Economy

Rave

A Solution to the Federal Government Debt: End Income and Pa

Posted 19 months ago|17 comments|760 views
Written by
Colorado
Westcliffe, CO
American's have become uneasy about the amount of Federal Debt that is stacking up in Washington and for good reason. This month the debt total topped $13 trillion and will reach $14 trillion within six months. Although these numbers are impressively large and hard to accept, the path to reverse them is not terribly hard.

To demonstrate that the debt problem could have been easily handled during the height of the crisis lets crunch some numbers. The cost of the government bailouts and guarantees the federal government granted was $7.7 trillion dollars. That's what I said, $7.7 trillion and that does not include the $16.3 trillion of federal government guarantees that were made by many government agencies. After all that money was spent our economy is still weak and unemployment is still high.

Instead with that money the government could have protected the credit system with the $ 700 billion TARP fund and then canceled income and payroll taxes for two years. Sound crazy?

The world operates on incentives, especially the economy. If underlying economic indicators are weak than there is little incentive for investors to invest, for businesses to expand, and for creation of new jobs. However, if income taxes were canceled people would be able to spend and save much more rather than having to pick wither to save or to spend. If payroll taxes were cancelled corporations would be willing to risk expansion and hire more workers. Demand would grow due to increased savings rates and consumer spending. The country would experience an economic boom almost overnight.

To pay for the 50% decrease in federal government revenue a very small nationwide sales tax could be implemented and spending could be cut drastically. Ending the wars and cutting military spending, create a means test for social security and increase retirement age to 70, and deregulate healthcare which would make healthcare cost decrease. Those three tasks would cut the projected 2010 $3.7 trillion budget by 50 percent.

Alas that is not what happened, instead we received a stimulus package that has done little and spent a lot, bailouts of corrupt and greedy bankers, and no major decrease in unemployment. Since hindsight is 20/20 what could be done now? The answer is still the same one as above but just a little different.

Use the $700 billion TARP funds, use the remaining 45 percent of the stimulus package, end the wars and cut military spending, cancel the $800 billion dollar healthcare reform, and cut social security spending. Take all of that money and cancel the income tax and payroll taxes.

I am 100 percent confident that there would be unintended consequences but this plan would create positive incentives on the individual level rather than a trickledown effect. In a complex organization such as the economy solutions have to be regulated to the individuals in the free markets. With less federal government spending and nationwide sales tax there would be no real reason to bring back the income tax but if we did, it would be much lower and go directly to paying off the debt. America would once again become the greatest economic power in the world instead of coming in second to the social European Union.


Sources:

http://www.usfederalbailout.com/
http://usgovernmentspending.com/#usgs302...
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/#usgs...
Think Twice, Michael J Mauboussin
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
THE RONBOT HUNTER
THE RONBOT HUNTER
19 months ago: aND WHO DO YOU THINK WE OWE THIS DEBT TO?

It is to the International Bankers that own the Corporation called the US.

Read these links to give you the facts of how and who created the treason in 1933.

The Global Power Elite is NOT that Strong! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1_5UfSJQ...

The Rothschilds Exposed 1/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F4IGwuKd...

The Cashless Society http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVUV_ohng...

The Rothschild Octopus http://www.dejanlucic.net/THE%20ROTHSCHI...

Also http://vaticproject.blogspot.com/2010/02... Dejan Lucic http://www.dejanlucic.net/Dejan%20Lucic-...

PAWNS IN THE GAME William G. Carr http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/pa...#4

Fight the New World Order with Global Non Compliance All 3 parts http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?doc...

Salbuchi Pt.1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J03j9Zo5o... Pt.2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W53SvPsO...

Full list of Brasscheck TV videos http://www.brasschecktv.com/index.php

Disinformation agents of the N.W.O. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a8J_uPLH...


The Illuminati - Rothschild Banking Family Exposed - Part 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2Yjoi...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...

Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws! Mayer "Amschel Rothschild (1744 - 1812)".

If the American people knew the corruption in our money system there would be revolution before morning
"Henry Ford".

If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency (instead of Congress), first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the c
THE RONBOT HUNTER
THE RONBOT HUNTER
19 months ago: PART TWO WHERE IT WAS CUT OFF

If the American people ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency (instead of Congress), first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied.
"Thomas Jefferson, letter to then Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, 1802."

The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight.
"John F. Kennedy, speech at Columbia University, 10 days before his assassination."

I tell it like it is, I pull no punches, tell no lies, and I am as I am

THE ONE AND ONLY RONBOT HUNTER
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
THE RONBOT HUNTER
THE RONBOT HUNTER
19 months ago: Yes, thank you.

He was assassinated because he was against the masons, Illuminati and any and all other secret societies.

But the really big secret ones, behind the ones that killed him, were the owners of this corporate Federal US government.

They give the orders for all major killings and all wars.

I tell it like it is, I pull no punches, tell no lies, and I am as I am

THE ONE AND ONLY RONBOT HUNTER
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
19 months ago: If the TARP funds were given to the people (via income tax and payroll tax vacation as you suggested) it would have been much better than giving it to the bankers. Maybe then the people wouldn't have had to loose their homes. The least Bush could have done is make some strings attached so the banks would have been forced to use that money for new loans to rev the economy up. Instead the bankers took the free money and invested it so they could get rich.

When Obama got in, his stimulus was 1/3rd tax cuts to the middle class and small businesses and the other 2/3rds for supposedly "Shovel Ready" projects like fixing roads. Unfortunately most of those projects won't kick in till this summer because it took time for bids, planning etc.

It cost the government hundreds of thousands of dollars for each job created. It would have been much cheaper if the government just hired people directly, like the CCC or WPA. They could have hired 20 people for each one the private sector hired with the tax cuts.

The TARP and the Stimulus did keep us out of a depression and the Stimulus has stopped the hemorrhaging of jobs and resulted in 6 straight months of job growth. See: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archive...

Most economists agree that cutting benefits to the unemployed and cutting other stimulus spending will slow down the economic recovery and could result in either a double dip recession or a major depression. The reason the economy isn't doing better is the stimulus wasn't as large as the economists thought it should be.

Part of the economy has recovered much faster than the rest however, and it wouldn't hurt the recovery to tax the super rich billionaires. Wwecould also generate trillions by putting a small transaction tax on those risky leveraged hedge fund transfers and derivative trading. This wouldn't hurt the regular people (which a sales tax would) and would discourage the harmful ponzi schemes that caused the economic disaster.

Colorado
Colorado
Westcliffe, CO
19 months ago: thanks for the comment.

i agree that the stimulus helped hold things together but now people the markets are very worried that the stimulus is the only thing holding the markets together. The Fed even started talking about a new stimulus and nobody is talking about your great idea of the CCC.

So if we are stuck with another stimulus lets help the people that really need it, the lower and middle class plus businesses that want to hire but are to worried about the market.

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
19 months ago: I agree that we need to stimulate the economy by helping the middle class and the small businesses. Middle class tax cuts would generate consumer spending and consumer confidence which would give businesses the confidence to start hiring again. The small businesses generate 65% of the jobs.

Obama has given tax cuts to 95% of the people and has targeted the middle class and small businesses to try and create jobs. See: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/obama-mid...

To pay for this stimulus we need to cut some spending. I agree with you we need to cut military spending and Obama's plan to get us out of Iraq and next year start pulling out of Afghanistan, and also his requests for all military to cut spending 10% to transfer those funds to active duty operations and to cut unnecessary cold war military equipment we do not need will save money if Congress goes along. We also need to save money with the entitlements. Obama has tried to cut Medicare waste 5% and his Health Care law will trim $1.5 trillion from the deficit over the next 10 years. We also need to cut domestic spending and Obama has asked for a 3 year freeze on non military spending, and the House has gone 7% farther than that in their budget. It is being held up by the Republicans in the Senate.

Nonetheless cutting programs will not pay off the national debt. TO do that we need to raise revenue. A flat tax or sales tax will hurt the middle class the most, which we agree will hurt the economy. The only way to generate revenue without hurting the economy is by taxing those with more money than god. Top tax rates are now 35%, when the Bush tax cuts expire they will go back to 39%, and that alone will generate $700 billion/yr. Even if we leave the rest of the Bush tax cuts to the middle class alone. Historically during times of war and right before Reagan got in the top tax rates were 90%. Also the transaction tax on harmful financial activity would not harm the middle class but would generate trillions without harming the economy.
19 months ago: Al. Please. That lie is beginning to turn my stomach.

...Obama has given tax cuts to 95% of the people and has targeted the middle class and small businesses to try and create jobs...

I must be rich with my net taxable household income of way less than 100,000.00 dollars...way less than 90,000.00 dollars...way less than 80,000.00 dollars...way les than 70,000.00 dollars...way less than 60,000.00 dollars... and my taxes went up. Not down. Does that mean I'm rich or stupid? You probably will say ''both''.

What was that quote again? Something taxes not increasing by a single dime if...?

A lie. Your not being honest.

