We weren't "inflating our way out of debt" in the 1970s. And actually we have ALWAYS inflated our way out of part of our debt, without any adverse consequences. And given that our inflation rate today is under 2%, increasing inflation by 1% would not harm the economy, and it would put the $$ yield on the debt into the NEGATIVE territory. So it very much would work quite well.
Nonetheless, we had inflation in the 1970s, and the upshot was a stalled economy. A 2 percent annual inflation rate is low, but it still means your currency is totally devalued after enough time, and that is an adverse consequence of running any level of inflation. Most people don't worry about debt yield -- they merely notice that the same amount of money buys fewer groceries.
sure there is taxation is taxation.
Someone here once told me that you've lost if you're arguing a tautology. "Taxation" is not providing sufficient revenue, which has led to the current problems. More taxation is politically impossible so the statement remains -- there is no revenue stream with which to redeem the bonds in the so-called Social Security Trust Fund.
Um no. Government bonds are not worthless. What makes the "trust fund" a "legal fiction" is that there is no Constitutional limit on the fungibility of those funds.
The bonds can't be sold to you or me. The trust fund doesn't exist -- it's a box full of IOUs from the government, to the government. IOUs that we do not currently have the means to pay or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
FACTS MATTER - yes they are a bit complicated and confusing, but they do exist.
Facts matter, and you're ignoring too many of them.