The government guarantees/subsidizes bad investments and then the advocates for these bad investments try to get the government to write off their debts. This is true in student loans, housing mortgages, and too big to fail corporations.
True, new people turn 18 everyday, but more and more of their income goes into paying for higher rents/mortgages, student loans, and other expenses, leaving less for discretionary spending. A reform to the education system (less college more trade schools, etc.) could allow young people to get a better ROI on their time and finances, as well as the government’s subsidy. The government is propping up failing universities. In housing, the government bailout of lenders that offered mortgages to people they knew couldn’t pay led to the 2008 economic crisis. Ultimately, it required legislation to stop these practices, but the damage had been done.
Ultimately, the rising debt will need to be paid back with higher taxes, which will eat away at the productivity of the average taxpayer. Perhaps the government expects population growth to outpace the debt burden.
thats not even remotely true or how it works. and this discussion is going to be so long that i am not ready to write paragraphs over paragraphs. but US is the issuer of its own debt and the debt is issued in US dollars. the government can always print its money to pay off its debt. does require to raise taxes all the way
and even if the taxes are raised what do u think govts going to do twith the taxes? its going to spend and its spending becomes someones incomes and that income is going to be spent somewhere which becomes someones elses income. and so liquidity flows in the system again