Debt - Revision history

ArchiveBot: Repoint 2 dead mises.org links to the archived original (automated; see Austrian Economics Wiki:Link repointing)

2026-08-16T04:21:50Z

Repoint 2 dead mises.org links to the archived original (automated; see Austrian Economics Wiki:Link repointing)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:21, 16 August 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:
	==Links==		==Links==
	* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia		* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia
	* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [~~http~~://~~mises~~.org/books/~~debt_benn.pdf~~ Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [https://freecapitalists.org/books/debt-private-and-public-good-and-bad/ Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010
	* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/3925 Productive Debt versus Unproductive Debt] by Doug French, December 2009		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/3925 Productive Debt versus Unproductive Debt] by Doug French, December 2009
	* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4151 The Global Debt Crisis] by Marius Gustavson, March 2010		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4151 The Global Debt Crisis] by Marius Gustavson, March 2010
	* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003
	* [~~http~~://~~mises~~.org/journals/rae/~~pdf~~/~~RAE9_2_7.pdf~~ Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996		* [https://freecapitalists.org/journals/rae/rae9-2-7/ Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996
	* [http://mises.ca/posts/blog/shadow-lending-hides-the-feds-distortions/ Shadow Lending Hides the Fed’s Distortions] by Doug French, October 2013		* [http://mises.ca/posts/blog/shadow-lending-hides-the-feds-distortions/ Shadow Lending Hides the Fed’s Distortions] by Doug French, October 2013

	[[Category:Economic concepts]]		[[Category:Economic concepts]]

ArchiveBot: Repoint 5 dead mises.org links to the archived original (automated; see Austrian Economics Wiki:Link repointing)

2026-08-16T04:08:28Z

Repoint 5 dead mises.org links to the archived original (automated; see Austrian Economics Wiki:Link repointing)

Pestergaines: /* Links */ +res

2013-10-26T11:56:32Z

Links: +res

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:56, 26 October 2013
Line 29:		Line 29:
	* [http://mises.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003		* [http://mises.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003
	* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996		* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996
			* [http://mises.ca/posts/blog/shadow-lending-hides-the-feds-distortions/ Shadow Lending Hides the Fed’s Distortions] by Doug French, October 2013

	[[Category:Economic concepts]]		[[Category:Economic concepts]]

FormerContributor-78162cb3: Reverted edits by Johnmartin03 (talk) to last revision by Nathan Larson

2012-10-11T12:56:21Z

Reverted edits by Johnmartin03 (talk) to last revision by Nathan Larson

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:56, 11 October 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	{{Main\|Public debt}}		{{Main\|Public debt}}
	In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

	~~[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]~~


	From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

Johnmartin03 at 12:53, 11 October 2012

2012-10-11T12:53:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:53, 11 October 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	{{Main\|Public debt}}		{{Main\|Public debt}}
	In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

			[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]


	From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

FormerContributor-78162cb3: Reverted edits by Johnmartin03 (talk) to last revision by Pesterbot

2012-10-11T11:53:20Z

Reverted edits by Johnmartin03 (talk) to last revision by Pesterbot

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:53, 11 October 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:
	==Productive debt==		==Productive debt==
	The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.		The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.

	~~[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]~~

	In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>		In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>

Johnmartin03 at 07:29, 11 October 2012

2012-10-11T07:29:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:29, 11 October 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:
	==Productive debt==		==Productive debt==
	The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.		The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.

			[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]

	In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>		In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>

Pesterbot: /* Links */External Links to Links, replaced: ==External links== → ==Links==

2011-06-21T18:38:32Z

Links: External Links to Links, replaced: ==External links== → ==Links==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:38, 21 June 2011
Line 22:		Line 22:
	{{Reflist}}		{{Reflist}}

	==~~External links~~==		==Links==
	* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia		* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia
	* [http://mises.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [http://mises.org/books/debt_benn.pdf Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010		* [http://mises.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [http://mises.org/books/debt_benn.pdf Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010

Pestergaines: +link to Default

2011-02-16T12:55:17Z

+link to Default

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:55, 16 February 2011
Line 13:		Line 13:

	From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

			==Default==
			Default is the failure to pay back debt.

