Why the Growth of National Debt Should Be Treated with Caution —A Warning from the Triad of Currency Value, Public Burden, and National Credibility—

■ Introduction: The Quiet Dependence Behind Expanding Public Debt

Public debt often appears to be a flexible fiscal tool—supporting stimulus measures, welfare, reconstruction, and infrastructure.
Yet, a society where the expansion of government debt becomes normalized is one that consumes its future wealth for the sake of present political comfort.

---

■ 1. Political Temptation and Structural Inflation

As public debt grows, governments are tempted to rely on inflation-induced tax revenue and tax hikes to expand fiscal room.
This creates the illusion of economic vitality and rising revenue, but in reality, it is the gradual erosion of citizens’ savings that sustains the illusion.
Inflation acts as a hidden tax—it lightens the state’s debt burden by silently transferring wealth from savers to the government.

Once this cycle sets in, fiscal discipline weakens, and both monetary stability and trust in public finance begin to decay.

---

■ 2. The Real Foundation of Currency Stability Lies in Self-Sufficiency

For any nation, the stability of its currency depends not merely on monetary policy but on the strength of its self-sustaining economic structure—
its energy supply, food production, industrial base, and technological capability.

If these are overly dependent on external sources, the nation’s currency becomes anchored to external trust, not internal strength.
Thus, public debt that fails to enhance domestic self-reliance becomes a consumptive liability, not an investment.
Such debt may boost short-term demand but erodes the long-term foundation of currency credibility.

---

■ 3. Growing Debt as a Burden Transfer and Credibility Drain

The resources for repaying public debt ultimately come from citizens—through taxes, inflation, and diminished purchasing power.
Therefore, a rising national debt is effectively an invisible tax on present and future generations.

Over time, capital begins to flow outward in search of stability, eroding domestic confidence.
This outflow is not just an economic shift—it is the retreat of trust from the nation itself.
Once that trust erodes, the cycle of debt expansion becomes self-reinforcing and difficult to reverse.

---

■ 4. The Core Issue: Debt as a Signal of Distorted Circulation

Debt itself is not inherently evil.
The critical question is whether it is issued to sustain economic circulation or to consume it prematurely.
Public finance functions as the bloodstream of an economy; if its flow becomes unbalanced, the entire body weakens.
Thus, the reason we should be wary of rising national debt is that it signals a breakdown in the balance of economic circulation.

---

■ Supplementary Note: The Only Meaningful Use of Strategic Debt

National debt can have long-term value only when it is used to optimize spending that strengthens the country’s self-sufficiency.
Investments in domestic energy, food security, industrial revitalization, and technological infrastructure
can turn debt into a strategic instrument for future credibility, not a short-term indulgence.

Such use of debt—anchored in real productive capacity—represents the only sustainable and justified form of national borrowing.

---

■ Conclusion

The growth of national debt is not merely a matter of numbers—it is a statement about the future direction of a nation’s intent.
Is debt being used to sustain economic circulation, or to consume the future for present ease?

If the balance is lost, currency, credibility, and the people’s trust will erode quietly but steadily.
National debt should be viewed as a warning signal of dissonance within the economic cycle.
To preserve national integrity, it must be paired with wisdom and restraint—debt used for regeneration, not depletion.

---

■ Paradox of National Integrity and Structural Decay

Paradoxically, when a nation’s self-sustaining structure deteriorates, it signals that the government is either failing to fulfill the very purpose of the state, or that it operates within a framework that renders such fulfillment impossible.

In such a condition, the state’s actions—whether intentional or negligent—drift toward policies that undermine national integrity, effectively eroding the foundation they are meant to protect.
This is not merely a matter of economic mismanagement, but of a loss of cross-sectoral understanding—a blindness to the interdependence between fiscal policy, productive capacity, and the social contract that binds citizens to their state.

A nation that cannot sustain itself materially and structurally ceases to be sovereign in any meaningful sense.
Its governance becomes reactive rather than directive, and its policies—however patriotic in rhetoric—functionally align with the logic of external dependence, rather than internal renewal.

Thus, the erosion of self-sufficiency is both a symptom and a verdict: it reveals whether the state still serves its foundational role as the guardian of collective continuity—or whether it has become, consciously or unconsciously, an agent of its own disintegration.