• 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 would you pay to fix our infrastructure problem?

Whatever happened to the balanced budget Amendment people used to talk about?

I am heartily opposed to deficit spending. I am heartily opposed to constant "borrowing" from the Fed, which increases inflation. I am also heartily opposed to increased taxation to cover giveaways our government should not be dealing in.

That's one thing I like about Rand Paul, his stand on a balanced budget.

If you want to improve infrastructure, which I agree is an important function of government, then makes sure it's within a budget and the money is used only for that purpose.
What happened to even having a budget? This is my biggest criticism of Trump. He has not done hardly anything to fix the out of control spending. Congress holds presidents political hostage to CSR bills by threatening gov shutdowns.

Something i never hear brought up our spending and the trade war with china is what is going to hsppen if China decides not to buy our debt?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
What happened to even having a budget? This is my biggest criticism of Trump. He has not done hardly anything to fix the out of control spending. Congress holds presidents political hostage to CSR bills by threatening gov shutdowns.

Something i never hear brought up our spending and the trade war with china is what is going to hsppen if China decides not to buy our debt?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

A better question is why are we depending on other nations, especially "economic" enemies like China to control our debt?

WE should be controlling our own debt by exercising fiscal responsibility.

As for blaming Trump? He does not control the budget, laws exist allowing him to reallocate funds if Congress fails to act.

Yet we have a Congress full of people who keep telling us we need to spend, spend, spend. No rational explanation as to where the money is supposed to come from...until of course it shows up as more taxes.

Candidates promising free tuition, slave reparations, student loan payoffs, free healthcare, etc. The emphasis on "free" when there is no such thing.

The money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is those of us with an income.
 
What I find interesting with the OP plan is hitting the "rich" and corporations. Seems AOC wants the rich to pay for her plans. Seems many politicians running for President want the rich and corporation money. Bottom line, the rich and corporations cannot pay for infrastructure, health care, food for all, schools, etc.

The US has a spending problem that has been growing for years. What the Feds and States need to do is balance their budgets. Not all programs are going to get all they want and not all programs can continue.

Besides some tax reform maybe we need to raise the gas tax. I know the gas tax would hit everyone, but it could be one source of revenue. I agree that if a tax is raised to fund infrastructure than it need to go for that. Congress is too easily distracted and use targeted funds for other things.
I've grown weary of the complaint that everyone needs to pay their fair share when half the country does not pay any federal income tax and we borrow 40% of what we spend.

If every man, woman and child were required to pay tjeir fair share it would cost them about $12k each. A family of 4 would owe $48k. People would be singing a much different tune if they were required to pay their faire share of the cost for everything they want the gov to do.

You want to fix spending in this country you have to touch the real 3rd rail in politics. Tax the incomes of the 40% who dont pay any.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
I've grown weary of the complaint that everyone needs to pay their fair share when half the country does not pay any federal income tax and we borrow 40% of what we spend.

If every man, woman and child were required to pay tjeir fair share it would cost them about $12k each. A family of 4 would owe $48k. People would be singing a much different tune if they were required to pay their faire share of the cost for everything they want the gov to do.

You want to fix spending in this country you have to touch the real 3rd rail in politics. Tax the incomes of the 40% who dont pay any.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

What is the definition of "Fair"?
 
If Trump wants to make good on his promise to address infrastructure, he would demand money from Congress to address infrastructure. If Congress were to refuse to give him money for infrastructure, he could declare a national emergency (ala the wall) and take the money from other sources. The fact that he has not demanded money for infrastructure (ala the wall) tells me he is not serious about infrastructure.
 
Everybody knows we have a really bad problem with our infrastructure and it is getting worse. We need more than a trillion dollars just to fix the most serious deficits. So what do you suggest doing to pay for this problem?
Here is my solution. First get rid of the Trump tax cuts and force a minimum tax on corporations that make a profit. This will force the wealthy who in the end get the most out of an improved infrastructure as it helps the business of doing in this country and what is god for business is good for the wealthy and the corporations. Then I would place a two percent tax to enable us to sell infrastructure bonds backed by the US to raise more funds for the project. I have read this would enable us alone to raise 500 billion dollars. This part of the plan would cause everyone to help pay for the project, including those who might not contribute through the Federal Income tax. These two changes would raise over 1 trillion dollars to be put into starting to fix our infrastructure that needs it so badly.

