For Christians, the Bible is explicit about our obligations to our children. “Children are not responsible to provide for their parents but parents for their children,” wrote St. Paul to the Corinthian Church. He went on to assert that one who fails to provide for his family “has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (I Timothy 5:8.) The obligation to pay our lawful debts runs even deeper, going all the way back to the Ten Commandments. Defaulting on one’s debts is at least lying if not stealing.
Yet, Americans appear to be violating both of these great religious teachings at warp speed.
How are we doing it? By continuing to spend more and pay less with our national government. Specifically, we are $9 trillion in debt, with the figure rising at the rate of about half a billion dollars a day. The interest alone on the national debt amounts to more than $230 billion a year, or 8% of the federal budget.
Why is this a moral issue? Because these are real dollars that must eventually be paid back. If not by us, by our children and our grandchildren.
Reference to this article was made on one of the C-span call-in political shows and my first thought that KSH would probably post it. What was unsurprising and yet disappointing was the thoughtless partisanship that addressed this subject. I would have to question some of the authors’ analysis and assertions about economics but the question about the morality is something that needs to be answered. Recently, Senator Tom Coburn raised the issue with a hyperbolic comparison to abortion, but in spite of that National Debt is still an issue with more than an economic component. My wife and I are both advocates along with many others such as Canon Keith Brown in promoting things like Crown Ministries that fosters an awareness of the theological component of handling money. My hesitancy in commenting further is a function of time but also expertise. I am hoping that those with real solid intelligence with make reference to this subject
Surely one of the great leaps forward of Western society was the invention of credit? Until the Reformation credit was condemned as usury. To this day, strict Muslims will go to great lengths to avoid taking interest on a loan. The development of a credit/loan/equity mentality went hand in hand with the development of banking institutions, and the creation of a society where there could be trust and dependability extended far into the future. The issue would seem to be whether the amount owing has become dangerously high. Certainly the global (ie whole) figure is staggering. However, against this I would have thought that classical economic theory would have said that we would know this was at a dangerous level if there was accompanying inflation. Which there is not.
Simply more liberal mindset exposed. Agreed the federal deficit is too high. However congress (that’s with a little ‘c’, no big men there) is unable to curb their appetite for pork barrel spending. The ‘voodoo economics’ that the author disparages is well refuted by the ‘Laffer’ curve model. Keynesian economics is no longer a valid model. Liberals propose the ‘communist’ model to take the place of the ‘capitalistic’ model. Stefano hit the nail on the head with the Crown Ministries model for individuals and families. Perhaps congress could actually look into that. And don’t get me started on the thousands of pages of US Tax code that college graduates can’t even understand.