just moving your money from a checking account at the Fed (bank reserves) into a savings account at the Fed (a T-security).
At maturity, Treasury pays you back by shifting the balance from your “savings” (security) back to your “checking” (reserve account).
No outside funding required, no solvency risk — just accounting entries.
Why “debt” is misleading
Households and firms borrow because they can run out of money.
The U.S. government can’t — it issues the dollar.
What we call “debt” is just the government’s promise to return your dollars with a bit of interest, not evidence that it’s short on money.
Why “deposits” makes more sense
They’re functionally deposits at the Fed, just with fixed terms and interest.
They serve as a safe savings instrument for the private sector.
They are assets for investors, liabilities for the government, but not in the sense of a household debt.
Bottom line:Yes — calling them Treasury deposits or savings bonds would be far closer to reality than “debt.” The language of “national debt” fuels fear and politics, but economically, it’s just the sum of dollar-denominated deposits held at the Fed.
Everyone, please raise your hands if you would like ChatGPT (or one of its cousins) to replace the ineffective and misinforming congressional Representatives and Senators we currently have.
Perhaps some of the media and college professors as well.
In that event, I could retire from this blog and devote my remaining time to something less frustrating — like rolling a boulder up a hill.
United Airlines’ frequent flyer deficit in 2024 was $298 million, bringing the total frequent flyer debt to $7,441 billion. This is a ticking time bomb.
The $7.4 billion in frequent flyer debt is yet another stunning reminder of the terrible state of United’s finances. Spending miles and receiving miles are woefully out of balance – to the tune of nearly $3 million annually and rising – and instead of addressing this imbalance, United keeps choosing to make things worse.
Except this is all nonsense.
It’s a lift from an August 12, 2025, article by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), which is a regular fountain of nonsense. Here is precisely what the CRFB article said.
“The gross national debt hitting $37 trillion is yet another stunning reminder of the terrible state of federal finances. Spending and revenue are woefully out of balance – to the tune of nearly $2 trillion annually and rising – and instead of addressing this imbalance, Congress keeps choosing to make things worse.”
There are direct parallels between United Airlines’ frequent flyer miles and U.S. federal deficits and debt:
1. Infinite Issuer
United: Can issue as many miles as it wants. There is no operational limit.
Federal Government: Can issue as many dollars as it wants. There is no operational limit.
(Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press or, today, its electronic equivalent, that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost.”)
Neither needs to “get” miles or dollars before creating them. Dollars and mileage credits are not physical; they both are nothing more than bookkeeping notations.
2. Deferred Redemption (a.k.a. “Debt”)
United: When miles are awarded but not yet redeemed, they show up as a liability (“deferred revenue”) — in 2024, that was $7.441 billion.
Federal Government: When the Treasury spends more than it taxes, the difference (the so-called “debt”) is really just outstanding government securities — promises to accept back the dollars it created in the first place. Both a dollar bill and a T-bill are dollar-denominated obligations of a government that can make an infinite number of dollars.
In both cases, these “debts” are just obligations to honor the thing the issuer itself controls.
3. Deficit as Ongoing Flow
United: Each year, miles created exceed miles redeemed — a “miles deficit.” But that’s precisely what keeps the program alive and attractive. If miles were never made in excess, the system could not function.
Imagine what would happen if United were to demand that its customers give back more miles than they received — similar to the federal government running a surplus. The entire system would collapse, just as the economy collapses when the government runs a surplus.
Depressions and Recessions Begin With Federal Surpluses
1804–1812 48% 1807 Depression began in 1807
1817–1821 29% 1819 Depression began in 1819
1823–1836 99% 1837 Depression began in 1837
1852–1857 59% 1857 Depression began in 1857
1867–1873 27% 1873 Depression began in 1873
1880–1893 57% 1893 Depression began in 1893
1920–1930 36% 1929 Depression began in 1929
1947–1948 3.6% 1949 Recession began in 1949
1969–1970 3.4% 1970 Recession began in 1970
1997–2001 15% 2001 Recession began in 2001
Federal Government: Each year, dollars spent typically exceed taxes collected — a “fiscal deficit.” But that’s precisely what keeps the private economy supplied with net financial assets. Without it, economic growth stagnates, and we experience recessions or depressions.
