2010-11-16, 02:36 | Link #1 | |
Shougi Génération
Graphic Designer
|
How would YOU fix the US deficit?
The game
Quote:
|
|
2010-11-16, 07:26 | Link #4 |
Adventure ∀logger
|
@Sumeragi
Higher taxes means people spending less. People spending less means stores not selling goods. Stores not selling goods means them eventually going out of buisness, etc... It all goes down hill from there. They should have taxes go by what people are making, and after a while if they chose to stay unemployed, they ether get arrested or taxes raised.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 10:06 | Link #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Age: 54
|
Even if it's unpopular:
1) Progressive tax raise to the very top. The speedup in wealth concentration at the top 5% needs to be counteracted. 2) Significant tax increase on fossil fuels 3) Capital gains tax, inheritance tax 4) Reduce taxation on personal income. 5) Reduce military spending, close a major number of military bases around the world Naturally that wouldn't fly since the elites have bought their blockade minority of senators and congresspeople. But that's what would have to happen to balance the budget. |
2010-11-16, 10:33 | Link #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
|
|
2010-11-16, 10:54 | Link #7 |
ひきこもりアイドル
IT Support
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsylvania , United States
Age: 34
|
Good Question... I would...
Sadly some of these won't happen because the Republicans want the tax cuts for the rich and they like big oil.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 12:01 | Link #8 |
Gundam Boobs and Boom FTW
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
1) Smack massive tariffs on China and reduce our trade deficit with them.
2) Legalize prostitution/marijuana and tax it heavily. 3) Reduce our global military presence. Cut it down, bring back the kids from overseas, and stop butting into other people's business (and let the world destroy itself as it sees fit). 4) Close the damn tax loopholes.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 12:31 | Link #10 | |
Banned
|
Quote:
1) It's not just China. We need to smack tariffs on goods coming in from countries with poor worker safety conditions or environmental policies. The reason we can't compete with their lower prices, is because we value our environment and workers more. Tariffs would prevent jobs from going overseas, thus strengthening our economy and increasing the amount of taxes that come in. 2) I wouldn't tax prostitution/marijuana heavily at first; somewhat light to encourage people to go legal, and then increase later. 3) Part of the problem is that we need oil. So we'd have to really reduce our dependence on oil first, before we can pull out from such regions, although I agree we should get our guys out of Iraq now and reduce the military budget. I'd order all branches to reduce their spending by at least 10%, and if they don't do that, I'll cut their budget by 20% instead. 4) agree on this. I'd make the tax on corporations simple: they get taxed on the goods and services they bring into this country. Doesn't matter where they make them or house them; if they do business here, they get taxed here. This also kinda goes hand-in-hand with tariffs. 5) Eliminate the Department of Homeland Security; it's useless bureaucracy that has only ever given us one thing: color alerts! The FBI and CIA should be more than sufficient; it was only the fact that they didn't really talk to each other very well that resulted in 9/11, so I'd force them to get along. 6) Downsize the TSA. We're spending millions on useless security theater. They just need the metal detectors and x-raying luggage. That's it. 7) As others have said, increase the gas tax and/or reduce or eliminate oil subsidies. This will bring gas prices up, and make other forms of energy more competitive. I'd cut the red tape for nuclear plants and get some newer designs approved ASAP, and perhaps use some limited subsidies to get new plants into operation. 8) Reduce farm subsidies; we don't need to pay farmers to grow corn crops that they then toss as garbage. 9) Eliminate earmarks and most of our foreign aid. Just for fun, here's my ny times budget changes for the government. Not only fixes the deficit, but gives us a surplus, with taxes wisely chosen to curb bad behavior and thus increase prosperity. Last edited by Kaijo; 2010-11-16 at 12:43. |
|
2010-11-16, 13:40 | Link #12 |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
To anyone suggesting closing bases around the world, it's in the US interest to keep them open. As a nation heavily reliant on foreign trade, which there is nothing you can do to reduce, as the US lacks many of the resources a modern technological power needs, the US needs to enforce peace. Do you really think we have these bases because we like interfering with other nation's affairs? Having China and Japan not focusing on killing each other is in the US interest. Not having dictators invading their oil rich neighbor in the middle East is in the US interest. Sure, you could argue for reducing US military presence overseas, but eliminating it completely will hurt the US economy, not help it.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 14:19 | Link #14 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Age: 54
|
Quote:
Based on the latest Census Bureau numbers (from 2007), you spend around 42 billion US$ total, ~29 in economic and ~13 in military aid. The biggest recipients are Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and Egypt. The various "bribe your own dictator" programs don't amount for much. Cut it all? Wow, that's gonna be fun! Cutting military help immediately harms American arms companies. And cutting aid to Israel is borderline heretical for conservatives. I salute you for your audacity! Closing military bases lessens your ability to project power. I'd be all for it, but that's another unusual position for a conservative. Get rid of all social entitlement programs. Awesome! Let the unemployed and sick die and rot on the street! Who needs them anyway. Quote:
|
||
2010-11-16, 14:36 | Link #15 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2010-11-16, 14:37 | Link #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
Quote:
|
|
2010-11-16, 14:44 | Link #17 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
I'll say many of the posters really have not thought the ramifications of their ideas and why "simple answers" don't really work. Simple answers only work in imaginary simple systems like the ones they make up for tests.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 14:45 | Link #18 |
blinded by blood
Author
|
A lot of Europeans do think the US is run a bunch of moustache-twirling Saturday morning cartoon villains... but Mentar isn't one of them. We may disagree on a lot, but we certainly do not disagree on the fact that America's leaders are morons.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 14:54 | Link #19 |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Then what exactly is he accusing me of denying? Seems to be the US doesn't enjoy doing it but does anyway it out of self interest part. To think the US enjoys fighting wars does require the leaders to be moustashe twirling villains.
__________________
|
2010-11-16, 15:05 | Link #20 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Age: 54
|
Quote:
I was reacting to your statement "Do you really think we have these bases because we like interfering with other nation's affairs?", which looked very much like a rhetorical question to me expecting "No" as the answer. However, I don't think that this is the case. A very significant part of the people involved in your foreign policy DOES like interfering with other nation's affairs. You might really want to read up on the cabal surrounding the Bush clan, particularly our friends from PNAC, or the "neocons", as they were also dubbed. They were the brainiacs which engineered the Iraq war, and while they were largely discredited in the aftermath, they're regaining power. For them, American preeminence (to avoid the more stringent word "imperialism") is the logical form of foreign policy, and projection of American military power is their major means of coercion. And this is no group of loony closet Machiavellis. These guys are used to be on the helm. Now don't get me wrong: I do believe that you are more of the unwilling type who sees American involvement more as some kind of policing action, a necessary evil for the Greater Good[tm] of the world. But those people who shape American foreign policy tend to be unscrupulous disciples of realpolitik, and that's a dirty business. Closing bases means closing shop for trouble spots. So, I don't see that happen. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|