• 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!

Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All States?

Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

Can you imagine a debate between trump and Franken?

The network would have to post a "spew warning" prior to the debate....the amount of coffee, water, beer, soda, etc......sprayed onto television screens across the nation would reach epic levels.
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

Can you imagine a debate between trump and Franken?

No, but I think it would have been most interesting, fun to have watched.
 
An idiotic idea just like that of the debt ceiling. All it does is tie the hands of people who are trying to solve our problems and keep our economy running smoothly. If you want the budget balanced vote for someone who swears that they will in fact do that, but don't tie the hands of legislators to some arbitrary nonsense.

Anybody who would argue for this garbage clearly has no concept of reality when it comes to how government spending works. Sadly there are way to many undeducated bafoons out there that seem to think a federal budget is just like their family budget. They are so anstronomically different it is insane, and to try and manage them the same is delusionally stupid.

First, the interest rates the federal government pays are incredibly low. Just like a Bank the debt we take on is usually turned around and invested in such a way that we actually make more money than we end up paying in interest. The United States would usually be losing money if it didn't run at least a little bit into the red. At the very least though we're almost certainly not screwing ourselves over by borrowing a little bit of money every year.

Secondly, if for any reason we found ourselves in a situation where we really really had to pay our collectors off, and we didn't have the money laying around we're in no real danger of defaulting because we can always just print the money. Not saying that we should do that a lot, but we can any time we need to, and in many instances it actually would make sense if we did it a little bit more than we currently do.

The real problem is, getting elected to office, takes different skills, than doing the job once elected. The result is those who get elected, are good at the election process, but are not fully competent for the job. This is why everything is so slow and expensive in government; led by layman.

When getting the job is based on popularity, advertising and mud slinging, you get the wrong people for the job. Picture if IBM or Apple decided to hire a new CEO, based on a general election. What would happen? It would go in the red and look like the government in a short time.

Many people don't like President Trump, so he fails the popularity criteria. However, he has the targeted education and experience for a balanced budget job. The incompetent in power, and the media who also lacks these skills, will place the popularity criteria ahead of job competence. President Obama was a lawyer, so his knowledge of the economy was that of an educated layman. However, he was popular and that made him right for the job?

Under popularity first conditions, the easy thing to do is borrow, to make up for lack of skills. A layman with extra money can get others to do the job, but that requires expensive middlemen, that add to the cost and raise the deficits.

A balanced budget amendment would require a clause that spells out who can work the job. It would need to be composed of the experts, with the loud mouthed laymen con artists, out of the loop.
 
Last edited:
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

Actually, my friend, it appears that you are blind to the sentiments of the American people. It is the voters that have given the Republicans over a thousand elected positions in state and federal government since 2009. There is no possibility of the Democrats getting the Senate in 2018 and almost none of them getting the House.

You may well be right.

The re-Awakening of America is going to take some time. But, the gruesome unfairness of its market-economy will catch up to it. And the re-awakening will be more rude the longer it takes for that to happen.

You are underestimating the length-and-breadth of the Income Disparity. Because you are fixated on the growth of Wealth. But, that advantages only 20% of the population, whilst the other 80% must simply do with the everyday status-quo.

You (plural) are worshiping the wrong gods ....
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

You may well be right.

The re-Awakening of America is going to take some time. But, the gruesome unfairness of its market-economy will catch up to it. And the re-awakening will be more rude the longer it takes for that to happen.

You are underestimating the length-and-breadth of the Income Disparity. Because you are fixated on the growth of Wealth. But, that advantages only 20% of the population, whilst the other 80% must simply do with the everyday status-quo.

You (plural) are worshiping the wrong gods ....