4, Control over Rules and Laws
United has complete control over all the rules about the use of its mileage credits.
The federal government has complete control over all the laws about the use of dollars.
5. Not a Threat
United’s miles: Nobody worries that a growing balance of unredeemed miles will bankrupt the airline. In fact, the mileage program is the airline’s largest profit center. (The airline loses money on flights.)
Redemption is completely under United’s control; it determines how mileage points are used, and predictable breakage occurs. Additionally, United can always issue more points if it wishes.
Federal “debt”: Likewise, it’s not a threat to the U.S. government. The federal government has the infinite ability to pay debts, interests or any other financial obligation denominated in dollars. The danger comes only from artificial limits (e.g., debt ceiling politics), not from the mechanics of issuing dollars.
IN SUMMARY
United’s “mileage debt” is not a financial danger to United. It is a profit center. Likewise, the federal “debt” is not a financial danger to the government. It is a profit center for the economy.
United’s mileage program and the government’s deficits are artifacts of accounting terminology, not solvency constraints. Both have minimal cost and are highly profitable — the former for the airline and the latter for the economy.
The danger isn’t in the numbers—it’s in the myths we build around them.United Airlines’ mileage program and federal finances. United has an infinite supply of mileage credits; the government has an endless supply of dollars. The supply of mileage credits and dollars is entirely controlled by their issuer.
This is an update of the many, many previous posts showing the seemingly never-ending warnings about “federal debt” (that isn’t federal and isn’t debt).
The purpose has been to demonstrate how, year after year, so-called experts claim the U.S. is about to enter catastrophe because federal debt is “too high,” while the experts are proven wrong year after year. The economy grows and grows and is healthier than ever.
I’ve been doing this for over 20 years; the experts have been wrong for over 85 years, and they never seem to learn. While I find it frustrating, I’ve tried to remain civil and merely recite the facts. But now, as I pass my 90th year, and the road ahead is short, I’ve grown impatient with civility, and I’ve decided to call it like it is: BULLSHIT.
Last year, what set me off is a BULLSHIT tweet (or whatever “X” calls them now), from the richest man in the world, who, despite his great wealth, seems to know diddly-squat about federal finance:
No Elon, the U.S. federal government, being Monetarily Sovereign, cannot go bankrupt. Even if tax collections fell to $0, and spending tripled, the federal government could continue to pay all its bills, forever.
The Big Lie in economics is: “Federal taxes fund federal spending.” Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Control the economy by taxing what the government wishes to discourage and by giving tax breaks to those the government wishes to reward (mainly the wealthy).
Assure demand for the U.S. dollar by requiring taxes to be paid in dollars.
That’s it. Taxes do not fund federal spending. Period.
The U.S. federal government is not like state/local governments, not like euro governments, not like businesses, and not like you and me.
It is uniquely Monetarily Sovereign. It cannot, unwillingly, run short of its own sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar. As real experts have said:
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: “A government cannot become insolvent with respect to obligations in its own currency. There is nothing to prevent the federal government from creating as much money as it wants and paying it to somebody. The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print the money to do that.“
Former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke: “The U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. It’s not tax money… We simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account.”
Statement from the St. Louis Fed: “As the sole manufacturer of dollars, whose debt is denominated in dollars, the U.S. government can never become insolvent, i.e., unable to pay its bills. In this sense, the government is not dependent on credit markets to remain operational.”
Press Conference: Mario Draghi, President of the Monetarily Sovereign ECB, January 9, 2014. Question: Can the ECB ever run out of money? Mario Draghi: Technically, no. We cannot run out of money.
Fed Chairman Jerome Powell stated, “As a central bank, we have the ability to create money digitally.”
Paul Krugman (Nobel Prize–winning economist): “The U.S. government is not like a household. It literally prints money, and it can’t run out.” — Numerous op-eds/blog posts
Hyman Minsky (Economist, key influence on MMT) “The government can always finance its spending by creating money.”
Eric Tymoigne (Economist) “A sovereign government does not need to collect taxes or issue bonds to finance spending. It finances directly through money creation.”
Because the U.S. federal government has the infinite ability to create its sovereign currency, the U.S. dollar, it never borrows dollars.
Contrary to popular wisdom, T-bills, T-notes, and T-bonds do not represent borrowing. They are deposits, the purpose of which is to provide a safe place to store unused dollars and to help the Fed control interest rates.
The government never touches those dollars, which remain the property of the depositors. Not only can our Monetarily Sovereign government not run short of dollars, but federal deficits are necessary to grow the economy, as evidenced by the formula: Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Nonfederal Spending + Net Exports.
The formula shows that economic growth requires federal deficit spending growth.
The record highs of federal debt (red) match the record highs of Gross Domestic Product (blue).
The next graph shows that reduced deficit growth (red) is associated with recessions (vertical gray bars), and increased deficit growth cures recessions.
When we don’t have sufficient federal deficits, we have depressions and recessions:
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.
Periodically, we publish yet another shrieking claim that the U.S. federal debt is “unsustainable”and a “ticking time bomb.”
This lie has been told to you every year (really, almost every day) since 1940, and that bomb has never exploded, nor will it.
Rather than repeat the entire list of the thousands of lies to which you have been subject, I will list samples here as a reference and add periodically, at the end, new “federal debt is a ticking time bomb“BULLSHIT claims as I encounter them.
Read these and see that even respected economists replace facts with BULLSHIT:
(Yes, the record of bad predictions goes all the way back to 1940. It probably goes back longer, but I don’t have the examples.)
September 26, 1940, New York Times: The federal budget was a “ticking time-bomb which can eventually destroy the American system,” said Robert M. Hanes, president of the American Bankers Association.
By 1960, the debt was “threatening the country’s fiscal future,” said Secretary of Commerce Frederick H. Mueller. (“The enormous cost of various Federal programs is a time-bomb threatening the country’s fiscal future, Secretary of Commerce Frederick H. Mueller warned here yesterday.”)BULLSHIT
In 1984: AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland said. “It’s a time bomb ticking away.”BULLSHIT
In 1985: “The federal deficit is a ticking time bomb, and it’s about to blow up,” U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell. (Remember him?)BULLSHIT
Later in 1985: Los Angeles Times: “We labeled the deficit a ‘ticking time bomb‘ that threatens to permanently undermine the strength and vitality of the American economy.”BULLSHIT
In 1987: Richmond Times-Dispatch – Richmond, VA: “100TH CONGRESS FACING U.S. DEFICIT’ TIME BOMB‘”BULLSHIT
Later in 1987: The Dallas Morning News: “A fiscal time bomb is slowly ticking that, if not defused, could explode into a financial crisis within the next few years for the federal government.”BULLSHIT
In 1989: FORTUNE Magazine: “A TIME BOMB FOR U.S. TAXPAYERS“BULLSHIT
In 1992: The Pantagraph – Bloomington, Illinois: “I have seen where politicians in Washington have expressed little or no concern about this ticking time bomb they have helped to create, that being the enormous federal budget deficit, approaching $4 trillion.“BULLSHIT
Later in 1992, Ross Perot said, “Our great nation is sitting right on top of a ticking time bomb. We have a national debt of $4 trillion.”BULLSHIT
In 1995: Kansas City Star: “Concerned citizens. . . regard the national debt as a ticking time bomb poised to explode with devastating consequences at some future date.”BULLSHIT
In 2004: Bradenton Herald: “A NATION AT RISK: TWIN DEFICIT A TICKING TIME BOMB” BULLSHIT
In 2005: Providence Journal: “Some lawmakers see the Medicare drug benefit for what it is: a ticking time bomb.” BULLSHIT
