Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

US National Debt

Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 1:03:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Does anyone seriously believe that we are going to one day balance the books and generate a long term surplus to pay of this enormous debt? It would require massive changes in policy that are simply not going to happen. The political system is broken and a disaster is inevitable and not too far off.

In the next ten years, another half will be added on to the debt even if we adopt the most fiscally conservative policy on the table.

I will also assert that raising taxes is not a viable option because even if it would work in theory, Washington would respond with increases in spending and the trajectory would be maintained.

Challenge my radical views.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes. Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him. The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 1:45:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Here's my plan for solving the national debt.

We need to develop a missile defense system, before anyone else. Then, the gov. sends a squadron of Navy SEALS to infiltrate the Russian nuclear arsenal and launch a big-a$$ warhead at China. China thinks the Soviets are out to get them so they ring up Obama and ask him to use the missile-defense to destroy the missile. Obama says yes only if they acquit the US of all national debt. Otherwise, China will meet a painful and fiery death.

Bam. Debt solved. Makes perfect sense.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 2:36:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
When European bank failures (around 2013) cause another ripple effect through financial markets, the US will bail out the banks again, default on its debt, and the result will be anarchy, which you want, so be happy.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 2:54:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Constitutional convention, abolish old government. New gov't is not a successor state, gives up seats in the UN and such, doesn't really give a ****, not responsible for old gov'ts debt.

F-16, that was hilarious.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 2:59:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Question: Why does a nation need to pay off its debt? All it needs to do is payoff its interest of the debt. Of course, paying interest sucks, but there's no reason a nation has to pay off all its debt as long as there are people willing to buy treasury bills.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 3:07:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Every year, interest on the debt is a redistribution from taxpayers doing productive things to old risk averse people who buy treasuries. It's not even progressive redistribution.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 10:25:33 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
America is never going to default on its debt - that would be politically impossible. It's going to print money to pay it off, dragging down all the other economies tied to the dollar with it. The only thing protecting America is the dollar's status as a reserve currency.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:05:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 3:07:50 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Every year, interest on the debt is a redistribution from taxpayers doing productive things to old risk averse people who buy treasuries. It's not even progressive redistribution.

Sounds like paying tithes to the do-nothing aristocrats.

Thought the USA hated Nobility?

Anyway, a default is inevitable; you don't really need Moodys to tell you this.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:13:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 11:05:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/27/2011 3:07:50 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Every year, interest on the debt is a redistribution from taxpayers doing productive things to old risk averse people who buy treasuries. It's not even progressive redistribution.

Sounds like paying tithes to the do-nothing aristocrats.

Thought the USA hated Nobility?


Anyway, a default is inevitable; you don't really need Moodys to tell you this.

A default is inevietable if we continue on the current direction. If reforms were made to social security, medicare, and medicaid then we might have a chance.

Also, it is possible that the US will just print money. The Fed actually bought 80% of treasury bonds last year. So, whose excited about stagflation or hyperinflation?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:19:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:03:14 AM, Grape wrote:
Does anyone seriously believe that we are going to one day balance the books and generate a long term surplus to pay of this enormous debt? It would require massive changes in policy that are simply not going to happen. The political system is broken and a disaster is inevitable and not too far off.

In the next ten years, another half will be added on to the debt even if we adopt the most fiscally conservative policy on the table.

I will also assert that raising taxes is not a viable option because even if it would work in theory, Washington would respond with increases in spending and the trajectory would be maintained.

Challenge my radical views.

When it comes to predicting future actions, nothing can be proven, only speculated on. This is going to continue so long as the people remain too stupid to realize that classic politicians are never going to resolve the problems. Most voters are childish and immature and only consider what is best for them in the short run.

No one wants to make sacrifises for the good of the future. The poor do not want to sacrifise their welfare benefits, the rich do not want to sacrifise their income to taxes. Everyone wants someone else to shoulder the burden and wants to sip on margaritta's on a sunny beach. Current politicans cater to this selfish mindset just like a shoulder demon. I don't know if it started with people saying they want to be selfish and politicans complying, or if politicans said "go ahead and be selfish" and the people giving in, but the two have melded into a sickening mass now.

