For adults only: Can you find a flaw in this logic?

[Raisin Caine]

Actually you are wrong. In forming an argument, all arguments are generally based upon a set of assumptions. If the assumptions are wrong, then the argument falls apart. There is no need to deal with a every point from A to Z if A and B are wrong.


Now it may indeed be that your conclusion is correct even though your assumptions are wrong. Nonetheless, if that were the case, you should be able to make the argument using a different set of correct assumptions. The onus to do so falls upon the person making the argument in the first place.

Edit:
LOL, a logic course? Guess I should have taken more logic course in my PhD Statistics classes.

Your logic is off. Basically you are pretending that it is good for the national gov't to have debt. The national gov't debt is really just an encroachment into the private sector more than authorized by the budget. You are right, that they can simply print more money, if you think the fed and the gov't are the same entity. But when they print more money they are stealing money from every person in the form of inflation.

The debt that you say doesn't need to be paid, does indeed need to be paid. Sure they can borrow from Peter to pay Paul, just like any of us can do.

I do, however, agree with you on one matter. Spending for the improvement of infrastructure is most always good, especially in a recession. But the spending occurring by the federal gov't is not for infrastructure.