The responsible thing for the US to do is increase taxes
Debate Rounds (3)
we spend 3.5 trillion a year. our deficit is like half a trillion.
we can only find insufficient things to cut. you can rail against things like the department of education or depart of housing etc, but you will find you are talking about small fries. we spend about a fifth on healthcare, a fifth on defense, another on social security, another on interest, and the rest on general governance. to oversimplify s the proportions aren't quite that and mroe could be added to say healthcare. that means cutting those departments is cutting a fraction of the budget. you could cut general governance in half, and it'd only be like ten percent of our budget. paying for the poor as the major problem is a myth as hte feds only spend not much beyond ten percent on them.
reputable sources say our debt is manageable.... but it won't be forever. we need to balance the budget. cutting entitlements ain't gonna work politically. cutting general governance will only take you so far. the poor as the problem is a myth. we've been borrowinng against our future so long that it's starting to catch up with us. it isn't all that politically feasible, but increasing taxes is the most politically feasible thing to do.
and it's not like this is without precedent. our tax rates have been much hghe on a regular basis in the past.
con doesn't say what he would cut to make the deficit gone or pay the debt. he just says it's possible. okay, but at what expense? cutting social security and medicare? con says it wouldn't be a problem if the government was small enough. does that include social security and such? does he ignore that general governance is only like a fifth of hte budget, and going so far to cut that in half is only a fraction of our budget?
he points out an excess of twenty five million to iraq. that is a drop in the bucket to what the budget it. i dont deny that lots of small things can add up, but i dont see it being enough to balance the budget or get rid of the debt. we have a budget problem that is more structurally impossible to just do away with... it's structural and bigger than ocn says.
con doesn't have any solutions. he just offers empty rhetoric about "keeping the govenrment smaller"
bigal1999 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by logical-master123 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: FF.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.