• 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!

Concerned about that 20 trillion in debt?

Helix said:
are you personally willing to pay more in taxes in order to pay down the debt?
Click to expand...

The more tax revenue is raised the more congress spends it. It would never go to paying down the debt. That's why most conservatives are against raising taxes - because the money won't be saved, it will be spent. That's not even open for debate. We have had about 250 years of it.
 
Critter7r said:
Or ... it would allow them to spend like drunken sailors at every turn, because " ... **** it!! I'm not coming back anyhow!! Woot woot!! Spend away!!"

Lowering term limits essentially creates lame duck sessions for every election, which means either nothing gets done, or crazy **** gets done. I don't like either of those options.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you most of the time but you hit the nail on the head with this one. You did forget to mention though that term limits would also increase shady shenanigans and taking money from lobbyists. I used to be in the retail business and when Christmas time comes around and you hire a bunch of seasonal help (especially cashiers) you shouldn't ever tell any of them that they were hired as seasonal only and will be layed off after Christmas because it increases the likelihood that they could steal from you if they know they won't be around long. Ditto Congressman and Senators.
 
Moderate Right said:
The MMT believers (who are liberals) say it all the time.
Click to expand...

Deficits matter, just not the extent conservative debtophobes believe. But if you're mad that you think liberals say deficits don't matter you must really be mad that republicans actually tell you and follow through on their beliefs that deficits don't matter. Its why deficits shoot up under republicans and go down under democrats.
 
Moderate Right said:
The more tax revenue is raised the more congress spends it. It would never go to paying down the debt. That's why most conservatives are against raising taxes - because the money won't be saved, it will be spent. That's not even open for debate. We have had about 250 years of it.
Click to expand...

i'll take that as a no. are you willing to give up tax cuts in order to pay down the debt?
 
Vern said:
that does not address my point or your false conservative narrative. I understand your agenda though. You don't want to hold republicans accountable for being flaming lying hypocrites where deficits are concerned. If you pretend "both sides do it" you can continue to vote republican. But FK, help me understand how you rationalize the party that constantly promises to balance the budget then doubles or triples the debt and ignore that deficits go down with democrats. Sure, democrats have no interest in balancing the budget but that's still way better than republicans' complete lack of concern for deficits when they are in power. Yes, zero concern, not a little, zero.
Click to expand...

I don't hold them accountable? I voted every single position on my ballot and voted for a single Republican, who was my state rep. Not sure what you're talking about.
 
fmw said:
While democrats and republicans say different things, they do the same things when they are in power. I hope that isn't news to you.
Click to expand...

No, that's not news. That's history.
 
fmw said:
While democrats and republicans say different things, they do the same things when they are in power. I hope that isn't news to you.
Click to expand...
While that might be a good slogan, it's not true, in terms of fiscal responsibility. Let's look at government spending under Clinton, Bush and Obama and see if we can pick up a pattern.

CLINTON:
usgs_line.php


BUSH:
usgs_line.php


OBAMA:
usgs_line.php


The sides are not symmetrical. In Clinton's term there was a slight increase in real spending. In Bush's term there was a near half increase and Obama was about even.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Here's some fuel to add to that fire.

It seems that (1) the deficit is only a part of the borrowing that is adding to that pile of debt, and
that the deficit is projected to go up this year, and
That is before any tax cuts, trillion dollar expenditures on infrastructure, or multi billion dollar walls:


I hadn't heard a lot about the federal deficit or the debt (yes! I know the difference! Let's not beat that dead horse again!) since the election, and got to wondering. I found this site, with a link to yet another site. Check it out.
Click to expand...



It feels like the U.S. has been in debt forever, generations before me and will be generations after. After awhile it's so high it doesn't seem like anything will make a difference.
 
Fishking said:
I don't hold them accountable? I voted every single position on my ballot and voted for a single Republican, who was my state rep. Not sure what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

well, you seem mad at liberals for what you think they say but don't seem mad at republicans for promising to balance the budget then exploding the deficit.
 
