Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

balance the budget: list some specifics

darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 12:01:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
So, we have problem in the US. Virtually everyone believes that the balance should be budgeted. The problem: People don't want programs to be cut, especially special interests.

And what annoys me the most is that you know a politician is bullsh!ting you about balancing the budget If he has no plan, and has no specific programs that he wants to cut. I was just watching Mitt Romney's speech. And his plan "I'm going to look at the budget and I will cut every program that is unnecessary". Hmm.....where have Iheard that same exact speech from. Freakin.....Obama. Really? Romney. How about you look at the budget NOW. The budget is available for the public. Why don't you actually look at the budget, and do that now, and name which programs you want to cut and come up with a plan. In fact, If you don't have the time to do that yourself, why don't you look at someone else's plan. Paul Ryan has a plan, Ron Paul has a plan. Rick Perry has a plan.

It just infuriates me. I mean do people actually but this bullsh!t? If Mitt Romney is elected as president, unless congress stands up against him he would not balance the budget. In fact, a balanced budget is more likely to occur If Obama is president and fiscally responsible republicans take over Congress then under Mitt Romney.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:46:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Option #1:

Eliminate the USA Government. This would eliminated the deficit and debt immediatley.

Option #2:

Eliminate the Federal Government back to pre- Teddy Roosevelt Levels. Eliminate all taxes, except for a 10% Flat Tax. Once the debt is eliminate, lower flat tax to levels that can keep the budget balanced, exactly.

Option #3:

Reform Medicare and Social Security, by turning Social Security into a system of mandatory personal retirement accounts and making Medicare a premium support model (both of these in the Paull Ryan model). Slash other spending sharply. Reform the tax code by lowering rates and eliminating loopholes. Also, get taxation away from capital and labor and towards consumption and immovable property. This is far more efficient. All of these reforms lead to higher GDP, and therefore higher revenue and less spending

Option #4:

Make some pusssy asss fake cuts and raise taxes and successful people. Problem here is that successful people leave, do less productive stuff. This ultimatley fails to lead to much new revenue and doesn't solve deficit crisis.

Option #6:

Hyperinflation.

Option #5:

Financial Collapse.
President of DDO
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:26:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 12:01:50 AM, darkkermit wrote:
So, we have problem in the US. Virtually everyone believes that the balance should be budgeted. The problem: People don't want programs to be cut, especially special interests.

And what annoys me the most is that you know a politician is bullsh!ting you about balancing the budget If he has no plan, and has no specific programs that he wants to cut. I was just watching Mitt Romney's speech. And his plan "I'm going to look at the budget and I will cut every program that is unnecessary". Hmm.....where have Iheard that same exact speech from. Freakin.....Obama. Really? Romney. How about you look at the budget NOW. The budget is available for the public. Why don't you actually look at the budget, and do that now, and name which programs you want to cut and come up with a plan. In fact, If you don't have the time to do that yourself, why don't you look at someone else's plan. Paul Ryan has a plan, Ron Paul has a plan. Rick Perry has a plan.

It just infuriates me. I mean do people actually but this bullsh!t? If Mitt Romney is elected as president, unless congress stands up against him he would not balance the budget. In fact, a balanced budget is more likely to occur If Obama is president and fiscally responsible republicans take over Congress then under Mitt Romney.

This is the only reason why i would vote for Ron Paul, because I believe he would make every effort to make substantive change. I'm willing to overlook all the nonsense that he believes in order to achieve this one major issue.

Mitt is an effective executive, and this I know from having him as our governor, but his policy is not based in anything other than political expediency. In the end I will probably vote for Romney despite the fact that I once said I would never do that, only because I think he would be better in making things happen, and only slightly better than better than Obama in net result.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 8:30:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 12:01:50 AM, darkkermit wrote:
So, we have problem in the US. Virtually everyone believes that the balance should be budgeted. The problem: People don't want programs to be cut, especially special interests.


New Hampshire Constitution
[Sect.] 1. [Bill of Rights]
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.]
Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

June 2, 1784
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 8:40:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Repeal anything that doesnt have to do with, taxation, mail, legal tender, felonies at sea, military defense, or international and interstate relations( such as commerce, Foriegn Affairs, and Internal Affairs)
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 8:42:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 8:40:26 AM, DanT wrote:
Repeal anything that doesnt have to do with, taxation, mail, legal tender, felonies at sea, military defense, or international and interstate relations( such as commerce, Foriegn Affairs, and Internal Affairs)

And immigration. I thought I added that to the list , gues not
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 1:38:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Simplifing the tax code (I've listed how I think the taxes need to be laid out in other threads).