In 2006: NewsMax.com, “We have to worry about the deficit . . . when we combine it with the trade deficit, we have a real ticking time bomb in our economy,” said Mrs. Clinton. BULLSHIT
In 2007: USA Today: “Like a ticking time bomb, the national debt is an explosion waiting to happen.” BULLSHIT
In 2010: Heritage Foundation: “Why the National Debt is a Ticking Time Bomb. Interest rates on government bonds are virtually guaranteed to jump over the next few years. BULLSHIT
In 2010: Reason Alert: “. . . the time bomb that’s ticking under the federal budget like a Guy Fawkes’ powder keg.” BULLSHIT
In 2011: Washington Post, Lori Montgomery:”. . . defuse the biggest budgetary time bombs that are set to explode.” BULLSHIT
June 19, 2013: Chamber of Commerce: Safety net spending is a ‘time bomb’, by Jim Tankersley: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is worried that not enough Americans are worried about social safety net spending.The nation’s largest business lobbying group launched a renewed effort Wednesday to reduce projected federal spending on safety-net programs, labeling them a “ticking time bomb” that, left unchanged, “will bankrupt this nation.” BULLSHIT
On June 15, 2014: CBN News: “The United States of Debt: A Ticking Time Bomb” BULLSHIT
On January 27, 2017: America’s “debt bomb is going to explode.” That’s according to financial strategist Peter Schiff. Schiff said that while low interest rates had helped keep a lid on U.S. debt, it couldn’t be contained for much longer. Interest rates and inflation are rising, creditors will demand higher premiums, and the country is headed “off the edge of a cliff.” BULLSHIT
February 16, 2018 America’s Debt Bomb By Andrew Soergel, Senior Reporter: Conservatives and deficit hawks are hurling criticism at Washington for deepening America’s debt hole. BULLSHIT
April 10, 2019,The National Debt: America’s Ticking Time Bomb. TIL Journal. Entire nations can go bankrupt. One prominent example was the *nation of Greece which was threatened with insolvency a decade ago. Greece survived the economic crisis because the European Union and the IMF bailed the nation out. BULLSHIT
SEP 12, 2019, Our national ticking time bomb, By BILL YEARGIN SPECIAL TO THE SUN SENTINEL | At some point, investors will become concerned about lending to a debt-riddled U.S., which will result in having to offer higher interest rates to attract the money. Even with rates low today, interest expense is the federal government’s third-highest expenditure following the elderly and military. The U.S. already borrows all the money it uses to pay its interest expense, sort of like a Ponzi scheme. Lack of investor confidence will only make this problem worse. BULLSHIT
JANUARY 06, 2020, National debt is a time bomb, BY MARK MANSPERGER, Tri City Herald | The increase in the U.S. deficit last year was about $1.1 trillion, bringing our total national debt to more than $23 trillion! This fiscal year, the deficit is forecasted to be even higher, and when the economy eventually slows down, our annual deficits could be pushing $2 trillion a year! This is financial madness. there’s not going to be a drastic cut in federal expenditures — that is, until we go broke — nor are we going to “grow our way” out of this predicament. Therefore, to gain control of this looming debt, we’re going to have to raise taxes. BULLSHIT
February 14, 2020, OMG! It’s February 14, 2020, and the national debt is still a ticking time bomb! The national debt: A ticking time bomb?America is “headed toward a crisis,” said Tiana Lowe in WashingonExaminer.com. The Treasury Department reported last week that the federal deficit swelled to more than $1 trillion in 2019 for the first time since 2012. Even more alarming was the report from the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicting that $1 trillion deficits will continue for the next 10 years, eventually reaching $1.7 trillion in 2030 BULLSHIT
August 29, 2020, LOS ANGELES, California: America’s mountain of debt is a ticking time bomb. The United States not only looks ill, but also dead broke. To offset the pandemic-induced “Great Cessation,” the U.S. Federal Reserve and Congress have marshalled staggering sums of stimulus spending out of fear that the economy would otherwise plunge to 1930s soup kitchen levels. Assuming that America eventually defeats COVID-19 and does not devolve into a Terminator-like dystopia, how will it avoid the approaching fiscal cliff and national bankruptcy? BULLSHIT
