Q-Could the US Government function without any limit on how much debt load they take on?
A-They _could_ function, but not for long, and not very effectively. The structural deficit would kill the economy worse than anything ever seen before, including the so-called "Great Depression".
Q-Should there be a limit?
Q-What happens when interest rates rise, as they inevitably will, and servicing the existing national debt becomes and unsustainable fraction of GDP?
A-The demands on the federal budget will exceed the entire economic output of the country.
Not even a Foulgerian 100% tax rate on everybody would suffice to pay off the balance.
Q-Or are we already at that point?
A-Not yet, but we will be if the Obamanation has its way.
Q-Does anyone seriously believe the US can continue to borrow more than they can ever repay, and go deeper in debt?
A-No, not really. Not even Foulger could be that stupid...or _could_ he?
The subject line is a badly thought out excuse for a political discussion.
1 - If RAS could create unlimited non-recourse debt it would be a very, very profitable company so long as it collectd revenue on the loans it makes.
2 - Note the only caviat there: "so long as it collects revenue".
3 - We don't have a debt problem in the U.S. We have a revenue problem. RAS couldn't save its way to profitability (although cutting costs certainly help). It has increased revenue. That's the only solution to our government debt, and we are partway there. We already ended the biggest of the Bush tax cuts. What we haven't done is close the big loopholes. That's the thing that most needs to be done, but which isn't being done.
Certainly the U.S. can repay its existing debt. That's not even hard. It just takes non-ideological solutions and peole who actually think about the problem.