Why is there income disparity? See, I think that it is because those who are successful keep making the decisions that made them successful, while those who are barely scraping by... They are making the same type of decisions that led to their low incomes in the first place. Of course, the left wants to focus on income disparity. They want to seize what people who are successful make and give it to those that didn't earn it. Sure sounds like a fair system, doesn't it? Why is it the left hates success? Liberals hate Walmart. It's an example of an American success story, but Sam Walton was too successful. It's just not fair. Then there is Thomas S Monaghan... Too successful. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell... All American success stories. What do they all have in common? They worked their asses off. They didn't go having kids before they could afford them.
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

Most states do have a balanced budget requirement. Because they can't just print more money. But why should the federal government ever balance the budget? Gone pretty well so far borrowing and printing. Everybody knows we ain't gonna pay it back, yet they still want our bonds. Maybe because the rest of the world is just like us, only worse. It's just a number after all.
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

A DECENT LIFESTYLE

Why is there income disparity? See, I think that it is because those who are successful keep making the decisions that made them successful, while those who are barely scraping by... They are making the same type of decisions that led to their low incomes in the first place.

Oh, come off it - will you? The above is about as dumbfounding as saying "it's God's will".

You've bought the hogwash that "if you try hard enough, you can make it". That aint necessarily so. (Tell that to any black person you know.)

People are rich because they luck-out. Not necessarily because they are "inventive or creative". Some examples:
*The two kids at Stanford (in 1990) who "stumbled upon" a well-developed technology for alphabetizing the text of any document and then relocating the document when a word or phrase was "googlized", which was child's play (technically). But both are now multi-multi billionaires. (The right place at the right time.)
*The person who's an Investment Banker and makes a megabuck toying with stocks (in a growth market) with other people's money.
*The guy-or-girl who moved to Hollywood and in an instant became "bankable".

These are all instances of the few who "lucked out". The greater part of the population emulates them for their "luck", but know that none of the above will ever happen to them.

We don't see Jack 'n Jane America on TV at night. We see those who "succeeded", and we think (stoopidly) that "anybody can do that". Nope it is NOT anybody. It's more like one in 5 million!

The greater part of any population on earth are just "working joes-'n-janes" trying to make a living. But, in a world where the minimum wage is 7 bucks and hour, they just cant make it up the grade. And their kids will never find their way out of poverty for as long as tuition-costs keep them away from a post-secondary education (which means "vocational, two- and four-year" diplomas).

So, the kids become the next generation of "working joes-'n-janes" (and on, and on, and on).

Moreover, given the transition from the Industrial Age to the Information Age, obtaining that post-secondary degree to get out of poverty and into a sufficiently well-paying job is essential for a decent existence.

But, all that is lost on people who think it is just "a matter of luck or effort or both". Which is consummate BS!

You don't climb the highest mountain in the world without the right "kit". And if you try, then likely you die.

It's the same for education that allows one the right credentials to find a decent job. People NEED nowadays those post-secondary degrees to do so. It is highly inconsiderate of a nation that does not to make the necessary investment for them to achieve that goal: A decent salary that affords a decent life-style.

That is, a post-secondary degree free, gratis and for nothing. If we, as a nation, could achieve that for a secondary-school degree, we can do it also for a post-secondary degree as well ...
 
WE, THE SHEEPLE

An idiotic idea just like that of the debt ceiling. All it does is tie the hands of people who are trying to solve our problems and keep our economy running smoothly. If you want the budget balanced vote for someone who swears that they will in fact do that, but don't tie the hands of legislators to some arbitrary nonsense.

Balancing the budget could be made the law. Were that the case, then the PotUS who sends their budget to the Congress for approval would be obliged to do so within the means available.

As it stands now, the PotUS sends the budget, which is negotiated, but in the course of the budget-year, Wow! The debt-ceiling must be raised! The nation will be spending beyond the authorized budget cost!!!

If a company worked like this, it wouldn't last two years. But, this is the "gummint" and, neither can you fire the Chief Executive, nor can you bankrupt the country, nor can you imprison anyone for trying to do so. (Not enough prison space? ;^)

Better rules are necessary. BUT, let's not forget a key fact: A budget depends upon expected revenues from various tax-sources. If the economy diminishes, then so do tax-revenues.

And when that happens, what's a country to do? Because that is exactly the challenge that Bush2 handed Obama! At the mid-term elections of 2010, we, the sheeple, screwed Obama by handing the HofR over to the Replicants.

Who promptly started yelling, "Budget Too High! Austerity Budgeting! Austerity Budgeting! Austerity Budgeting!" And Why?

To assure that No Further Stimulus Spending would be made so as to keep Unemployment Rates high for the presidential elections of 2010. That mischievous trick didn't work, did it?

But it succeeded in keeping us, the sheeple, out of work until the economy (all by itself!) started creating jobs again four long years later in 2014 - see that historical fact from the Bureau of Labor Statistics here.

See what happens when a two-party system starts playing silly political games - and we, the sheeple, pay the consequences?!?!?

Is that what we should want from a two-party system? Cuz that's what we got ... !
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

You've bought the hogwash that "if you try hard enough, you can make it". That aint necessarily so. (Tell that to any black person you know.)

My best friend is a black man who was born in a coal mining town in West Virginia. His entire family worked in the coal mines. He managed to work his butt off and get a scholarship to get through university before becoming an officer in the US Army. He retired as a full bird colonel about a decade ago. Left the service, went on to get his doctorate degree. He's not the only one. I have met many people who grew up poor, in the trailer parks or projects that became successful.
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

My best friend is a black man who was born in a coal mining town in West Virginia. His entire family worked in the coal mines. He managed to work his butt off and get a scholarship to get through university before becoming an officer in the US Army. He retired as a full bird colonel about a decade ago. Left the service, went on to get his doctorate degree. He's not the only one. I have met many people who grew up poor, in the trailer parks or projects that became successful.

Nice story.

I am concerned, however, for all those blacks (and all colours) who did not succeed as well because they did not have a scholarship. They are in the millions.

I live in France. I paid 800€ ($850) for tuition per year because the French government subsidizes ALL post-secondary schooling. All my kids have a 4-year degree. Two have master's degrees for which they paid out of their own pocket, the tuition being the same.

That is what we should have in the US for any child who seeks a Tertiary-level Education (vocational, 2- or 4- or 6-year). And, frankly, we can for about half the DoD-budget going for scholarships instead ...

In that manner, many more will find jobs and live meaningful lives.

As it stands today, only 45% of our kids are getting through to a Post-secondary degree - and on average for those that do, they have a $35K debt to repay. Of the 55% who don't, around 15% will liver permanently below the Poverty Threshold. And 40% will be lucky to be earning the median salary of $54K a year.

We can do better (by subsidizing Tertiary Schooling just like we subsidize Primary/Secondary schooling), but we don't seem to want to do so ...
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

Nice story.

I am concerned, however, for all those blacks (and all colours) who did not succeed as well because they did not have a scholarship. They are in the millions.

I live in France. I paid 800€ ($850) for tuition per year because the French government subsidizes ALL post-secondary schooling. All my kids have a 4-year degree. Two have master's degrees for which they paid out of their own pocket, the tuition being the same.

That is what we should have in the US for any child who seeks a Tertiary-level Education (vocational, 2- or 4- or 6-year). And, frankly, we can for about half the DoD-budget going for scholarships instead ...

In that manner, many more will find jobs and live meaningful lives.

As it stands today, only 45% of our kids are getting through to a Post-secondary degree - and on average for those that do, they have a $35K debt to repay. Of the 55% who don't, around 15% will liver permanently below the Poverty Threshold. And 40% will be lucky to be earning the median salary of $54K a year.

We can do better (by subsidizing Tertiary Schooling just like we subsidize Primary/Secondary schooling), but we don't seem to want to do so ...

France, what a shining example. Let's talk about austerity. Tell me, does have of those earning income not pay federal income tax? Tell us about your 20% sales tax on most items sold. That education is paid for...
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

France, what a shining example. Let's talk about austerity. Tell me, does have of those earning income not pay federal income tax? Tell us about your 20% sales tax on most items sold. That education is paid for...

We don't have a problem with "taxation" per se in Europe. It provides the benefits that people expect a state to furnish them. Namely, both a National Healthcare System and Tertiary Education that are very, very low cost (compared to the US).

The Sales-Tax is a far better more effective manner for any government to collect funds. It is more efficient than the Income-Tax.

The US should adopt it and relieve the states from collecting a sales-tax, all the while sharing the revenue obtained within the state in which it is obtained. It would be cheaper and reduce the "inter-state" competition as regard sales-taxes.

Most EU-countries have both, but! That is, the Income Tax is far less a part of the total tax-intake of any nation in the EU. More breadth is given to income-earners, especially those with growing children.

And Europe is different in another aspect. We taxpayers here do not have the national DoD hanging around our necks eating up 54% of national budgets (in a time of relative peace!)

The US has collectively a mad-fascination with anything that goes "bang". Lotsa luck with that one, in a country with an overwhelming guns-guns-guns mentality.

Las Vegas is only a beginning. The crazies are about to have a field day. Only sixty dead?

Watch the mad-rush to "beat that number" ...
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

We don't have a problem with "taxation" per se in Europe. It provides the benefits that people expect a state to furnish them. Namely, both a National Healthcare System and Tertiary Education that are very, very low cost (compared to the US).

The Sales-Tax is a far better more effective manner for any government to collect funds. It is more efficient than the Income-Tax.

The US should adopt it and relieve the states from collecting a sales-tax, all the while sharing the revenue obtained within the state in which it is obtained. It would be cheaper and reduce the "inter-state" competition as regard sales-taxes.

Most EU-countries have both, but! That is, the Income Tax is far less a part of the total tax-intake of any nation in the EU. More breadth is given to income-earners, especially those with growing children.

And Europe is different in another aspect. We taxpayers here do not have the national DoD hanging around our necks eating up 54% of national budgets (in a time of relative peace!)

The US has collectively a mad-fascination with anything that goes "bang". Lotsa luck with that one, in a country with an overwhelming guns-guns-guns mentality.

Las Vegas is only a beginning. The crazies are about to have a field day. Only sixty dead?

Watch the mad-rush to "beat that number" ...

We had a proposal called the Fair Tax which his a national sales tax. The bed wetting liberals claim that it is a terrible thing. They claim it is regressive and harms the poor unfairly but you are extolling its virtues as a better way to collect taxes. I actually agree with you.
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

We had a proposal called the Fair Tax which his a national sales tax. The bed wetting liberals claim that it is a terrible thing. They claim it is regressive and harms the poor unfairly but you are extolling its virtues as a better way to collect taxes. I actually agree with you.

I don't know what kind of "liberals" you have in the US. Liberals here in Europe are BigSpenders (but not on Defense). And tax-revenue is tax-revenue, regardless of how quickly or not you spend it.

And, yes, if that is the case, then I too am a "liberal". I'd rather see money spent on National Health Care and Tertiary Education, than have people dropping like flies from an illness or thousands of dumb kids put behind bars because they were caught red-handed trying to take the fast-track to riches.

Here in Europe, the sales tax is collected immediately and spent directly by governments. (And, yes, some spend it willy-nilly, but Greece is a highly particular economic disaster.)

The sales tax is, however, affected by economic recessions - but so is income-tax. But, The real challenge (at least in Europe) is to make states understand that taxation is not an endless gold-mine from which they can continue to make extravagant expenditures. (Regardless of the nature of said expenditures.)

Which is still good advice as regards the US and particularly the DoD, one of the most extravagant expenditures ever conceived that consumes 54% of the Discretionary National Budget. For which there is very little real return - except to assure incomes at a finite number of DoD-contractors. (And, these last years, assuring one helluva lotta body-bags returning to the US - so it's "really great'" for the body-bag business.)

Of course, as some famous economist must have said, "There is nothing like a war every now and then to dampen the excessive rise in birth-rates".

(And who am I to dispute Common Sense ... ;^)
 
Re: Is it Time for a Balanced Budget Amendment for the Federal Government and All Sta

I've lived in both Germany and the Netherlands. I know how wonderful it is over there. I have seen the socialized medicine, the paying people to go to school, and all those other great social programs. I also learned the tax burden paid by those citizens. I saw how expensive the cost of living was for the Dutch and Germans. The price of a gallon of gasoline, the cost of a house, the price of a pair of Levis. I have seen it. The French are ranked 26th in the world on the amount of disposable income per month (after taxes), compared to the USA having a 13th ranking. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence but it does still have to be mowed.
 
Back
Top Bottom