Politicans are not going to be the ones to break the selfishness, it has to be people voting in a different breed of politicans, and en masse. Everyone also needs to understand that they need to work hard, bite the bullet and accept sacrifices for their children.

I find it darkly comical. Adults seem to have little reserve against working hard and sacrifising so that their kids can have a better life than them. But that all stops when you leave the individual scale.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:21:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 2:54:23 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Constitutional convention, abolish old government. New gov't is not a successor state, gives up seats in the UN and such, doesn't really give a ****, not responsible for old gov'ts debt.

F-16, that was hilarious.

lol, what happens when a person defaults on their debt? Some comes and repocesses your car and home. Do you really think China and everyone else that is owed money is just going to accept have trillions of dollars erased? Any transition in government is going to have a time period of minimal military power (it takes time to get everything transfered), and our debters are not going to let that "window of opportunity" pass.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,281
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:26:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 11:21:46 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/27/2011 2:54:23 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Constitutional convention, abolish old government. New gov't is not a successor state, gives up seats in the UN and such, doesn't really give a ****, not responsible for old gov'ts debt.

F-16, that was hilarious.

lol, what happens when a person defaults on their debt? Some comes and repocesses your car and home. Do you really think China and everyone else that is owed money is just going to accept have trillions of dollars erased? Any transition in government is going to have a time period of minimal military power (it takes time to get everything transfered), and our debters are not going to let that "window of opportunity" pass.

I just wanted to slightly derail this thread to point out that Oregon, you have a Massive post count! I remember you when you were under 2000!

Okay, back to bitching about do-nothing politicians.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 11:49:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 2:54:23 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Constitutional convention, abolish old government. New gov't is not a successor state, gives up seats in the UN and such, doesn't really give a ****, not responsible for old gov'ts debt.


So therefore defaults on debts, international assets are grabbed, American economy collapses, sabre rattling, third world war or the emergence of China as the sole world superpower.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 4:22:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes. Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him. The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.

I smell a joke...
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 4:24:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:03:14 AM, Grape wrote:
Does anyone seriously believe that we are going to one day balance the books and generate a long term surplus to pay of this enormous debt? It would require massive changes in policy that are simply not going to happen. The political system is broken and a disaster is inevitable and not too far off.

In the next ten years, another half will be added on to the debt even if we adopt the most fiscally conservative policy on the table.

I will also assert that raising taxes is not a viable option because even if it would work in theory, Washington would respond with increases in spending and the trajectory would be maintained.

Challenge my radical views.

I agree with those...
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 4:25:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:45:05 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
Here's my plan for solving the national debt.

We need to develop a missile defense system, before anyone else. Then, the gov. sends a squadron of Navy SEALS to infiltrate the Russian nuclear arsenal and launch a big-a$$ warhead at China. China thinks the Soviets are out to get them so they ring up Obama and ask him to use the missile-defense to destroy the missile. Obama says yes only if they acquit the US of all national debt. Otherwise, China will meet a painful and fiery death.

Bam. Debt solved. Makes perfect sense.

This video is just showing that our debt to China really doesn't matter in the big scheme of things.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 4:53:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes. Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him. The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.

And then, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wakes up from his coma to find a nation where all the productive people have left due to massive regulations and extremely high taxes on productive citizens (and those who stay barely work because all of their income gets taxed away), 40% Inflation, a National Debt exceeding 500% of GDP because the government thought it could rely on taxing 2% of the population to fix its entitlement problems (and those 2% either left or stopped working).

Not to worry, F-16 can always go enjoy that wonderful Universal Health Care System by getting into a month long line to get a check up.
President of DDO
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:03:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:03:14 AM, Grape wrote:
Does anyone seriously believe that we are going to one day balance the books and generate a long term surplus to pay of this enormous debt?:

No. I've seen several credible models showing that it is literally a statistical impossibility to pay off the debt under the current system of fiat currency that compounds its own interest, even, as you said, if we were to adopt the world's most fiscally conservative plan.

The only way to salvage this sinking ship is to completely revamp the system, zero everything out, and essentially start over. In essence, implement the "radical" plans of somebody like Ron Paul or bust.