MTAtech said:
While that might be a good slogan, it's not true, in terms of fiscal responsibility. Let's look at government spending under Clinton, Bush and Obama and see if we can pick up a pattern.

CLINTON:
usgs_line.php


BUSH:
usgs_line.php


OBAMA:
usgs_line.php


The sides are not symmetrical. In Clinton's term there was a slight increase in real spending. In Bush's term there was a near half increase and Obama was about even.
Click to expand...

I would say you have too small a base to make any definitive conclusions. But I appreciate the effort.
 
Helix said:
i doubt it. Republicans are only concerned about it when the other side is in charge, and even then, they aren't willing to give up tax cuts to help pay it down. Democrats don't seem concerned about it at all. it's like being 20, living in a party house, and wondering about who's paying the electric bill. everyone living there only cares about it in an abstract sense.
Click to expand...

Dont you get tired of posting the same cliched comments that we've heard a million times? Everyone knows that politicians (ALL parties) dont care about anything but scoring points against their enemies and winning elections. What does restating the obvious add to this the debate?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Here's some fuel to add to that fire.

It seems that (1) the deficit is only a part of the borrowing that is adding to that pile of debt, and
that the deficit is projected to go up this year, and
That is before any tax cuts, trillion dollar expenditures on infrastructure, or multi billion dollar walls:


I hadn't heard a lot about the federal deficit or the debt (yes! I know the difference! Let's not beat that dead horse again!) since the election, and got to wondering. I found this site, with a link to yet another site. Check it out.
Click to expand...

The only way to do something about it is to improve our economy and/or reduce sending.

Historically, no mater who we tax at what rate, we get an average of around 18.3% revenues from the GDP (or is it GNP?) Lowering tax rates improve the economy, and we end up with around that 18.3% number. Raising the tax rates reduce the economy, and we still get around that 18.3% number.

This is why we need to end almost all subsidies. This is why we need to stop subsidizing illegal residence. This is why we need to make sure the safety nets don't become hammocks. Various types of social subsides I believe the largest thing the federal government spend money on.

Time to reign in the freeloaders and leaches of society.
 
Helix said:
i doubt it. Republicans are only concerned about it when the other side is in charge, and even then, they aren't willing to give up tax cuts to help pay it down. Democrats don't seem concerned about it at all. it's like being 20, living in a party house, and wondering about who's paying the electric bill. everyone living there only cares about it in an abstract sense.
Click to expand...

It's political suicide to actually try to take action. President Trump has the best plan I can think of to reduce this financial bleeding our nation has. Do all we can to e=mitigate illegal residency, and bring jobs back to our shores by disassembling the free trade agreements.

Look at the heat he gets for these ideas? Any thing more effective is political suicide.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Here's some fuel to add to that fire.

It seems that (1) the deficit is only a part of the borrowing that is adding to that pile of debt, and
that the deficit is projected to go up this year, and
That is before any tax cuts, trillion dollar expenditures on infrastructure, or multi billion dollar walls:


I hadn't heard a lot about the federal deficit or the debt (yes! I know the difference! Let's not beat that dead horse again!) since the election, and got to wondering. I found this site, with a link to yet another site. Check it out.
Click to expand...

According to that page they sometimes borrow LESS than the deficit, so Im not sure what we're supposed to take from this. The official debt can be found at the Treasury website

They actually borrowed about 1.2 trillion last year, but that includes the G fund which is money invested by govt employees in T bonds, which matures daily and is then removed. So it comes out to 686bn.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Exactly. When the Republicans are in charge, the Democrats are concerned about spending. . When the Democrats are in charge, the Republicans are concerned about spending. Neither party is pro fiscal responsibility. Tax cuts are popular, after all, but spending cuts are not.
Click to expand...

Just remember campaign promises are lies to the gullible, on both sides.

Have to look at the actual accomplishments of a politician.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Just remember campaign promises are lies to the gullible, on both sides.

