Blonde and Co.,
The US Government isn't unlike any other business in that it's possible to carry debt and still be a sound business. Most people are used to viewing debt through the lens of their personal finances (ie: credit card debt, student loans, etc = all dreadful).
In business, debt can be a good thing. The US government gets their debt on the cheap, too. When people (or China) buys bonds, the government really isn't giving them a very good interest rate. In other words, there are plenty of better investments to make than loaning the government money via bonds. However, since people buy bonds, the government is getting into debt without it costing too much.
Put it this way, if you knew of something to invest in that you expected to have a 15-20% return, and someone was willing to loan you money at 3%... it would make sense to do it, right? So while, yes, you're "going into debt", you expect it to be a net positive in the long run.
I'm not saying the government gets that good of return on their ventures. Certainly, in the case of the Iraq war, they received a horribly negative return. But take this housing bailout... they could make a lot of money off of holding on to these undervalued mortgages and waiting for the market to regain its sanity.
I guess the moral of the story is: don't let the word "debt" be a red flag in you mind that is synonymous with "bad". Without debt (which is what Ron Paul wants the world to operate like under the gold standard), we'd basically just be back to having to barter our way through life. The world would be much less efficient and far less of an enjoyable place to live.
|