• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

National Debt Nears 20 Trillion Just in Time for Election

joG said:
I realize that argument seem comforting. But it does not work. You are right that the closeness to whatever the criminal behavior is increases the level of complicity and that the greater the distance is the less involved one feels. But, if you know your society is doing things that are atrocious, you must take action or be part of it.
Click to expand...

What action can I take? I can force people to vote them out.
 
mbig said:
We could go with the Trump Tax Plan/Lollipop (there is obviously no real Budget plan)
Trump wants an across the board 20-30% Cut in taxes...
Big Increase in Military spending: 350 New Navy Ships for openers; a Wall.
And NO significant Budget cuts I can see:

So if you're Debt/Deficit Conscious you should vote HILLARY:

Two very different paths on taxes: Clinton vs. Trump
Two very different paths on taxes: Clinton vs. Trump | Tax Policy Center
Tax Policy Center - July 28th

"Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have proposed dramatically different tax plans. Clinton wants to raise taxes on high-income households and businesses to boost revenue and pay for new social initiatives. Trump wants to slash tax rates on both individuals and businesses.

Add it up and over the next decade the two plans are more than $12 trillion dollars apart:
The Tax Policy Center (TPC) estimates Clinton’s tax proposals would Shave $1.2 trillion off the nation’s debt over the next 10 years while Trump’s would Add $11.2 trillion."​

Oucher!
Click to expand...

TPC is misleading. Her plan does not reduce the debt, it just reduces the INCREASE in debt. So, no, if you are debt conscious you should not vote Hillary (or Trump).
 
jonny5 said:
Sadly, tax are more complicated than regular math, bro.
Click to expand...

They are for you, apparently.

There has been a massive skewing of wealth in recent years, while at the same time voracious lobbying to cut taxes at the top end as much as is possible. This, and the underemployment of human resources in the workforce are at the root of current economic problems.
 
Ganesh said:
They are for you, apparently.

There has been a massive skewing of wealth in recent years, while at the same time voracious lobbying to cut taxes at the top end as much as is possible. This, and the underemployment of human resources in the workforce are at the root of current economic problems.
Click to expand...

And yet, the rich pay more taxes than ever, and a greater share of income taxes. How would making them pay 100% of the taxes instead of 94% fix the economy?
 
jonny5 said:
And yet, the rich pay more taxes than ever, and a greater share of income taxes.
Click to expand...

Yer simply choosing to ignore what's been stated repeatedly — incomes at the top have increased dramatically, much more than the increase in their taxes paid and tax burden.

>>How would making them pay 100% of the taxes instead of 94% fix the economy?

They don't pay anything close to 94%. Why are you posting such nonsense?
 
jonny5 said:
TPC is misleading. Her plan does not reduce the debt, it just reduces the INCREASE in debt. So, no, if you are debt conscious you should not vote Hillary (or Trump).
Click to expand...

Hillary says that she will not add one penny to the debt. Yeah. Right.
 
Moderate Right said:
Hillary says that she will not add one penny to the debt. Yeah. Right.
Click to expand...

And Bush is responsible for all those spending bills Obama signed, sure. Even if Hillarys specific policy proposals somehow managed not to change the baseline, she is still going to be signing spending bills of over a trillion a year. And doing very little about the 3 trillion in autopilot spending. The debt limit is suspsended until March 15. There is no way she is going to veto an increase. Neither will Trump.
 
jonny5 said:
And Bush is responsible for all those spending bills Obama signed, sure. Even if Hillarys specific policy proposals somehow managed not to change the baseline, she is still going to be signing spending bills of over a trillion a year. And doing very little about the 3 trillion in autopilot spending. The debt limit is suspsended until March 15. There is no way she is going to veto an increase. Neither will Trump.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you're so concerned about. So we have "$3T in autopilot spending"? What is that? Mostly Medicare, Social Security, and Defense. Those three things account for pretty much $2.5T in spending, don't they? So I don't understand what you're saying. You want to cut Medicare and Social Security and Defense? How? Where?
 
jonny5 said:
And Bush is responsible for all those spending bills Obama signed, sure.
Click to expand...

When the Negro was inaugurated, CBO's deficit forecast was $1.2T. RW BS about who signed what is completely irrelevant.
 
Incisor said:
I don't understand what you're so concerned about. So we have "$3T in autopilot spending"? What is that? Mostly Medicare, Social Security, and Defense. Those three things account for pretty much $2.5T in spending, don't they? So I don't understand what you're saying. You want to cut Medicare and Social Security and Defense? How? Where?
Click to expand...

Actually 3.4T. Solution, lets start by cutting 10% off the top. Do less. Means test all social programs so only the truly needy get full compensation. Eliminate all elective care reimbursements, and low cost care reimbursements. Privatize social security 100%. If you want to set up some tax free program and have the govt save your money for you fine. Everyone else can opt out. On defense, no clue. Cut it 10%, reduce the world policeman role, and let the military figure out whats unnecessary. Start by getting our allies to do more.

What Im concerned about is the 20% income tax I have to pay. The 15% payroll tax. The hundreds and thousands more in various fees I have to pay so the govt can control me.
 
jonny5 said:
Actually 3.4T. Solution, lets start by cutting 10% off the top. Do less. Means test all social programs so only the truly needy get full compensation. Eliminate all elective care reimbursements, and low cost care reimbursements. Privatize social security 100%. If you want to set up some tax free program and have the govt save your money for you fine. Everyone else can opt out. On defense, no clue. Cut it 10%, reduce the world policeman role, and let the military figure out whats unnecessary. Start by getting our allies to do more.