			{{Main\|Default}}

	==References==		==References==

Forgottenman: /* External links */Category:Economical Concepts --> Category:Economic concepts using AWB

2010-11-09T18:01:12Z

External links: Category:Economical Concepts --> Category:Economic concepts using AWB

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:01, 9 November 2010
Line 24:		Line 24:
	* [http://mises.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003		* [http://mises.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003
	* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996		* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996
	[[Category:~~Economical Concepts~~]]		[[Category:Economic concepts]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:56, 11 October 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	{{Main\|Public debt}}		{{Main\|Public debt}}
	In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

	~~[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]~~


	From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:53, 11 October 2012
Line 11:		Line 11:
	{{Main\|Public debt}}		{{Main\|Public debt}}
	In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		In 1720s has the Prime Minister [[Wikipedia:Robert Walpole\|Sir Robert Walpole]] introduced the [[Wikipedia:Sinking fund\|sinking fund]], a funding system designed to pay down England's [[public debt]]. Taxes, which had before been laid on for limited periods, were rendered perpetual, and the fund should not be used for any other purpose. The government obtained a reduction on the interest of the public debt. The savings were added to the fund and it was for some time regularly applied to the discharge of debt. But soon, the principle of an inviolable sinking fund was abandoned. During the wars which were waged while it subsisted, the whole of its produce was applied to the expense of the war; and even in time of peace, large sums were abstracted from it for current services. The sinking fund has greatly increased debt instead of diminishing it.<ref name="Ricardo_debt">David Ricardo. [http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=205&chapter=38605&layout=html&Itemid=27 "Funding System An Article in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica 1820], Part of: The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. 4 Pamphlets and Papers 1815-1823; 11 vols (Sraffa ed.). Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

			[http://www.kwikcash.co.uk quick cash]


	From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>		From then on, government debt never needed be repaid. It was enough to create a regular and dependable source of revenue and use it to pay the annual interest and the principal of maturing bonds. Then for every retired bond would be sold a new one. In this way, a national debt could be made perpetual. Walpole's system proved its worth in financing British overseas expansion and imperial wars in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The government could now maintain a huge peacetime naval and military establishment, readily fund new wars, and need not retrench afterward. The British Empire was built on more than the blood of its soldiers and sailors; it was built on debt. The ever-growing debt had the ancillary benefit of attaching the interests of wealthy creditors to the government. This example was not lost on some leaders of the infant American Republic, [[Wikipedia:Alexander Hamilton\|Alexander Hamilton]] for one.<ref name="Trask_debt">H.A. Scott Trask. [http://mises.org/article.aspx?control=1419 "Perpetual Debt: From the British Empire to the American Hegemon"], Mises Daily, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-24.</ref>

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:08, 16 August 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:
	The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.		The distinction between "'''productive'''" and "'''consumptive'''" debt is not always be clear and exact and, therefore, may give rise to much controversy, it is significant as to motive and effect. A debt incurred for productive purposes, e.g., a commercial or industrial [[investment]] designed to earn future incomes, may cover its interest costs and even yield entrepreneurial [[profit]]s.

	In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [~~http~~://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>		In contrast, new debt in the form of a second mortgage on a home may finance the purchase of a vacation home, new furniture or another automobile, or even a luxury cruise around the world. The debtor may call it "productive," but it surely does not create [[capital]], i.e., build shops or factories or manufacture tools and dies that enhance the productivity of human [[labor]]. It actually may consume capital and thereby depress standards of living.<ref name="Sennholz_Debt">Hans F. Sennholz. [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=468 "Deep in Debt"], The Free Market, Volume 24, Number 1, January 2004. Referenced 2010-06-06.</ref>

	==Public debt==		==Public debt==
Line 24:		Line 24:
	==Links==		==Links==
	* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia		* [[Wikipedia:Debt\|Debt]] on Wikipedia
	* [~~http~~://mises.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [http://mises.org/books/debt_benn.pdf Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4326 The People Who Borrow] from [http://mises.org/books/debt_benn.pdf Debt: Private and Public, Good and Bad] (pdf) by Sir Ernest Benn, June 2010
	* [~~http~~://mises.org/daily/3925 Productive Debt versus Unproductive Debt] by Doug French, December 2009		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/3925 Productive Debt versus Unproductive Debt] by Doug French, December 2009
	* [~~http~~://mises.org/daily/4151 The Global Debt Crisis] by Marius Gustavson, March 2010		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/4151 The Global Debt Crisis] by Marius Gustavson, March 2010
	* [~~http~~://mises.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003		* [https://mises.freecapitalists.org/daily/1328 The Roots of the Federal Debt] by Mises.org, September 2003
	* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996		* [http://mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE9_2_7.pdf Who Owes What, and To Whom? Public Debt, Ricardian Equivalence, and Governmental Form] (pdf) by Richard E. Wagner, 1996
	* [http://mises.ca/posts/blog/shadow-lending-hides-the-feds-distortions/ Shadow Lending Hides the Fed’s Distortions] by Doug French, October 2013		* [http://mises.ca/posts/blog/shadow-lending-hides-the-feds-distortions/ Shadow Lending Hides the Fed’s Distortions] by Doug French, October 2013

	[[Category:Economic concepts]]		[[Category:Economic concepts]]