March 12, 2010
Ask Fr. Spitzer
Is the Size of the National Debt an Ethical Issue?
Q: There’s a lot of debate in the country right now over the size and growth of the national debt. Do you see this as a purely political issue, or is there a legitimate ethical dimension as well?
A: I think there is a very important ethical issue involved here. If we’re running up a very large debt and we don’t pay it back ourselves, then our kids will inherit that debt and they will have to pay it off. They won’t be able to borrow like we’ve been borrowing because the debt has already reached a critical amount, so we’re basically stealing from the younger generation to pay for the excesses of the older generation.
"The injustice lies in the fact that debt will limit what our children can do for themselves. ... They may want to invest in education or other things that will make the world a better place. But they won’t have this option, or the option will be greatly reduced, because they’re saddled with the debt of their parents." |
I’m not saying that all debt is unethical. According to Keynesian economic theory, some degree of debt can be warranted. That’s because when you borrow money, you can pay it back in next year’s dollars, which aren’t worth quite as much as this year’s dollars. The money you borrow can also lead to investment, which will lead to greater GNP, and these factors can mitigate the effect of the debt on the next generation. A growing population can also mitigate the impact of debt by spreading it over more people.
However, our population isn’t growing by very much, so we’re looking at a very large debt being spread out over a very slowly growing population. Even if one assumes that we’ll achieve greater productivity and GNP, and assume inflation will lower the worth of all the dollars we’ve borrowed, the younger generation will still bear the brunt of a large debt burden. It isn’t fair at all. It’s a real injustice.
The injustice lies in the fact that debt will limit what our children can do for themselves. They may not want to be as materialistic as their parents – they may want to invest in education or other things that will make the world a better place. But they won’t have this option, or the option will be greatly reduced, because they’re saddled with the debt of their parents. It’s a legitimate moral issue, no question about it.
Ideally, we should be looking for ways to reduce the injustice. We could generate some algorithms to show us precisely how much of the debt we’re incurring will be mitigated by economic growth and other factors, and how much will represent an unfair burden to the next generation. Once we have that figure, we can do our best to pay off that excess burden in prosperous times. We’d need to make some sacrifices of our own or cut back on our spending in order to pay our fair share of the debt, instead of just loading it on to the next generation.
Return to the Home
Last changed: Sep 10 2009 at 11:08 AM