April 16, 2021, NATIONAL POLICY: ECONOMY AND TAXES / MARK ALEXANDER / The National Debt Clock: A Ticking Time Bomb: At the moment, our national debt exceeds $28 TRILLION — about 80% held as public debt and the rest as intragovernmental debt. That is $225,000 per taxpayer. Federal annual spending this year is almost $8 trillion, and more than half of that is deficit spending — piling on the national debt. BULLSHIT
Now, the national debt is approaching $31 trillion,which is $12 trillion more than when Donald Trump took office in 2017, and more than half of that debt was tacked on in his final year. Then we’ve had the disastrous year and a half of Joe Biden. Now, the Fed is hiking its rates, and that spells even more trouble for the national debt and the economy at large. BULLSHIT
December 4, 2022 America’s ticking time bomb: $66 trillion in debt that could crash the economy By Stephen Moore, The national debt is $31 trillion when including Social Security’s and Medicare’s unfunded liabilities. Wake up, America. BULLSHIT
That ticking sound you’re hearing is the American debt time bomb that, with each passing day, is getting precariously close to detonating and crashing the US economy.BULLSHIT
April 22, 2023The Debt Ceiling Debate Is About More Than Debt, Jim Tankersley, WASHINGTON — Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California has repeatedly said that he and his fellow House Republicans are refusing to raise the nation’s borrowing limit,and risking economic catastrophe, to force a reckoning on America’s $31 trillion national debt. “Without exaggeration, America’s debt is a ticking time bomb that will detonate unless we take serious, responsible action,” he said this week. BULLSHIT
November 3, 2023 The Fuse on America’s Debt Bomb Just Got Shorter,J Antoni Heritage Organization. The Treasury is now on track to borrow almost as much in just six months as it did in the previous 12 months. That’s nearly a doubling of the deficit. Because the federal debt is $33.7 trillion, just a 1 percent increase in yields adds $337 billion to the annual cost of servicing the debt over time. Absent spending reform, eventually no one will be willing to hold the bomb anymore, and the yields on U.S. debt will begin to resemble those in Argentina. BULLSHIT
February 2, 2024How Florida can help defuse the nation’s debt bomb By BARRY W. POULSON,professor emeritus of economics at the University of Colorado Boulder and DAVID M. WALKER,former comptroller general of the United States. Washington’s out-of-control spending, combined with fiscal and monetary policies have resulted in trillion-dollar-plus annual deficits, over $34 trillion in federal debt, over $125 trillion in total federal liabilities and unfunded obligations, and excess inflation. Excessive spending and loose monetary policy increase inflation in the short term, and mounting debt burdens serve to reduce future economic growth and shift the economic burden and consequences of mounting debt burdens to future generations. BULLSHIT
February 8, 2024Legendary investor Paul Tudor Jones says a ‘debt bomb’ is about to go off in the U.S.: ‘We’re fast-pouring consumption like crazy’. The U.S. economy may seem like it’s firing on all cylinders, but underneath the surface, a “debt bomb” could be on the verge of exploding, according to billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Tudor Jones. The esteemed investor said in an interview with CNBC that he couldn’t deny the economy was strong, but that it was actually “on steroids” due to massive government spending and borrowing. BULLSHIT
Jones is not the only one to call attention to the growing deficit issue in the U.S. On Sunday, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell took a rare dive into politics, telling CBS’s 60 Minutes that the national debt was “growing faster than the economy,” and calling for lawmakers to get the federal government “back on a sustainable fiscal path.” Meanwhile, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has said she is not yet worried about the increasing national debt as long as the government keeps in check the net payments it makes on its debt relative to GDP. BULLSHIT
Those payments are projected to rise from 2.5% last year to 2.9% next year, according to the Office of Management and Budget, below their level in the early 1990s. Jones told CNBC that the strong economy could postpone the effects of the government’s deficit spending, but only for a little while. “The only question is … when does that manifest itself in markets?” he added. BULLSHIT
