In today’s political landscape, few issues resonate as strongly across party lines as the urgent need for fiscal responsibility. Both Barack Obama and Donald Trump campaigned on commitments to reduce the ever-burgeoning national debt.
Yet, regardless of party affiliation, one constant remains: the national debt not only persists but escalates.
We find ourselves in this predicament again. Trump’s so-called “big, beautiful bill” threatens to inflate the already staggering US debt. Notably, several Republican senators, including Rand Paul from Kentucky, are vocally opposing this endless spending spree. Even Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, characterized the proposal as a “disgusting abomination” as he departed the White House.
This issue extends well beyond any single administration. For decades, a chorus of economists has raised alarms about the growing US debt, while politicians have defaulted on their pledges to address it. The debt continues to inflate in defiance of these promises.
In 2008, Obama insisted on the campaign trail that Washington must start “taking responsibility for every dime that it spends,” with the national debt hovering around $14.46 trillion.
Fast forward to 2015: Trump claimed he would “bring it down big league and quickly,” as the debt had swelled to approximately $24.07 trillion. By last year, it skyrocketed to a staggering $35.46 trillion.
Wall Street is now gripped by unease, teetering on the brink of panic. Billionaire investor Ray Dalio has called on Trump to confront the deficit—the gap between government spending and tax revenues—with dire warnings of impending crisis. Dalio ominously stated that the situation may lead to a “heart attack” for the economy within mere years.
Instead of addressing this looming threat, Trump seems distracted. While pushing for massive tax cuts, which impartial analysts predict could add trillions to the national debt, he dispatched Musk to streamline government spending.
A recent downgrade from Moody’s has explicitly underscored the crisis, stripping the U.S. of its final top-tier credit rating. The agency’s assessment noted the unsustainable trajectory of our debts and deficits.
Moody’s observed that the persistent refusal of U.S. administrations and Congress to address massive fiscal deficits and escalating interest costs is alarming. Their prediction indicates that entitlement spending will continue to rise while government revenues stagnate, leading to greater fiscal woes.
Legally, there exists a debt ceiling—a limit on federal borrowing. Introduced in 1939 at a mere $45 billion, this ceiling has become a battleground in Congress, with ongoing struggles to raise or suspend it, often diverting attention from the critical issue of spending accountability.
This back-and-forth has not only raised doubts about U.S. debt as a reliable investment but has led some to argue for the complete abolition of the debt ceiling itself.
after newsletter promotion
Moody’s further elaborated that the burden of federal debt, which was approximately 98% of GDP last year, could reach an alarming 134% by 2035. This trajectory is unsustainable and threatens our economic stability.
Owen Zidar, an economics professor at Princeton, astutely points out that “talk is cheap.” What truly matters are the tangible policies in place, or lack thereof. Priorities should align with responsible deficit reduction rather than expensive boondoggles.
Historically, wise stewardship of fiscal resources characterized the Clinton administration, making tough choices about spending. In contrast, the added costs of tax cuts and unnecessary military engagements during the Bush administration exacerbated our current debt crisis.
Presidents have often reassured investors regarding their concerns about growing debt. Obama himself warned that on our current trajectory, accumulating debt could lead to job losses and profound economic harm.
Trump’s unpredictability, identifying himself as the “king of debt” and even suggesting partial repayment during his first presidential campaign, introduces new uncertainties. Recently, he declared that the debt limit should be abolished to avert an “Economic catastrophe.”
As we grapple with these challenges, it is essential to recognize that an unpredictable administration raises grave concerns, especially when fiscal fundamentals are unstable. The move towards personal responsibility and accountability in government is not merely a choice; it is an imperative for ensuring a stable future.