Have to look at the actual accomplishments of a politician.
Click to expand...

That's true, and this time around the gullible gave us a politician who said he wasn't a politician, who had no accomplishments in that field, but who was gong to make America great again.

Soon, we'll be able to look back at his accomplishments. When we do, his supporters will never, but never ever, admit that they were conned.
 
Fishking said:
Most Republicans aren't conservative.
Click to expand...

So true. They just lie and appear to be, but their votes in congress say otherwise.

Both parties have failed this nation, and I think people are hard pressed to actually vote for a politician they believe in. We have effectively been reduced, as a nation, to vote for the lesser of evils.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is either a rare example who actually has a good person in their area to vote for, or are fooled by the charlatan nature of politics.
 
fmw said:
While democrats and republicans say different things, they do the same things when they are in power. I hope that isn't news to you.
Click to expand...

There are enough diffeneces, i still normally see republicans as the lesser of the evils. I do some times vote democrat.
 
Lord of Planar said:
There are enough diffeneces, i still normally see republicans as the lesser of the evils. I do some times vote democrat.
Click to expand...

You're ahead of me. I don't vote at all. What I want and what voters want is miles apart. It is a waste of my time.
 
Moderate Right said:
The more tax revenue is raised the more congress spends it. It would never go to paying down the debt. That's why most conservatives are against raising taxes - because the money won't be saved, it will be spent. That's not even open for debate. We have had about 250 years of it.
Click to expand...

Democrats will cringe on this little factoid...

The last time we actually had a year of reducing the national debt, was under president Nixon.
 
Helix said:
i'll take that as a no. are you willing to give up tax cuts in order to pay down the debt?
Click to expand...

raising or lowering tax rates only have a one, maybe two year effect.

Throughout history, no matter the tax rates, the government collects about 18.3%.
 
MTAtech said:
While that might be a good slogan, it's not true, in terms of fiscal responsibility. Let's look at government spending under Clinton, Bush and Obama and see if we can pick up a pattern.

CLINTON:
usgs_line.php


BUSH:
usgs_line.php


OBAMA:
usgs_line.php


The sides are not symmetrical. In Clinton's term there was a slight increase in real spending. In Bush's term there was a near half increase and Obama was about even.
Click to expand...

Those are bad examples to use. Should I claim you to be ignorant?

President Clinton's term of 1993 to 2001 gave him budget signing authority from FY 1994 to FY 2001. Same delay for the other presidents.

Your post detracts from your integrity. I assume you copied someone elses material, which anything they did is likely equally flawed.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I hadn't heard a lot about the federal deficit or the debt (yes! I know the difference! Let's not beat that dead horse again!) since the election,
Click to expand...

Of course not. That's because Republicans only make a big deal about it when they're not in control of the white house. When a Democrat is in the white house the only thing that matters to Republicans are deficits, and soldiers dying. When Republicans are in the white house deficits don't matter and soldiers knew what they were signing up for.

With Democrats, you'll notice that they consider the deficit and soldiers to be roughly equal in importance regardless of who's in the white house.

Guess who's lying to manipulate you....
 
The Democrats' solution to deficits is a one trick pony. Raise taxes. But anybody who has an IQ over 91 and is honest knows that amount of taxation needed to keep up with all the spending Democrats typically want to do would be cripple the economy.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Those are bad examples to use. Should I claim you to be ignorant?

President Clinton's term of 1993 to 2001 gave him budget signing authority from FY 1994 to FY 2001. Same delay for the other presidents.

Your post detracts from your integrity. I assume you copied someone elses material, which anything they did is likely equally flawed.
Click to expand...
No, that's my independent analysis but I do not doubt economists show the same conclusion.

While you have posting in this thread that cutting taxes improves the economy, there is no empirical evidence supporting that view. What's worse is that the tax-cuts that the GOP want are concentrated 79.8% on the rich. The evidence is clear, Tax Cuts for the Rich Aren’t an Economic Panacea — and Could Hurt Growth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom