Beyond Labels

With the U.S. debt ceiling back in the news, we’ll revisit this topic, together with the overall level of U.S. government debt ($31 trillion) and the deficit spending that increases the debt total.

Among the specific questions we may discuss are:

Debt Ceiling

• What is it, and how does it work?
• If increasing the debt ceiling as it is approached is as pro forma as Democrats claim, why do we even have one? What are the downsides to eliminating it?

Federal Debt

NY Times: How the U.S. Government Amassed $31 Trillion in Debt

• How should we think about the amount of debt incurred (or guaranteed) by the federal government?
• What’s the “right” level of debt? A common comparative metric is the debt-to-GDP ratio.
• At an abstract level, which activities should be debt-financed, and which should be pay-as-you-go?
• How should debt-like obligations, like pensions (or, in the case of the U.S. federal accounts, the bigger items like Social Security and Medicare), be factored into our maximum debt calculus? Here’s an opinion piece on the subject–whether you agree with his views or not, his basic math is (I believe) correct.

Federal Deficits

• How should we think about federal budget deficits?
• Do the rules for calculating the fiscal impacts of bills make sense? [See the opinion link to The Hill.)

Does Any of This Matter? (MMT)

There’s a school of thought out there that government debt doesn’t matter, since the government (or Fed) can print money. So it’s OK to run deficits and borrow as long as inflation is under control. This may be a bit esoteric for some, but Modern Monetary Theory generally comes up (at least in recent years) whenever someone expresses concern about our level of debt, so it’s worth understanding the basics. Suffice it to say, there seem to be a lot more MMT skeptics than proponents.

The library is closed. We’ll discuss this week’s topic next Monday.

Tomorrow (if the library is open) we’ll discuss–in person or virtually for those of you who don’t want to brave the weather–the attached article from The Atlantic:
Monuments to the Unthinkable, Clint Smith (MSN link)

The article explores how the Holocaust has been memorialized, then explores how analogous “unthinkables” in the U.S. (like slavery and the slave trade) have been memorialized.

In discussing the article and the subject in general, my guess is that we’ll cover questions such as the following:

• How do we (or some subsequent generation) decide what events or circumstances should be memorialized? Or are there no clear criteria and the decision is left to each generation/society at the moment?
• What is the most sensitive, appropriate way to construct a memorial–especially one remembering past atrocities or other difficult periods of history?
• Should memorials’ objectives be to educate? To stir emotions? To elicit resolve not to repeat the sins of the past? All of the above? “It depends?”
• Should historical figures be judged primarily in the context of the norms of their own time, by modern standards, or by a combination of the two? (This is obviously a current point of debate for several historical American figures who were celebrated for decades or centuries but whose lives are now viewed as being more complex than most of us were taught in primary/secondary school.)

The discussion may also head into broader, but related, areas such as:

• Aside from documenting and memorializing/remembering past atrocities, what other steps are appropriate (such as “reparations”)?
• If reparations are appropriate, what guidelines should be used to construct the plan? For a given situation:
  • Who should benefit from reparations? (As the links to the past fade over time?)
  • Who should pay reparations?
  • What form and magnitude should reparations take?

I look forward to hearing a variety of perspectives on this complex and, often, emotional subject.

Check tomorrow morning to see if the library is open.

If you aren’t comfortable traveling in the morning’s weather, you can get a Zoom link through the library’s events calendar or by calling library staff.