Turning the military from a massive full body military into a small, higher-tech precission based military (less like operation Iraqi Freedom, more like Seal Team Six).

Nationalization of Tobacco (which the purpose of causing it to collapse over time).

Significant overhall of welfare (SS - removing the cap, raising the age, and lowering the tax rate, unemployment - fadding with time and parital employment with stricter requirements for maintaining, healthcare - universal minimum care, etc)

cut short, will come back to this some time later.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.
President of DDO
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:45:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.

Close tax loopholes.

Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.

Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.

Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)

Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits

Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:50:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.

Close tax loopholes.

Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.

Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.

Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)

Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits

Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 3:59:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Ya, but you didn't say eliminate it, just cut it.
President of DDO
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:00:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:59:20 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...


Ya, but you didn't say eliminate it, just cut it.

I would love to eliminate it, but that is not going to happen. I would like to cut it at least in half, if not more.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2012 4:03:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:50:58 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.

All this does is create incentives to earn less income. Plus, there aren't enough rich people. So, this raises very little, if any, revene and hurts the economy.


Close tax loopholes.

And, lower rates... if you don't lower rates with this, the economy is hurt.


Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.

Ya, so no group can get more in tax benefits than they pay in taxes. So, the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax will have to pay up.


Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.

Wow, your against charity. You really don't give a shiit about the poor, do you?


Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)

Ya, as if this will do anything. Just privatize medicare... that will solve budgetary problem and make it better for senors.


Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits

Alright, but this does not do much either


Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt

Great.

So, you have destroyed the economy, but the debt has barely been reduced.
President of DDO
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 9:15:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

The estimated 2012 federal deficit is $1.1 trillion. The US defense budget is $0.9 trillion. If you cut the military by 50%, you cut the deficit 41%

However, the plan listed by Royal does not give specific numbers, so we can't really say that it is a reduction by 50%, however we also cannot say that it is a reduction by 6%.

If we cut out just the wars, with were costing something like $200 billion a year and nothing else. That would cut the deficit by 18%.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 9:23:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 4:03:58 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:50:58 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.


All this does is create incentives to earn less income. Plus, there aren't enough rich people. So, this raises very little, if any, revene and hurts the economy.

No, it does not, becuase the rich still have more money overall. This does nothing to harm the economy, and voodo economics has failed miserably in the past.


Close tax loopholes.



And, lower rates... if you don't lower rates with this, the economy is hurt.

Nope.


Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.




Ya, so no group can get more in tax benefits than they pay in taxes. So, the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax will have to pay up.

Corporations can; approximately 31 corporations did so this year.


Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.




Wow, your against charity. You really don't give a shiit about the poor, do you?


No, I am against giving money to a private group that wastes a large chunk of the money to enrich its top employees. I am for increasing scrutiny so that we know that the money is going directly to the poor. In fact, I would rather hand them the money instead of giving it to a private charity for personal use.

Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)




Ya, as if this will do anything. Just privatize medicare... that will solve budgetary problem and make it better for senors.



Privitizing medicare does absolutely nothing. Medicare fraud was about $47.9 billion in 2010, so minimizing it will definitely be helpful.

Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits




Alright, but this does not do much either




Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt


Great.

So, you have destroyed the economy, but the debt has barely been reduced.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 11:16:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The $1.1 billion estimate for the 2012 deficit assumed that tax cuts would expire, unemployment won't be extended, and other unreasonable assumptions. The deficit will be up in the $1.6 trillion range again, with revenues around $2.2 trillion.

The Department of Energy should be eliminated. the Nuclear Regulatory commission can be folded into Commerce. End subsidies of green energy.

The Department of Education should be abolished. End government loans to liberal arts. Give residence to foreign grads in science and engineering.

Medicaid (the welfare program, not Medicare) should be replaced by block grants to the states, and reduced by about 25% at the same time.

Keep current social Security for those in the system, but put new entrants into a 401K-type plans. That will fund increased investment in productive enterprise.

Farm subsidies should be eliminated, along with most of the Department of Agriculture.

Medicare already has some means testing. The means testing should be increased so that those making over $100K receive no subsidy, and more is paid at lower income levels.

The Nation Labor Relations Board and most of the Department of Labor should be abolished.

Repeal Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and all the new regulations imposed in recent years. Repeal the Americans with Disabilities Act and leave that function with the states. These laws and regulations are massive deterrents to investing, especially to small business.

Adopt an energy policy that encourages oil and gas production. That will produce huge increases in tax revenues.

Cut most of the military bases in Europe and adopt a policy of forcing the Europeans to provide for their own defense. Transfer many of the military bases in Japan to the Japanese and make it clear that the Japanese must take up more of the burden of defense against North Korea.

Privatize the Postal Service. The government can subsidize some rural post offices.

Substantially reduce the powers of the EPA and OSHA.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 1:20:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 4:03:58 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:50:58 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.


All this does is create incentives to earn less income. Plus, there aren't enough rich people. So, this raises very little, if any, revene and hurts the economy.

You need to learn economics. This doesn't create an incentive to earn less. It supposedily reduces the incentive to try to earn more. Though reality likes to laugh at this theory, after all, aren't the union workers (who get paid more) supposidly the lazy free-loading workers? While the lower paid, non-union workers the hard workers? And don't chinese workers put in a lot more hours per week than american workers?




Close tax loopholes.

And, lower rates... if you don't lower rates with this, the economy is hurt.

No, it isn't. The economy is like a sports playing field, where all the different companies are different teams. So long as all teams are playing under the same rules and regulations, than competetion can accurately take place. It is when some teams get to play by a different rule set than others. Like if the Patriots worked out a deal with the NFL so that they could be up to 2 yards offsides and not get a penalty.

If everyone is under the same rules and regulations, competition still takes place.



Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.


Ya, so no group can get more in tax benefits than they pay in taxes. So, the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax will have to pay up.

Yep



Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.

Wow, your against charity. You really don't give a shiit about the poor, do you?

A lot of charities have piss poor ratios of fund that actually get sent to their mission and get jobbled up by administration.




Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)


Ya, as if this will do anything. Just privatize medicare... that will solve budgetary problem and make it better for senors.

Are you suggesting that there is no fraud to find, or that it is not worth finding?





Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits




Alright, but this does not do much either


Sure it does. My parents make about $280,000 a year, while my brother (living with them) collects social security for disability. Though they just take it and give it to charity, that is one case where money need not be spent


Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt


Great.

So, you have destroyed the economy, but the debt has barely been reduced.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 5:52:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/5/2012 1:20:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
No, it isn't. The economy is like a sports playing field, where all the different companies are different teams. So long as all teams are playing under the same rules and regulations, than competition can accurately take place. It is when some teams get to play by a different rule set than others. Like if the Patriots worked out a deal with the NFL so that they could be up to 2 yards offsides and not get a penalty.

Sort of. There are 72,000 pages of tax loopholes. When tax rates are raised, investment goes from productive uses to loopholes. Republicans have been fighting to close loopholes, but Democrats fight to keep them. Dem Sen Shumer is Wall Street's protector, and Obama received way more Wall Street money than McCain. Higher taxes don't discourage people from wanting more money, it causes money to be redirected from profitable enterprises into unprofitable ones: tax free government bonds, green energy, and 2500 hundred other loopholes.

Way back in 1920, taxes on millionaires were 90%. There were almost no millionaires. A year after taxes were lowered, over 200 millionaires appeared on the tax roles. They redirected investment out of loopholes into profitable enterprise.

The global economy has increased the ease of moving money to places with lower taxes. This makes offshore investment an alternative to using loopholes. For Americans, Canada is one prime destination. Corporate tax rates are 16% in Canada, resulting in companies near the Canadian border to move across. There is no US tax so long as the money is kept out of the US.

The Congressional Budget Office uses static scoring, meaning that they estimate revenue assuming that no one changes strategy based upon tax rates. I the idea was to put a hundred dollar tax on a banana, the official estimate of revenue would assume no change in the consumption of bananas. Millionaires now pay $180 billion per year in taxes, and they pay 29% of their reported income. So if rates were increased by 20%, $36 billion would be raised using static scoring. The deficit is $1600 billion.

Incidentally, Obamacare puts a 40% tax on medical devices and on the most expensive healthcare insurance policies. Under static scoring those revenues soar over the years. In practice they would disappear as people avoid buying the taxed items. Often, more expensive surgery can be use to avoid expensive medical devices. People would stop buying the most comprehensive insurance policies because the insurance wouldn't be worth the risk.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 6:55:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 1:38:58 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Simplifing the tax code (I've listed how I think the taxes need to be laid out in other threads).