Challenge my radical views.:

No need to... it's all true. And when Ron Paul warned of this inevitability, they mocked him and scoffed him, calling him a "radical." And even after his prophecies [figure-of-speech] have all come true, the naysayers still have some perennial excuse they cling to.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:13:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 11:21:46 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/27/2011 2:54:23 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Constitutional convention, abolish old government. New gov't is not a successor state, gives up seats in the UN and such, doesn't really give a ****, not responsible for old gov'ts debt.

F-16, that was hilarious.

lol, what happens when a person defaults on their debt? Some comes and repocesses your car and home.
That person is dead and didn't have any rightful property.

Any transition in government is going to have a time period of minimal military power
A mere presumption.

(it takes time to get everything transfered), and our debters are not going to let that "window of opportunity" pass.
In such a scenario there is no "our." It's not a mere formalism, it's a complete regime change. It doesn't work as much impression-wise if the new gov't is a "govt of the people" or has similar policies, and of course it won't work without some military backing. But not much else will work either, and you need a military whether in debt or not.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:19:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.


These things will probably continue happening regardless of the strength of the economy.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.


At a net loss up until this point because those investments will take forever to pay off.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes.

The President has not done this because he is in cahoots with the rich people. If he tried this plan, then

1) There would be a mass exodus of rich people from America
2) The government would just spend more because they would have more money
3) Rich people are not an unlimited fund you can draw money from forever. They do not have enough money to pay off the debt.

Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him.

This would increase the debt.

The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.

None of these events would lead to that result.

TL;DR - If the government suddenly starts trying to improve things even though they never have before, they will implement socialist policies that will magically fix everything in proud defiance of economic law.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:23:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 5:19:25 PM, Grape wrote:
At 9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.


These things will probably continue happening regardless of the strength of the economy.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.


At a net loss up until this point because those investments will take forever to pay off.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes.

The President has not done this because he is in cahoots with the rich people. If he tried this plan, then

1) There would be a mass exodus of rich people from America

If increasing taxes would just cause a mass ecodus of rich people, then why didn't all the rich people leave the US back when the tax code was much higher?

2) The government would just spend more because they would have more money

This is an assumption.

3) Rich people are not an unlimited fund you can draw money from forever. They do not have enough money to pay off the debt.

Oddly enough, the poor people have even less money to draw from.


Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him.

This would increase the debt.

No it wouldn't, because it is already established, it is status quo. Eliminating it would help reduce the debt, but maintaining it will not have an effect.


The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.

None of these events would lead to that result.

TL;DR - If the government suddenly starts trying to improve things even though they never have before, they will implement socialist policies that will magically fix everything in proud defiance of economic law.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:25:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I believe what you mean is that the rich will move their money and their businesses overseas, but they themselves will not move. Taxes are not the only incentive to live/work in an area. Quality of workers, quality of community, etc are all factors. There is a reason that the rich don't go live in Tailand next to the factories paying people $3 a day. They choose safety and comfort of living here over there. They merely choose for their companies to be there.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2011 5:35:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 5:23:00 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/27/2011 5:19:25 PM, Grape wrote:
At 9/27/2011 1:26:47 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
One fine day, the Sun rises across the horizon over a beautiful lake. There are green mountains in the background and the water from a river glistens from the light of the sun as it runs smoothly through the glorious grasslands into the river.


These things will probably continue happening regardless of the strength of the economy.

The president of the United States wakes up. It was a truly a happy day yesterday, for it was the last day that the United States was in debt. For 20 years, his country had worked hard to advance scientific research and technology. Renewable sources of energy such as wind power, solar energy and geothermal energy energy have replaced fossil fuels. The US dependence on the Middle-East for oil was declining dramatically and has finally been erased 6 months ago.


At a net loss up until this point because those investments will take forever to pay off.

The president looks from the window of the white house to reflect on how this dream was achieved. 8 years ago when he first came to office, he had increased taxes on the rich people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have paid more $50 billion in taxes.

The President has not done this because he is in cahoots with the rich people. If he tried this plan, then

1) There would be a mass exodus of rich people from America

If increasing taxes would just cause a mass ecodus of rich people, then why didn't all the rich people leave the US back when the tax code was much higher?