The first thing I would do is find out where the last trillion went. We collect enough taxes though. Surely there is something less important than infrastructure that we can cut to fund 'infrastructure'.
 
First roll back the 2017 corporate tax cut.
Start matching state dolllars.
If states want their infrastructure fixed they need some skin in the game.
For me infrastructure is not only roads and bridges but water supply, electric grids, gas lines and most especially broadband in rural areas.
Why aren't states and localities doing anything to raise some money for projects in their states. I'm not okay with increasing the federal gas tax and federal dollars going to areas that refuse to even put a ballot measure on to raise their sales, real estate, vehicle or any other tax to fix things in their states.
I'm not even going to blame Congress for this one. I think states need to get on the ball and Congress will follow.
 
The first thing I would do is find out where the last trillion went. We collect enough taxes though. Surely there is something less important than infrastructure that we can cut to fund 'infrastructure'.

Surely there are, but i doubt you'd ever get the left and the right to agree as to what those are.
 
Spending on WHAT?

What we have is a massive inequality problem that has been growing for 40 years. We need to reverse that - for the rich to get less and everyone else to get more. That's not only a 'zero sum game', but results in more growth as well. High inequality hurts growth, hurts opportunity, increases social costs.

Where we need to cut spending is on 'corrupt spending' and waste, but that doesn't mean what Republicans think. It means things like the corrupt military industry especially. It means attacking our massively excessive debt with its huge interest payments, DESIGNED to bankrupt our government as the "starve the beast" policy begun with Reagan.

The Progressive Caucus writes a budget every year that attacks these issues. I'd say it's highly likely you have never read it. It balances the budget faster than the actual, the Republican, OR the Democratic budgets. The problem isn't how to fix this, it's people not trying to.

- You mean this budget?
The Progressive Caucus FY 2019 "People's Budget" | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

- "]On the revenue side, the CPC budget targets a total $10.9 trillion of revenue without specifically itemizing how all of it would be raised."
Another way of saying we don;t know where the money will come from. :mrgreen:

- Interesting in the proposal they state what percentage the rich would pay, but no mention of us middle class folks. What are they going to do for the common folk?

And last the conclusion they posted:
"]We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences"

Present a plan to the public that they admit is based on some unrealistic numbers and politices. Further the Progressives say the plan may have unaccounted for economic consequences.

You support this Progressive plan tells a great deal about you. imo, it is DOA.
 
- You mean this budget?
The Progressive Caucus FY 2019 "People's Budget" | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

- "]On the revenue side, the CPC budget targets a total $10.9 trillion of revenue without specifically itemizing how all of it would be raised."
Another way of saying we don;t know where the money will come from. :mrgreen:

- Interesting in the proposal they state what percentage the rich would pay, but no mention of us middle class folks. What are they going to do for the common folk?

And last the conclusion they posted:
"]We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences"

Present a plan to the public that they admit is based on some unrealistic numbers and politices. Further the Progressives say the plan may have unaccounted for economic consequences.

You support this Progressive plan tells a great deal about you. imo, it is DOA.

So the hell what? It's a big improvement.

Your SAME SOURCE is saying the current budget plan 'may be the worst spending deal ever'. That's what YOU are defending in comparison. Did you read the Progressive budget, or only the commentary on it?
 
So the hell what? It's a big improvement.

Your SAME SOURCE is saying the current budget plan 'may be the worst spending deal ever'. That's what YOU are defending in comparison. Did you read the Progressive budget, or only the commentary on it?

I have not defended any budget plan. Why do you Progressive's jump to conclusions on what someone posts? Seems you can't take it when someone disagrees.
- I read the Progressive budget. Have you?
- Interesting that you brought up the Plan yet failed to provide a link to it. Yes, anyone can search and find it. Yet for the sake of discussion it would be good if the same source was used.

Your own groups words, "Overall, the CPC budget calls for large increases to both spending and revenue. We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences. At the same time, we are pleased they take seriously the goal of not only paying for new proposals but also stabilizing the nation's fiscal situation. As in prior years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus's budget puts the debt on a downward path and would represent a substantial improvement over our current debt trajectory."