Turning the military from a massive full body military into a small, higher-tech precission based military (less like operation Iraqi Freedom, more like Seal Team Six).

no good in World wars. Why not have a military made up of 1% of the population, at most; train them in specialized fields, and train the general populous to bear arms in case of invasion.


Nationalization of Tobacco (which the purpose of causing it to collapse over time).

No, instead legalize all prohibited sales, so that they may be taxed.

Significant overhall of welfare (SS - removing the cap, raising the age, and lowering the tax rate, unemployment - fadding with time and parital employment with stricter requirements for maintaining, healthcare - universal minimum care, etc)

localize all welfare programs, and the individual states could either scrap it, reform it, or keep it.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 7:17:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/5/2012 9:23:27 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 4:03:58 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:50:58 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:49:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:47:34 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/4/2012 3:39:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

And, you've gotten about 6% of the deficit taken care of.

Actually, that accounts for about 20% of federal spending per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Only 80% left. How much do social programs account for?

Raise taxes on the rich and on corporations.


All this does is create incentives to earn less income. Plus, there aren't enough rich people. So, this raises very little, if any, revene and hurts the economy.

No, it does not, becuase the rich still have more money overall. This does nothing to harm the economy, and voodo economics has failed miserably in the past.

What a convincing argument...

Because the rich have more money overall, incentives don't matter... that doesn't even make sense

And, if you want see miserable failure, you need to look at socialism.



Close tax loopholes.



And, lower rates... if you don't lower rates with this, the economy is hurt.

Nope.

Yup.



Institute laws that prevent any group from receiving more in tax benefits than they give to the government in addition to reducing tax benefits.




Ya, so no group can get more in tax benefits than they pay in taxes. So, the 47% of Americans who don't pay income tax will have to pay up.

Corporations can; approximately 31 corporations did so this year.

31 corpations didn't pay taxes... Compared to nearly 150 million people.



Increase scrutiny on the funds allocated to private charities and groups so that less money can be given.




Wow, your against charity. You really don't give a shiit about the poor, do you?


No, I am against giving money to a private group that wastes a large chunk of the money to enrich its top employees. I am for increasing scrutiny so that we know that the money is going directly to the poor. In fact, I would rather hand them the money instead of giving it to a private charity for personal use.

Because government welfare programs never waste any money enriching people... please

And, if you want, why don't then go hand your money to the poor... instead of stealing it from everyone else and ruining the economy.


Reduce Medicare fraud by increasing penalties for doctors who commit fraud (automatic loss of license as well as fines and imprisonment)




Ya, as if this will do anything. Just privatize medicare... that will solve budgetary problem and make it better for senors.



Privitizing medicare does absolutely nothing. Medicare fraud was about $47.9 billion in 2010, so minimizing it will definitely be helpful.

Ya, but we need private reforms to really make a dent.


Institute wealth/wage caps on Social Security benefits




Alright, but this does not do much either




Reduce pork; fine any Congressman who is caught being corrupt


Great.

So, you have destroyed the economy, but the debt has barely been reduced.
President of DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 7:22:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why should we raise taxes on the rich?!?! That's penalizing success!

If you took every penny the rich had at this very moment it wouldn't even DENT the problem. Blaming the rich is just a tactic used by the soldiers of the Class War. Everyone should pay the SAME taxes based on a fair PERCENTAGE.

Therefore if everyone has to pay say 12% national income then guess what, the rich DO pay more. In fact the rich will pay more taxes than you ever will and they don't deserve any more of them!
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 7:33:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
get rid of all executive agencies freeze military spending cut welfare, pass a balanced budget amendment boom! done. Also replace the tax code with a 2 stage tax, 30% for the rich (10% decrease), and a 5% for the poor (5% increase) also eliminate useless laws and pardon criminals that have done little wrong, like petty theft. You can do countless things, but i don't feel like naming them.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/5/2012 7:34:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/4/2012 2:55:05 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Cut military spending by reducing unncessary military outposts and bases, eliminating black sites, shutting down Guantanamo Bay, reducing the size of the armed forces, and starting fewer trillion-dollar wars.

well...leave Europe alone then we agree. Overall cuts...no
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross