• 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!

What's the best way to reduce the deficit?

What is (are) the best way(s) to eliminate the deficit?

  • A balanced budget amendment

    Votes: 20 24.7%
  • A line item veto amenndment

    Votes: 14 17.3%
  • replace income tx with a national retail sales tax

    Votes: 9 11.1%
  • Raise taxes on the rich

    Votes: 30 37.0%
  • Raise taxes on the middle-class

    Votes: 5 6.2%
  • Raise taxes stealthily in the form of fees, a federal lottery, etc.

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Nationalize oil and natural gas on federal land and get into the enegry business like Saudi Arabia

    Votes: 10 12.3%
  • Cut federal spending

    Votes: 56 69.1%
  • Sell services to prizate industry at a profit, privatize then tax them

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • other

    Votes: 23 28.4%

  • Total voters
    81
...actually, your chart shows that corporate revenues were pretty much comparatively flat throughout the entire time that individual incomes fluctuated significantly, again, agreeably, with the exception of the 2004-2008/09 period.
Indeed it does, which destroys your earlier point.

The point is that tax revenues increased so dramatically because the business base was so stoked. After 1/1/00, the bottom fell out of the boom economy and the tax revenues immediately started to fall.

Before you go wild and find that the revenues of 2000 were good, recall that the revenues received in 2000 were generated by activities in 1999.
 
As your screen name would indicate, you have proposed a remedy that could have come directly from the Communist manifesto.
:doh
No....... Not even close...
 
Competition makes things better. Competition in the marketplace increases the value of products and the range of products available.

Your system implemented in the 50's would result in our country today driving Edsels designed by folks using slide rules.

Promoting a fair trade, protectionist policy, does not get rid of "competition"
 
Stop all our wars and kill all our old people.
That would only work in the long term. For an immediate solution, substitute rich people for old people in your formula ;)
 
Other, the only way we have significantly reduced the deficit in the last 3 decades was to both cut excessive spending on the military and eliminate tax breaks for the wealthy, especially to those who offshore American jobs.
 
Yes. It means a fanatic is talking :mrgreen:

You mean fanatics like the CBO? Or the IMF? Perhaps you mean someone like Ben Bernanke? Or Crazy Conservative Fanatics like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton?

:roll:

The notion that we can ignore the slowest-moving, most obviously coming Fiscal Train Wreck In History and just keep on hiking up spending strikes me as the notion perhaps more congruent with the descriptor of "fanatical".
 
Last edited:
You mean fanatics like the CBO? Or the IMF? Perhaps you mean someone like Ben Bernanke? Or Crazy Conservative Fanatics like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton?

:roll:

The notion that we can ignore the slowest-moving, most obviously coming Fiscal Train Wreck In History and just keep on hiking up spending strikes me as the notion perhaps more congruent with the descriptor of "fanatical".


Or anyone that doesnt say exactly what CPWILL wants to hear...lol
 
What do you think are the best ways to eliminate the deficit?

I voted "Other."

Reduce tax rates across the board so that those who pay taxes pay lower rates, but also eliminate tax exemptions so that there is a larger number of those who must pay those taxes.

It'll never happen, though, because individual Representatives and Senators would rather get the individual contributions from lobbyists and pass those tax exemptions than do the right thing for the country.
 
Last edited:
...you realize that's pretty much the Ryan Plan's approach to taxation?
 
...you realize that's pretty much the Ryan Plan's approach to taxation?

Except he wants to make deep cuts to social programs but not to defense spending.
 
You mean fanatics like the CBO? Or the IMF? Perhaps you mean someone like Ben Bernanke? Or Crazy Conservative Fanatics like Barack Obama and Bill Clinton? :roll:

The notion that we can ignore the slowest-moving, most obviously coming Fiscal Train Wreck In History and just keep on hiking up spending strikes me as the notion perhaps more congruent with the descriptor of "fanatical".
No, fanatical is posting links to support one's fanatical claims while ignoring what the link actually says. For example, from your IMF link:

The IMF said the plan should include spending cuts, entitlement reform - a reference to the long-term burden of promised health and retirement benefits to seniors - as well as revenue increases.
Now we all well know that the Tea Party fanatics, which now includes GOP leadership (both Boehner and McConnell signed the Norquist pledge), refuse to acknowledge that "revenue increases" are words that even co-exist in this galaxy, much less implement them. Just like the fanatical right wing argument, which you and others present here, that the only way to reduce the deficit is to cut spending; raising taxes is not only not an option, it simply does not exist. Weird.

Further, the repeated dodge of GOP God Grover Norquist does your group little good when you use, as part of your argument, sources that say taxes somewhere somehow must be raised -- such as the IMF did in the quote above, and Clinton did in his linked comments (he even advocated a VAT, while noting that when the economy improves that alone will wipe out about half the current annual deficit, a fact always ignored by the fanatical cut spending and taxes crowd).

Lastly, Obama has cut spending, which you would have seen if you had simply read the posts in the thread -- in particular, post #119 (chart of federal spending per household). Under Bush, from FY2001-FY2009 the inflation adjusted budget increased from $2.0 trillion to $3.2 trillion, and he was hiding a lot of stuff off budget -- an increase of over 50% in spending during the Bush administration. Somehow I missed the right wing outcry. In comparison, since that $3.2 trillion peak in FY2009, under Obama spending has gone down to $3.1 trillion in both FY2010 and FY2011. You're blaming the wrong guy . . . . . . .

Spending figures: Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary (middle column, "Constant FY2005 Dollars")
 
do you think Bill Clinton is a right-wing fanatic?
Bill Clinton doesn't agree with you. That you think he does says something. . . . . . .

From cpwill's earlier Clinton link:

Now, that portion of the deficit annually attributable to the stimulus will go away when normal economic growth returns. About half of the annual deficit will go away. The rest of it is embedded again.

And since upper-incomes people's relevant tax burden was raised to help pay for health care, it's unrealistic to think that we can basically solve this whole thing from cutting spending and just raise an upper-income taxes. We're going to have to have more growth. I think we're going to have to have more taxpayers, which is why I favor, in a disciplined way, a immigration reform and letting more immigrants come to the country. I think it would make more jobs for people who are unemployed, not fewer. We're going to have to look at different tax systems that are not easily evadable, and that make us more competitive.

I think they ought to look at a progressive value-added tax, just because--and I think it's important the American people understand this--most of our competitors have tax systems like this.

CNBC News Headlines
Do you agree with 10%, 50%, or 90% of that? :2razz:
 
I suspected that chart may have been too complicated. Oh well -- pictures are as simple as I can make it :shrug:


You would expect spending to remain at 2000 levels? Why in the world would you expect that?

Let's say you have a livestock farm. Over the course of 12 years, your livestock grows and multiplies. Also over the course of that 12 years, your feedgrass grows to replenish itself, but you also have to plant more feedgrass to keep pace with the increased births of livestock. You also need increased barn and corral space, which costs money.

Around year 8, your area experiences a severe drought. Feedgrass dies. Your livestock looses weight, has fewer births, and you even have a few deaths -- therefore your income is reduced, complicating the feedgrass problem... you can't afford to buy as much new feedgrass acreage as you did in the past. Do you:

a) figure that you have slightly more feedgrass now than you did in 2000, despite the size of your operation increasing by some 25%, and blame the situation on your livestock multiplying?

b) slaughter some of your livestock, at a loss, to reduce feedgrass consumption (spending) to available supply?

c) borrow some money to buy additional feedgrass to keep your livestock alive until the drought passes and feedgrass growth returns to normal?

b) SLAUGHTER them till you are profitable again. You have no idea how long the drought is going to last. Otherwise not only are you putting yourself in debt now, It will be harder to recover after the drought.
 
b) SLAUGHTER them till you are profitable again. You have no idea how long the drought is going to last. Otherwise not only are you putting yourself in debt now, It will be harder to recover after the drought.
That was the expected response. Well done :2razz:
 
First and foremost, in order to reduce the deficit, Remove Obama from office and don't elect Democrats and other entitlement mongers.

