← Back to context

Comment by s1artibartfast

17 days ago

Yeah, national debt is splattered all around the US economy, but that doesn't mean it is uniform, or the payers and recipients are the same in terms of participation, returns, or even time.

Foundationally, national debt is about passing costs into the future, which also creates another huge dichotomy in payers and beneficiaries. Minimal federal spending is on growth, so isn't really about investment as how much value can be extracted from one group to another, largely, but not entirely overlapping group.

> but that doesn't mean it is uniform, or the payers and recipients are the same in terms of participation, returns, or even time.

I’m not sure if I’m following, but a (let’s say) 20% cut to the value of an average retiree’s pension account will hurt much _more_ than the same cut to a diversified wealthy person. This is simply because poorer people are affected more by fixed costs. I don’t see where the populist angle comes in. Shouldn’t the populist angle be about targeting the “elite” specifically?