be it resolved that the national debt be repudiated

One common argument against repudiation is that it would result in a certain and devastating economic collapse. Nothing could be further from the truth. The sky will not fall if the government does not pay back all the money it has borrowed and the hysteria to the contrary is simply the squawking of an economically illiterate media; the same fools who tell you that consumption is the key to prosperity (try consuming your way to prosperity with your own finances and tell me how well you do)! No the key to economic growth is savings. Unfortunately savings are ravaged by inflation. Why do we have inflation? What is inflation? Inflation is an increase in the money supply. Who benefits from inflation? Leaving aside the Hayekian insight that inflation benefits those who get the new money first (the political class) it is clear that if you print more money, then the value of money already in existence becomes less. Supply and demand. This is why you hear old timers talking about a weeks pay for $50 or whatever shockingly low figure is used to describe a price in a distant past because the government has been printing so much money. Printing money benefits debtors at the expense of creditors (since the money that pays back the loan is worth less than than the money with which the loan was borrowed). This creates a disincentive towards savings. But savings are where real economic growth comes from, those savings are then loaned to entrepreneurs, who build capital, that capital makes workers more productive and these more productive workers now earn a higher salary. Another big problem with paying back the debt is that in order to pay it back you need to tax people. This is a big problem because taxes are terrible for the economy, they kill jobs, and it's wrong to take someone elses property and it's especially wrong to threaten to hurt them if they do not give you their property. This is called extortion and it's against the law - except when the government does it, because the government can do anything they want, because they're the government and you're not. And why should some random plumber pay back all the money that was sent to foreign dictators via foreign aid, or given to rich agribusiness interests like subsidizing ethanol, or put into countless imperialist wars of aggression against poor people in little huts that could never have hurt anyone if they wanted to which they assuredly did not? If you take out a loan you are morally obligated to pay back that loan. Otherwise you're stealing. But how can I possibly be obligated to pay back a loan for money that I never agreed to spend in the first place? Really it's the fault of whoever loaned the money in the first place. Why on earth would you loan money to an organization as cruel, as ruthless, with as brutal disregard for human life as the state? Why would you seek to finance this vicious and repressive empire for the sake of a few points in interest? But, say proponents of stealing your money to pay back all the spending politicians have done in order to secure their own power, wealth and the wealth and power of the people who elected them, who would lend the government any more money if the debt was repudiated? And that's exactly the point. No one. Instead of these debt ceiling circuses there would be a very real debt ceiling. Bad credit. And how incredible would that be! If you knew that NO ONE could leverage your children's future. If the government learned a little fiscal restraint. I know I would spend like crazy with a trillion dollar credit card. Wouldn't you?