Members banned from this thread: Hermes Thoth, SmarterthanYou, USFREEDOM911, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Granule, canceled.2021.1, Boris The Animal, canceled.2021.2, MAGA MAN, iewitness, Irish, CFM, Ralph, Sailor, Life is Golden, Bigdog, TTQ64, Getin the ring, zymurgy, Superfreak, PraiseKek, Eagle_Eye, katzgar, countryboy, Tommatthews, volsrock, The Ugly Truth, BodyDouble, coolzone, rhym3pays, LV426, Loving91390, Into the Night, Enlightened One and Anarchon


Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 181 to 185 of 185

Thread: There Is Simply Not Enough Revenue. The Deficit Is Too Large. Debt Is Out Of Control.

  1. #181 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    I have not watched the video...(I hate videos except when naked women are involved). Is there a transcript of what he slowly says.

    I agree that community service could be a rewarding activity (getting MORE)...although I think there is lots to be had using volunteers.

    Interesting story: The Town council where I live once proposed to pay the volunteers of the Volunteer Fire Companies...and Volunteer First Aid ambulance companies...but the volunteer members lobbied against the idea and won. They wanted their efforts to be voluntary...not for monetary compensation.

    I guess this is as good a place to mention that MONEY as the major (often the only) compensation for work or contribution...is something that has to end.

    Romans used the use of purple for toga fringe as compensation. Chevrons, other insignia, and military scrambled eggs may be needed...or items of that sort. The love of money is the root of most evil in our society.
    It's a challenge but I think we can do it.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  2. #182 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    23,253
    Thanks
    13,544
    Thanked 12,185 Times in 7,629 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1,051 Times in 998 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunny2009 View Post
    Sorry, but I find this concept "We have to limit the number of humans working to the minimum possible." to be just insane. Somehow everything you want has to be "paid" for, one way or another. Farmers will not grow food unless they are getting something tangible in exchange for it. There is only so much that a machine can do, there still has to be people involved.
    There is no doubt that humans will be needed. And they have to be "compensated" (read what I said above to Poli on that score.)

    The idea is not only NOT INSANE...it is INEVITABLE...particularly in a capitalistic dominated society.

    Companies are REQUIRED to maximize profits...and the cost of labor will always be the prime victim of that. The moment it becomes less profitable to use humans than machines (which is coming for lots of jobs very soon)...the humans are out the door.

    Then what happens when the person you gave a "sufficient amount" for a decent life blows it or does not use it well and runs out, will they get more?
    You are fixated on the "distribution" problem requiring money as now used...as a necessity.

    If distribution uses confined scrip of some sort...the notion of "blowing it" may out the door. It CAN be handled.

    In order to incorporate large hunks of socialism into our system, you would also need to get rid of the Constitution, or just ignore it I suppose.
    Maybe...maybe not. Our system is flexible...and we may be able to do a lot more along the lines a few of us are suggesting than you think...while staying well within the confines of the Constitution.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Frank Apisa For This Post:

    PoliTalker (12-15-2018)

  4. #183 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,520
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,566 Times in 17,093 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Apisa View Post
    Yeah...I know.

    That is why I suggest it as PART of what has to be done.

    "Taxing the rich more" IS NOT GOING TO GET THE JOB DONE. Neither is making capital gains a part of ordinary income...nor is increasing inheritance taxes.

    It is a beginning...a first step in a process that will have to be accomplished in a structural pattern.

    So???
    Of course, taxing the wealthy and corporations more would lower the debt. It is so huge that it would not do it in a year. But it would erode the debt on a steady process. We slashed taxes to the wealthy the last 50 years, you cannot expect a tax increase to fix it in much less. But you need to start the process .

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Nordberg For This Post:

    Frank Apisa (12-15-2018), PoliTalker (12-15-2018)

  6. #184 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    34,430
    Thanks
    23,941
    Thanked 19,095 Times in 13,072 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 5,908 Times in 5,169 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Hello Nordberg,

    Quote Originally Posted by Nordberg View Post
    Of course, taxing the wealthy and corporations more would lower the debt. It is so huge that it would not do it in a year. But it would erode the debt on a steady process. We slashed taxes to the wealthy the last 50 years, you cannot expect a tax increase to fix it in much less. But you need to start the process .
    Absolutely true.

    It is common to think we have to eliminate the debt to be on sound financial footing. That is not true. Actually we don't even have to reduce it or wipe out the deficit.

    There is a more important metric than the debt.

    That is the size of the debt compared to the GDP.

    The important figure to look at is the Debt/GDP ratio.

    If that gets too high it is bad, weakens the USA.

    When it gets lower, we are much more secure.

    We need to reduce the Debt/GDP ratio.

    That can be done two ways.

    a) reduce the debt.

    b) increase the GDP.

    As long as GDP is growing faster than the Debt, then Debt/GDP is reduced. A good thing!

    That is not happening.

    That's the main problem for our economic outlook.

    We could be just fine if we never reduce the Debt, as long as we grow the economy.

    When we get the deficit very low, that occurs. As long as the economy is doing well, and we reduce the deficit to a low figure, (a few hundred billion would be fine) then Debt/GDP is reduced.

    We can have a great nation and still run our big debt.

    We can operate on a deficit and still be fine.

    It's not as bad as some fear. The debt will not kill us.

    But this is not limitless. We cannot borrow our way to prosperity. We are borrowing too much of our budget. We have to have more revenue. We need to tax the rich more. That is indicated by all measures.
    Personal Ignore Policy PIP: I like civil discourse. I will give you all the respect in the world if you respect me. Mouth off to me, or express overt racism, you will be PERMANENTLY Ignore Listed. Zero tolerance. No exceptions. I'll never read a word you write, even if quoted by another, nor respond to you, nor participate in your threads. ... Ignore the shallow. Cherish the thoughtful. Long Live Civil Discourse, Mutual Respect, and Good Debate! ps: Feel free to adopt my PIP. It works well.

  7. #185 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,520
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,566 Times in 17,093 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Sorry but cranking up the deficit is a long term Republican plan. It is not an accident. McConnell and Ryan said that after the huge Trump tax cut, they could not justify cuttiing social programs. That was always the aim. Trumps tax cut did exactlty what the Repubs wanted, it cranked up the debt. That is why we never cut the military . You would think if the Repubs thought the debt was a problem, they would not continue causing it, but they do.Does anyone still think they are the party of fiscal responsibility.? They are the party of debt and building a plutocracy. The wealthgap is greater than the Gilded Age and what did Trump do? He gave the wealthy more. Someday you guys may figure it out.https://thinkprogress.org/republican...-488a9bcbba7d/
    Last edited by Nordberg; 12-15-2018 at 11:56 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. GOP Senator Warns Tax Bill Ignores ‘Debt And Deficit Issues’
    By floridafan in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-27-2017, 01:01 PM
  2. Question regarding the deficit/debt
    By apple0154 in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-18-2012, 07:05 PM
  3. Deficit growth slows, opportunistic deficit hawks strangely silent
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-11-2011, 10:28 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-12-2010, 07:04 PM
  5. The Real Deficit: 847 Billion per year, Debt should pass $10 trillion this year
    By KingCondanomation in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-29-2008, 11:30 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •