• 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!

How Obama Can Get Money to Reduce Defict

How Obama Can Get Money to Reduce Defict


  • Total voters
    21
I like the China one, but you would need to make them all slaves. Tis the only way.
 
**Raise taxes on the wealthy.

**Nationalize oil and coal companies, pay off debt with their excess profits. Slowly phase out oil and coal while transitioning their workforce to green and renewable energy.

**Tax bonus compensation over $99K @ 75%

**Tax anual salary over $5M @ 90%

Those last two suggestions would solve many, many problems.

Since the 1970's there has been a massive shift in power from Capital (people with money to invest in companies, specifically powerful shareholders) AND Talent (CEO's, CFO's and highly compensated athletes and performers). This shift has resulted in Talent getting vastly overpaid for less than successful work, failing upwards, etc.

Taxing this overpaid compensation would bring in more revenue and incentivize Capital Investors to demand their money be spread around more, expanding the workforce, R&D, and health insurance benefits for the workforce.

Middle management should demand higher compensation.

Workers and Capitalists Unite



So those that can't want to take what those who can, did.... :lol:
 
What are some of the best ways for Obama to get the money to reduce the national debt?
This poll is based on a false premise.
He doesn't need another dime of revenue - he needs only cut spending.
 
Cut military spending by 50%. Annually use $50 billion for the resulting unemployment/retraining and the remaining $500 billion to reduce the deficit.
 
One of the GOP Candidates (Daniels?) spoke of using lottery monies to fund education. Maybe there's a way to play off that.

I of course will always say "legalize marijuana."
 
Cut military spending by 50%. Annually use $50 billion for the resulting unemployment/retraining and the remaining $500 billion to reduce the deficit.
FY2009 deficit: $1413.6B
FY2009 military spending: $655.8B
Congrats - the deficit is now $1135.7B
What next?
 
I'm going to risk being criticized and take on the retirement age. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'm looking to throw something on the table and see what you guys think about it.

The retirement age was established at the age of 65 when the life expectancy was at around 62 years old (quite the racket, eh?). The average life expectancy for both men and woman (averaged) is about 78.3. With people living longer, perhaps it is time that the retirement age is extended to remain true to the way it was originally established. Now of course there are the downsides to this: One, it would garner widespread opposition from individuals nearing the retirement age and who were expecting to retire at the age of 65; Two, we have to take into account the health of people at around 78 years old, which is often very frail and no longer capable of hard labor. Extension of the retirement age would likely work under white collar conditions, but it would be the blue collar workers that would be most negatively affected by such a change.
 
I'm going to risk being criticized and take on the retirement age. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'm looking to throw something on the table and see what you guys think about it.

The retirement age was established at the age of 65 when the life expectancy was at around 62 years old (quite the racket, eh?). The average life expectancy for both men and woman (averaged) is about 78.3. With people living longer, perhaps it is time that the retirement age is extended to remain true to the way it was originally established. Now of course there are the downsides to this: One, it would garner widespread opposition from individuals nearing the retirement age and who were expecting to retire at the age of 65; Two, we have to take into account the health of people at around 78 years old, which is often very frail and no longer capable of hard labor. Extension of the retirement age would likely work under white collar conditions, but it would be the blue collar workers that would be most negatively affected by such a change.

Could there be a "grandfather" clause, i.e. if you are 60 and over, you still retire when expected but the rest of us continue working? But what will this do to the availability of jobs?

Frankly, I like the idea. My alleged paternal parental unit is 76 and he's still working seven days a week.
 
Could there be a "grandfather" clause, i.e. if you are 60 and over, you still retire when expected but the rest of us continue working? But what will this do to the availability of jobs?

Frankly, I like the idea. My alleged paternal parental unit is 76 and he's still working seven days a week.

That's a good point. That would certainly permit those who were nearing, and likely relying on their approaching retirement to retire when they planned. As for the availability of jobs, that's a good point. Nonetheless, with the economic crisis we have on our hands, keeping people of the age 65 in work will keep them spending normally, which will help to stimulate the economy. That still leaves room for people being out of work, though.
 
Back
Top Bottom