To sit there anf say we need to now cut programs without willing to be the one who gets cut is hyprocracy. How about we start cutting the waste in government employment? Yeah I forgot, you were a government employee and now earn your pention check every month for all of the pay loss you endured over the years. Yeah, right. It is finally coming out that government employees make more to do less than private sector employees. Tell me I'm wrong with that statement. Half of the government employees could be cut tomorrow and the other half would either have to pick up the slack or move on...just like in the private sector.
THE RONBOT HUNTER
THE RONBOT HUNTER
19 months ago: This the commie Liberal's wet dream -- to tax the successful people of 90% of their income.

Suppression of the upper middle class and the very rich, is the commie's answer to all our problems.

Even I, an enemy of the Rothschilds and the other 12 family elites that own you, know this is a stupid solution.

The solution is to know the truth about where does the money go to?

Commies can not face the truth, because the truth exposes their cooperation in the treason that happened in 1933.

I tell it like it is, I pull no punches, tell no lies, and I am as I am

THE ONE AND ONLY RONBOT HUNTER
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Find the clue of who I am in this link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hl...#!

Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
19 months ago: You are right Colorado that the Congress has been scared by radical right wing hysteria as above, but some people are considering direct government hiring of the unemployed.

Obama is a pragmatic centrist, so he has tried traditional supply side solutions, but Economists have determined that Supply Side Economics is not working. We need to turn to Demand side Economics.

This year is the 75th anniversary of the WPA which created 3.3 million jobs directly and an additional 7 million private sector support jobs.

We should have learned some lessons from that:
First, we learned that after the private sector suffers a major shock to the system, it can't quickly recover on its own. Government must step in.
Second, direct government hiring not only replaces jobs that have been lost, it also primes the pump so the private sector can start hiring again.
Finally, effective government hiring targets the communities hardest hit by economic crisis.

The newly introduced Local Jobs For America Act — which Campaign for America's Future is championing — could be a significant step in the right direction. It would provide $100 billion over two years for local governments, helping them create or save one million workers offering vital public services. In addition to creating or saving 250,000 jobs in education, it would give local governments freedom to create jobs in other areas depending upon the specific needs of their communities.

The bill currently has 120 co-sponsors in the House, but it needs more than 200 to have enough support to pass. So far, some right-leaning Democrats remain scared of cries of "socialism" and are wary of using the government to directly create jobs.
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010...


Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
19 months ago: But yes that is a bunch of money for a paltry amount of jobs. If the government hired directly instead of giving the money to local governments you could get a lot more bang for the buck by eliminating the middle men. At least that is what the prize winning economist Paul Krugman thinks.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11...
Siempre Solo
Siempre Solo
Auburn, NY
18 months ago: Federal Debit? Don't you mean public debit? We have to pay for it. Don't we? And if we have to pay for it then we should benefit from it, shouldn't we? I believe a lot of people have and will and they will be paying their debit if not now then later!
Colorado
Colorado
Westcliffe, CO
18 months ago: Oh I agree. I only used federal debt to make difference from total public debt (states, cities and so on)
18 months ago: Sepends on woh you consider the 'WE" that hast to pay for your benifits. Surely your not referring to yourself. Why would you need benifits handed out by the government if you could pay for them yourself? Your speaking to all of the benifits you can't afford?
Colorado
Colorado
Westcliffe, CO
18 months ago: ????
18 months ago: Sorry, was typing too fast...

Siempre, depends on who you consider the 'WE" that has to pay for your benifits. Surely your not referring to yourself. Why would you need benifits handed out by the government if you could pay for them yourself? Your speaking to all of the benifits you can't afford?
Siempre Solo
Siempre Solo
Auburn, NY
18 months ago: No Cypress, I think Colorado get's what I'm talking about! You on the other hand got an obsession with the poor and disenfranchised.

Massive large scale public works projects are only successful as they tie in to the private sector. They create opportunity for entrepreneurs. Opportunity which stimulate the economy by creating more opportunities that aren't publicly funded. Hopefully creating a cycle of private wealth. The cost? The immediate debt of getting the ball going, that's all.

That is basic economics 101 Cypress! I thought you were a business owner? Don't you know this already?

The same principles also apply to the poor and disenfranchised that you keep eluding to. You write them of as "permanent" wards of the state, by sighting the "expensive" tax dollar funded social programs of rehabilitation, but fail to acknowledge that without rehabilitation such victims can never payback into the system that helped rehabilitate them.

Your problem is not with the system or the people you criticize. It is with your own stereotypes and bigotry. Get over yourself and you will find it more liberating then getting back the few measly tax dollars that you think you are giving up for the people and social programs you criticize.

Get it? Probably not!

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.