Disband and eliminate Welfare and Medicaid. Welfare can be replaced with work farms and labor camps for public projects with the system being designed to be self suficient or near it. Medicaid can be replaced with a system of free clinics, staffed by federal/state employees and then allow all other medical systems to deny care to the un-insured (except in the case of imminent death). Yes, the initial building of those clinics may cost more than current Medicaid for a year, maybe two, but then again, maybe not as a bunch of those welfare kings and queens can be put to work doing the construction.

Do away with unnecessary federal agencies such as HUD and BATF.

Combine all federal law enforcement under one agency with a single management structure.

Reduce or totally eliminate redundant and unnecessary management levels and positions in all federal agencies.

Replace the EPA with an agency that balances business/economic factors with real enviromental science (not the sudo science advocated by current enviromentalist).

Remove congress from the Defence aquisition process. Congress should allocate funds for research, developement and aquisition then have no further say except maybe some oversight to ensure proper spending habits. The military should also change from contractors to building what it needs itself. Greatly reduce the Officer corps of the services to a ratio similar to WWII levels, this would include authorizing the Air Force to have warrant officers as pilots instead of commissioned officers, with only commissioned officers in command positions. Mandate that the Navy also move all of it's pilots slots, except command postitions to warrant officers. The Army already pretty much does this with it's helicoptors.

Replace all construction at the federal level and state levels to direct hire of employees to meet needs instead of contracting it out.

Replace Medicare with a privitized insurance policy provided by the government, similar, but hopefully better than the Tri-care system provided to service members.

Replace VA medical centers with privatized insurance policies also, this should not only reduce cost of maintaining facilities, but veterans would actually receive better care. A zero deductible/copay policy could be provided for those with high levels of disability.

Remove all but the original Social Security(SS) benefits from the SS funds. If it is a needed item, fund it elsewhere.

Convert all jail and prison systems to self sufficient labor camps and work on public projects. Institute a chemical interrogation process to remove potential innocents from facing the death penalty and then reduce levels of appeals and costly requirements in capital cases. Expand capital punishment to include the offences of all pre-meditated murder, murder when committing another felony, 2nd offence of rape and child molestation and the distribution of drugs to minors or tainted drugs that cause death in others.

Reform the education system and remove unnecessary levels of oversight and management. Struture it to meet the needs of the children, even if some programs get more funding than others and mandate a reasonable ratio of administrators to teachers.

End federal backing of student loans for useless degree programs and focus it only on employable degrees.

Do not fund any organization or medical company that performs abortions other than those necessary to save the life of the mother.

Do away with funding of public broadcasting and the arts.

Cancel all funding related to the enforcement and monitoring of Affirmitive Action.
 
...you realize that's pretty much the Ryan Plan's approach to taxation?


You mean the paul ryan whose plan has been totally rejected twice by the american people and congress.
 
do you think Bill Clinton is a right-wing fanatic?


Nope but hes whatever is best for bill and will change accordingly :)
 
No, it just reduces it, thus reducing growth.

"Reducing growth"? Where is the growth now? Where has been the US job growth for the bast 20 years here?
 
"Reducing growth"? Where is the growth now? Where has been the US job growth for the bast 20 years here?

Mostly in China where they are slowly throwing off their socialist ways instead of in America where socialistic ideas and government control have been on a steady rise. They are more and more embracing capatilist methods, improving their educations systems and should throw off the last vestiges of communism/socialism in the mid term future, where as America has embraced greater and greater socialis, electing it's first Socialist president in 2008, placing to many restrictions on business and expansion of new markets and ideas , has abandoned advancement to try to maintain a status quo and will probably become a 3rd world ****hole about the sametime as China dumbs the last communist/socialist out of their government. That is unless we also start dumbing socialism and socialist idiocy or have a second Civil war and eradicate the socialist/communist/liberal bastards and bitches before then.
 
We should raise taxes on all Americans who earn dollar one:

1- a five point income tax increase across the board or all
2- abolish the estate and inheritance tax as it exists and simply tax the money as income according to the normal income wage schedule
3- abolish the capital gains tax and simply tax the money as income according to the normal schedule
4- cut $300 billion from the budget today

We owe it to our kids and our grandkids. The selfishness has to stop. The ideology has to stop. The fanaticism has to stop.

We need to start being adults.
 
Back
Top Bottom