A plan based on "unrealistic" numbers and "unaccounted for economic consequences" is not a plan I can buy into.
 
Your own groups words, "Overall, the CPC budget calls for large increases to both spending and revenue. We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences. At the same time, we are pleased they take seriously the goal of not only paying for new proposals but also stabilizing the nation's fiscal situation. As in prior years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus's budget puts the debt on a downward path and would represent a substantial improvement over our current debt trajectory."

The CFRB you quoted is not 'my group'. Now, let's try your quote with the opposite part bolded.

"Overall, the CPC budget calls for large increases to both spending and revenue. We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences. At the same time, we are pleased they take seriously the goal of not only paying for new proposals but also stabilizing the nation's fiscal situation. As in prior years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus's budget puts the debt on a downward path and would represent a substantial improvement over our current debt trajectory."

A plan based on "unrealistic" numbers and "unaccounted for economic consequences" is not a plan I can buy into.

Ya, the status quo is so much better.

You post nothing about the actual budget, just a few cherry picked quotes from another organization about it.
 
I would require that a mile of comparable road be permanently removed for every new mile of road built. I would put an additional 5% federal income tax on payrolls of anybody working in urban areas with more than 100K people.
That's an interesting idea. Tax those that live and work and have businesses in the metropolitan areas that use and need the infrastructure.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
The CFRB you quoted is not 'my group'. Now, let's try your quote with the opposite part bolded.

"Overall, the CPC budget calls for large increases to both spending and revenue. We worry that some of their numbers and many of their policies may be unrealistic or have unaccounted-for economic consequences. At the same time, we are pleased they take seriously the goal of not only paying for new proposals but also stabilizing the nation's fiscal situation. As in prior years, the Congressional Progressive Caucus's budget puts the debt on a downward path and would represent a substantial improvement over our current debt trajectory."



Ya, the status quo is so much better.

You post nothing about the actual budget, just a few cherry picked quotes from another organization about it.

Then post a link to the budget you are so proud of.

The bolded statement by you is based on faulty assumption of unrealistic numbers and not knowing the economic consequences.
So they have no way to really know if the plan will do what they said it would do.

What actual budget?. I will ask again, post your link.
 
Debt financed infrastructure spending.
 
Charge a fee of one tenth of one cent for every share bought or sold on the american markets.
 
Everybody knows we have a really bad problem with our infrastructure and it is getting worse. We need more than a trillion dollars just to fix the most serious deficits. So what do you suggest doing to pay for this problem?
Here is my solution. First get rid of the Trump tax cuts and force a minimum tax on corporations that make a profit. This will force the wealthy who in the end get the most out of an improved infrastructure as it helps the business of doing in this country and what is god for business is good for the wealthy and the corporations. Then I would place a two percent tax to enable us to sell infrastructure bonds backed by the US to raise more funds for the project. I have read this would enable us alone to raise 500 billion dollars. This part of the plan would cause everyone to help pay for the project, including those who might not contribute through the Federal Income tax. These two changes would raise over 1 trillion dollars to be put into starting to fix our infrastructure that needs it so badly.

First off, Trump's tax cuts are generating more revenue that last year. As far as I know the wealthy drive on the same roads and use the same infrastructure as the rest of us.
 
You do remember that in his first term he passed the ACA which is very popular with a majority of Americans. He tried in his second term to start paying for infrastructure projects but Moscow Mitch held them up and when he finally got one approved, trump stopped the Federal Funds for the project when he came into office. SO the one show stinks here is Moscow Mitch an your favorite master Trump.
Actually, ACA rarely gets more than a point or two above 50% - usually it's lower.
 
Then post a link to the budget you are so proud of.

The bolded statement by you is based on faulty assumption of unrealistic numbers and not knowing the economic consequences.
So they have no way to really know if the plan will do what they said it would do.

What actual budget?. I will ask again, post your link.

Seriously, you can't type "Progressive Caucus Budget" in google?

Congressional Progressive Caucus : The People's Budget: A Progressive Path Forward FY 2019
 
Obama promised all these shovel ready jobs and only shoveled manure for 8 years

Obama was not willing to confront the environmental lobby and their lawyers, who makes a ton of money delaying projects. Projects in California stall for anywhere from. Low of five years to eternity. You send in your environmental impact report, they sit on it for a couple of year, then send it back with more demands. Some of our infrastructure going on now in Sacramento county is final approval of Obamas “shovel ready” jobs.

Footnote: the new tax increases for “infrastructure”, are 30% infrastructure, 30% county overhead, and 40% to fund generous pensions.
 
Everybody knows we have a really bad problem with our infrastructure and it is getting worse. We need more than a trillion dollars just to fix the most serious deficits. So what do you suggest doing to pay for this problem?
Here is my solution. First get rid of the Trump tax cuts and force a minimum tax on corporations that make a profit. This will force the wealthy who in the end get the most out of an improved infrastructure as it helps the business of doing in this country and what is god for business is good for the wealthy and the corporations. Then I would place a two percent tax to enable us to sell infrastructure bonds backed by the US to raise more funds for the project. I have read this would enable us alone to raise 500 billion dollars. This part of the plan would cause everyone to help pay for the project, including those who might not contribute through the Federal Income tax. These two changes would raise over 1 trillion dollars to be put into starting to fix our infrastructure that needs it so badly.

In the MSNBC series called 'American Swamp' they talked about the deterioration of the Hudson River tunnel that connects Manhattan with New Jersey. There was a series of projects known as the Gateway Program, which includes the Hudson tunnel, a $1.7 billion replacement for the Portal Bridge in the Meadowlands, and other improvements between Newark Penn Station and New York Penn Station. These structures are more than a century old and badly in need of repair. The Hudson tunnel is used by over 200,000 people a day under the Hudson River.

Lawmakers from New York and New Jersey agreed to pay half the cost and the Obama administration had agreed to pay for the other half the cost of the new bridge and tunnel, but Trump walked it back. The project's supporters argue that they're federal assets that are critical pieces of infrastructure in the region's economy and merit federal support. Amtrak owns both.

It's only a matter of time that some catastrophe involving a crumbling tunnel, collapsing dams and eroding bridges will fail, and when they do it will take many lives. Infrastructure needs to be a priority before it happens. Make no mistake, repairing our infrastructure brings many jobs to both skilled and non-skilled workers. There is a 2 trillion dollar gap needed to be filled if we can expect our infrastructure to be repaired by 2025. Americans must be willing to pay, rates and fees that reflect the true cost of using, maintaining and improving all infrastructure, including our water, waste, transportation and energy services. In last November’s elections, 79 percent of all state and local ballot measures supporting transportation infrastructure investments passed. Voters across 31 states raised their own taxes and fees in exchange for better roads, bridges and transit.

The government can put a small increase in the gasoline tax which hasn't been raised since 1993. Many states, including my own, are going to a 'VMT' fee for automobiles. That's a fee similar to a toll that charges drivers a fee for using the highways. The most traveled US highway goes through my state and I'm okay paying a fee to use the highway if that's the only way my state is able to keep up with the repairs it needs. We need to get our lawmakers to take the problem of infrastructure repair seriously and put it higher up on their agenda.

Has anyone else seen the amazing railroad station in N. Korea, or the super glitzy skyline of Guangzhou, China? The subway in N. Korea doubles as a bomb shelter in the event of a nuclear attack on Pyongyang. Seriously, the United States is the richest country in the world, so why are we not at the very least getting our infrastructure repaired so it's safe for all of us?



 
Why don't you look at how inefficient and wasteful our government is. Why does everyone think if we as a nation hand our entire paycheck over to the government, they will take care of us?

If we could just confiscate all of the wealth from the top 100 people in this country, we would have more than enough money to fix some of our short term problems.

The only problem with that solution is that the next 900 riches people in this country will flee the nation with their wealth and the US would actually end up losing more than it has gained.
 
Tax the poor. Conservative answer to everything.

Damn but thats a stupid response. Why do you even come here when you completely misunderstand the simplest of arguments?
 
Damn but thats a stupid response. Why do you even come here when you completely misunderstand the simplest of arguments?

It is a simple argument. Gas taxes snd tolls are essentially taxes on the poor and working class. You favor it. Therefore, you favor taxing the poor.
 
Back
Top Bottom