They exploited tax loopholes instead. The actual percentage of Tax paid by the rich is fairly stable... the marginal rates have gone way down though. The interesting thing is that when the Marginal rates fell, dramatically, the rich actually started paying more taxes because they hid less income and worked more.

Furthermore, you are talking about a world with Fixed Exchange rates... Over the past 30 years, countries have started floating their exchanges... making capital and productive individuals much more mobile.

2) The government would just spend more because they would have more money

This is an assumption.

A realistic one, though

3) Rich people are not an unlimited fund you can draw money from forever. They do not have enough money to pay off the debt.

Oddly enough, the poor people have even less money to draw from.

So what? The poor don't pay any taxes. When leftists talk about balancing the budget "on the back of the poor", they are talking about cutting programs that are funded by the rich and middle class. Cutting programs is different from taking more money from a group...

Of course, the big money is in middle class entitlements


Welfare and Universal health care had been established by the president's before him.

This would increase the debt.

No it wouldn't, because it is already established, it is status quo. Eliminating it would help reduce the debt, but maintaining it will not have an effect.

Ya... so... and Dont forget that these things lower GDP because of the higher taxes used to finance them... Lower GDP = Lower Tax Revenue


The United States is happy and prosperous. Grape walks up to the beautiful river and takes a piss while he reflects on how this hapenned. He had never really trusted the government with his money, but he realizes now that it was put to good use.

None of these events would lead to that result.

TL;DR - If the government suddenly starts trying to improve things even though they never have before, they will implement socialist policies that will magically fix everything in proud defiance of economic law.

Lol
President of DDO
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2011 4:51:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:03:14 AM, Grape wrote:
Does anyone seriously believe that we are going to one day balance the books and generate a long term surplus to pay of this enormous debt? It would require massive changes in policy that are simply not going to happen. The political system is broken and a disaster is inevitable and not too far off.

In the next ten years, another half will be added on to the debt even if we adopt the most fiscally conservative policy on the table.

I will also assert that raising taxes is not a viable option because even if it would work in theory, Washington would respond with increases in spending and the trajectory would be maintained.

Challenge my radical views.

Total Public Debt Outstanding $14,707,406,820,591.87
http://www.treasurydirect.gov...

In order to pay off the public debt in 8 years we need to maintain a surplus of;
$1,838,425,852,573.98

In order to pay off the public debt in 10 years we need to maintain a surplus of;
$1,470,740,682,059.18

In order to pay off the public debt in 25 years we need to maintain a surplus of;
$588,296,272,823.67

In order to pay off the public debt in 50 years we need to maintain a surplus of;
$294,148,136,411.84

In order to pay off the public debt in 100 years we need to maintain a surplus of;
$147,074,068,205.92

Lets say the goal is pay it off in 25 years;

1st thing we have to do is get rid of the Progressive income tax, because a flat tax produces more revenue.

The total national income in 2008 was $8,657,921,000,000
http://www.irs.gov...

The total revenue from income tax in 2008 was $1,031,252,000,000
The top 50% pays $1,002,159,000,000.00, while the bottom 50% pays $29,093,000,000.00 (the top 5% pays $378,607,000,000.00)
http://www.irs.gov...

A 12% flat tax in 2008 would have brought in a $1,038,950,520,000 revenue

Outlays in 2008 was $2,982,544,000,000
while Receipts in 2008 was $2,523,991,000,000
http://www.whitehouse.gov...

so $1,492,739,000,000.00 of the receipts did not come from personal income taxes.

The deficit was;
($458,553,000,000)

$1,031,252,000,000 - ($458,553,000,000) = $1,489,805,000,000.00

$1,489,805,000,000.00 + $588,296,272,823.67 = $2,078,101,272,823.67

$2,078,101,272,823.67 / $8,657,921,000,000 = 24%

obviously a 24% flat tax is too high, let's say a 13% flat tax would suffice, with the rest being cuts in spending.

A 13% flat tax would bring in a revenue of $1,125,529,730,000 in 2008

$1,125,529,730,000 - $2,078,101,272,823.67 = ($952,571,542,823.67)

($952,571,542,823.67) + $1,489,805,000,000.00 = ($537,233,457,176.33)

In 2008 the outlays for;
The Department of Health and Human services was $735,181,000,000
The Department of Defense (Military) was $446,498,000,000
The Department of Agriculture was $88,942,000,000
The Office of Personal Management was $70,055,000,000
The Department of Transportation was $61,542,000,000
The Department of Labor was $50,437,000,000
The Department of Defense (Other Programs) was $46,554,000,000
http://www.gpoaccess.gov...

Those are the only ones I'm going to list, but there is allot more.

Now if we reduce the Department of Health and Human services to $400,000,000,000, we save $335,181,000,000 right off the bat.
If we reduce The Department of Defense (Military) to $340,000,000,000 we save $106,498,000,000
If we reduce the Department of Labor to $25,000,000,000
If we reduce the Department of Agriculture to $50,000,000,000 we save $38,942,000,000.00
If we reduce the Department of Transportation to $50,000,000,000 we save $11,542,000,000
If e reduce the Office of Personal Management to $50,000,000,000 we save

All together we save $537,655,000,00.00

($537,233,457,176.33) + $537,655,000,00.00 = $421,542,824.67

$588,296,272,823.67 + $421,542,824.67 = $588,717,815,648.34

$14,707,406,820,591.87 / $588,717,815,648.34 = 24.98

So right there we eliminate the public debt in 25 years.

Note; I was using 2008 as an example because I had all the Data for 2008 bookmarked. The National income, and Federal Budget has changed since than.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2011 9:14:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2011 10:54:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/27/2011 1:45:05 AM, BlackVoid wrote:
Here's my plan for solving the national debt.

We need to develop a missile defense system, before anyone else. Then, the gov. sends a squadron of Navy SEALS to infiltrate the Russian nuclear arsenal and launch a big-a$$ warhead at China. China thinks the Soviets are out to get them so they ring up Obama and ask him to use the missile-defense to destroy the missile. Obama says yes only if they acquit the US of all national debt. Otherwise, China will meet a painful and fiery death.

Bam. Debt solved. Makes perfect sense.

Blackvoid for President!
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2011 7:22:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't think it's nearly as hard as you make it out to be. First off, there's no need to completely eliminate the debt. It would be great but we don't have to. It only needs to be brought down to sustainable levels. Second, military spending. It's not an unreachable possibility to decrease our military spending. It's probably the most likely thing that will get cut due to the fact that we will have to cut something and this is the one thing that doesn't do us any real good. In 2010 we spent nearly 700 billion dollars on the military budget. That's only an annual budget. Combine that with raising taxes and we can bring the debt well within a sustainable range. Raising taxes and decreasing military spending are both things on the liberal agenda. All it takes to get out of this mess is a swing to the left.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2011 7:28:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/1/2011 7:22:00 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I don't think it's nearly as hard as you make it out to be. First off, there's no need to completely eliminate the debt. It would be great but we don't have to. It only needs to be brought down to sustainable levels. Second, military spending. It's not an unreachable possibility to decrease our military spending. It's probably the most likely thing that will get cut due to the fact that we will have to cut something and this is the one thing that doesn't do us any real good. In 2010 we spent nearly 700 billion dollars on the military budget. That's only an annual budget. Combine that with raising taxes and we can bring the debt well within a sustainable range. Raising taxes and decreasing military spending are both things on the liberal agenda. All it takes to get out of this mess is a swing to the left.

This is backed up by the fact that there have been 5 budget surpluses in the last 40 years and they were ALL under Democratic presidents.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2011 7:45:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/1/2011 7:28:08 PM, FREEDO wrote:

This is backed up by the fact that there have been 5 budget surpluses in the last 40 years and they were ALL under Democratic presidents.

Very nit-picking data, considering that over the past 40 years, there's only been 1 president that had a "surplus" which was Bill Clinton. It should also be noted that the only reason why Bill Clinton had a "surplus" is due to the social security "surplus". However, the problem is it really isn't a surplus, because these funds are liable to future social security beneficiary. No corporation would consider liabilities to be part of a surplus.

Second, remember that Bill Clinton served under a republican congress. The president doesn't have absolute power over the budget. In fact, congress has the "power of the purse".
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...