“It could be this year, it could be next year. Productivity may mask, and it might be three or four years from now. But clearly, clearly we’re on an unsustainable path.” BULLSHIT
June 21, 2024 My Weekly Column: Our debt crisis is a ticking time bomb by Randy Feenstra: On June 18, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) – the government agency tasked with monitoring our nation’s fiscal health – confirmed my serious concerns with President Biden’s reckless spending agenda. BULLSHIT
His administration’s fiscal policies have not only caused cumulative inflation to skyrocket by over 20% since he took office, but they have also accelerated our accumulation of debt to levels that are beyond unsustainable. Instead of changing course, he recently released his budget for Fiscal Year 2025, which has a $ 7.3 trillion price tag and looks to raise taxes on our families, farmers, and businesses to the tune of $5.5 trillion. BULLSHIT
The CBO estimates that his debt “cancellation” policies will cost taxpayers nearly $400 billion over the next ten years. I strongly oppose these bailouts. Iowans who never attended college, entered the workforce early, or helped put their kids through school should not be forced to pick up the tab for President Biden’s costly and unfair executive orders. BULLSHIT
July 22, 2024Federal debt is the ticking bomb in your wallet By E.J. Antoni a public finance economist and the Richard F. Aster fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and a senior fellow at Unleash. The federal government is already running $2 trillion annual deficits, driving up interest on the debt exponentially. The time bomb of federal finance has already started ticking down. BULLSHIT
October 10, 2024, U.S. Debt Bomb is ticking louder by Nick Beams, World Socialist Website. The immediate economic question is: when will the rise in US government debt give rise to a crisis for the US dollar, a major meltdown in the market for debt, the Treasury bond market, or some other area of the financial system? Government debt is now heading towards $36 trillion and increasing at a pace that is regarded as “unsustainable” by Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, along with many others. BULLSHIT
May 30, 2025 DEFICIT DANGER. BOJ governor warns US debt time bomb outweighs trade war risks. By Dashan Hendricks. BANK of Jamaica (BOJ) governor Richard Byles has issued a stark warning that America’s spiralling budget deficits now present a more severe danger to the global economy than ongoing trade conflicts, as the world’s largest economy grapples with its third credit rating downgrade since 2011. His comments follow Moody’s recent decision to cut the US government’s credit rating from its top-tier Aaa to Aa1, citing concerns over its US$36-trillion debt burden, which now exceeds the nation’s US$30 trillion GDP. BULLSHIT
August 12, 2025 Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) Nancy Mace’s Debt Alarm Tweet was hit with a fact-check after warning on social media that the U.S. national debt had reached $37 trillion, calling it “a bill our kids can’t afford to pay.” The post, shared on Twitter, received over 2 million views and framed the soaring debt as a dire generational crisis.
(No kids will pay the national debt.) It’s not debt, and it’s paid by returning the dollars already in storage.
———————–//———————–
The above articles contain the same old BULLSHIT(“unsustainable,” “cost taxpayers,” “our kids will pay”) that they’ve been telling us since 1940. To buttress their lies, they make false comparisons to family finances or the finances of other monetarily non-sovereign entities like businesses or euro nations.
They have been wrong, repeatedly wrong, for all those years. If we wait long enough, perhaps something might happen to prove them right, perhaps in a thousand years? Today, this makes “only” 85 years of the debt nuts’ BULLSHIT.
The federal deficit yields economic growth year after year. When deficits are insufficient, we have had recessions, which were cured by increased deficits.
If respected economists keep predicting something terrible is imminent year after year, yet exactly the opposite happens, at what point do they reexamine their beliefs?
At what point does the public say, “Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me repeatedly for 85 years; shame on me. This is just a steaming pile of BULLSHIT“?
Whew, I feel a little better, now — but just a little.
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 