What Im concerned about is the 20% income tax I have to pay. The 15% payroll tax. The hundreds and thousands more in various fees I have to pay so the govt can control me.
Click to expand...

How are you being controlled?
 
jonny5 said:
Actually 3.4T. Solution, lets start by cutting 10% off the top. Do less. Means test all social programs so only the truly needy get full compensation. Eliminate all elective care reimbursements, and low cost care reimbursements. Privatize social security 100%. If you want to set up some tax free program and have the govt save your money for you fine. Everyone else can opt out. On defense, no clue. Cut it 10%, reduce the world policeman role, and let the military figure out whats unnecessary. Start by getting our allies to do more.
Click to expand...

OK, a lot of that is unrealistic and arbitrary. 10% of the top? Do less with more? I don't understand what that means. There's already been cuts across the board (the Sequester). It didn't produce the change promised and negatively affected operations of those programs in a significant way.
 
Last edited:
jonny5 said:
Actually 3.4T.
Click to expand...

Discretionary spending last year totalled $1.1T, so $2.6T … actually.

>>Im concerned about the 20% income tax I have to pay.

How much? Twenty grand? I figure yer getting yer money's worth.

  • ISIL about to be overrun and kicked out of Iraq and Syria, no Iranian nuclear weapon, peace on the Korean peninsula
  • safe food, medicine, transportation, public health, working conditions
  • clean air and water
  • relief from national emergencies
  • national research facilities
  • national parks
  • overseas diplomatic missions
  • interest paid on all the debt piled up by GOP SSE policies
>>The 15% payroll tax.

Social Security and Medicare.

>>The hundreds and thousands more in various fees I have to pay so the govt can control me.

The good news is that taxes on the Right will soon be eliminated, as we shift to added control in the reeducation camps.
 
Incisor said:
OK, a lot of that is unrealistic and arbitrary. 10% of the top? Do less with more? I don't understand what that means. There's already been cuts across the board (the Sequester). It didn't produce the change promised and negatively affected operations of those programs in a significant way.
Click to expand...

It cut the deficit in half. That was the changed promised.
 
jonny5 said:
Pick a regulation. Can I smoke weed? Pay someone for sex? Heck, drive without a seatbelt? Cut down a tree on my own property?
Click to expand...

Build just about anything on my property without a permit? That one probably bugs me way more than it should, but still, it really really bugs the **** out of me.
 
Henrin said:
Build just about anything on my property without a permit? That one probably bugs me way more than it should, but still, it really really bugs the **** out of me.
Click to expand...

Use any mailbox you want? Drink craft beer without a label? Enlist in the miliary AND order a beer at 18? Buy insurance without birth control coverage? Work for less than $7 an hour?
 
jonny5 said:
It cut the deficit in half. That was the changed promised.
Click to expand...

The Sequester didn't do that. Letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire on the wealthy did more, as did a growing economy. The Sequester was $85B in cuts, yet you say the deficit dropped by $500M. So how's your math work there?
 
jonny5 said:
Pick a regulation. Can I smoke weed? Pay someone for sex? Heck, drive without a seatbelt? Cut down a tree on my own property?
Click to expand...

1. Conservatives oppose legalizing marijuana.
2. Prostitution is legal in Nevada
3. Why would you drive without a seatbelt?
4. How is cutting down a tree a "freedom"?
 
Henrin said:
Build just about anything on my property without a permit? That one probably bugs me way more than it should, but still, it really really bugs the **** out of me.
Click to expand...

OK, but that's a local/state issue, not a federal one.
 
Incisor said:
1. Conservatives oppose legalizing marijuana.
2. Prostitution is legal in Nevada
3. Why would you drive without a seatbelt?
4. How is cutting down a tree a "freedom"?
Click to expand...

You asked how govt controls me. Asked and answered.
 
Incisor said:
The Sequester didn't do that. Letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire on the wealthy did more, as did a growing economy. The Sequester was $85B in cuts, yet you say the deficit dropped by $500M. So how's your math work there?
Click to expand...

Not so. Total discretionary budget authority dropped from 1.5T to 1.1T. Thats 400b right there. And the expiration of the tax cuts on the rich only expired in 2013. So you only have 3 years of revenue. According to the IRS, they took in

390billion at 35% rate in 2012
380bn at 39.6% in 2013
448 at 39.6% in 2014

So we're only talking about 50bn more per year (minus 5% if tax rate hadnt gone up).

Versus 400bn in savings from spending restraint.

So hows your math work?

https://www.irs.gov/uac/soi-tax-sta...ical-tables-by-tax-rate-and-income-percentile
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals


Meanwhile -
In fiscal year 2016, the federal budget deficit will increase in relation to economic output for the first time since 2009,

The deficit is growing in 2016 because revenues are up only slightly, by less than 1 percent ($26 billion), whereas outlays are projected to rise by 5 percent ($178 billion).
Click to expand...

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/51908
 
Henrin said:
Why is that important?
Click to expand...

Because if you don't wear a seatbelt, your odds of dying in a car accident are exponentially higher. Since the passage of seatbelt laws, fatalities from auto accidents have declined by nearly 50%.

How is it not?
Click to expand...

It's not a federal issue. It's a state/local issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom