My salary is less than $162k per year.
Makes sense.
I hope so. I've been an advocate for a National Sales Tax for years, now. But only IF the Income Taxes are eliminated entirely. . . for everyone.
tell me a reasonable plan to pay down $37 trillion in debt that's growing at 1.5-2 trillion a year
I'm all ears
Not going to happen. Trump will probably try to put tariff money in his "sovereign wealth fund".My salary is less than $162k per year.
Makes sense.
I hope so. I've been an advocate for a National Sales Tax for years, now. But only IF the Income Taxes are eliminated entirely. . . for everyone.
Having an out-of-control trade deficit will eventually drain our country. When all the wealth is overseas buying up America we'll all be sorry. Maybe you don't mind having a Chinese boss and working for peanuts but I think this county deserves better. Thank God we have Trump that will actually do something about it.
Don't pay it down at all. That "debt" is held by the private sector as savings. Those govt. liabilities do NOT need to be extinguished.
So, I'll give you a 2 part answer.“It’ll take a little while before we do that, but we’re going to be cutting taxes, and it’s possible we’ll do a complete tax cut, because I think the tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax.” - Trump
(disclaimer: I do NOT agree with Trump's pie-in-the-sky fantasy about tariffs paying for a "complete tax cut")
As the debt rises, the amount they have to pay in interest keeps going up. Interest payments are already their number 2 expense right behind SS.
That's redistribution of wealth, which is not really a valid function of government. It's Marxist nonsense, and has been going on in America since the 1930s. Government is too large, and it has become too powerful. Any collectivist ideology which relies on a centralized, confiscatory mandate (federal income taxes) is by definition authoritarian, which is always bad for liberty and freedom.Do I support lowering taxes on those that make less than $150k? In theory yes, very much so, in fact I'd go even higher than that, because I believe in a "middle-out-economy". IN fact, I'd even be for a those in the lowest income receiving more than they paid in in some cases.
"Paying it back to the government" is a bizarre concept to me. The money that govenrment takes from us (in taxes) is still OURS. . . it still belongs to us stiffs who busted our asses working for it. The government's job is to allocate OUR money - money that was taken from us (in the form of income taxes).But, if it's "paid for" by removing spending** and paying it back to the government, then the net/ net will likely be the same or worse especially for the people in the lowest income levels.
I think eliminating spending is the only way to reduce taxes. But no matter where spending is cut, some special-interest group starts the foot-stomping and the tantrums. Spending cuts are always messy.**When I say that I'm not for eliminating spending, there's a lot that goes unexplained when I say that.
1. I think it's good, very good to eliminate spending where the value (kind of a loaded word, but I had to pick something) per dollar spent is low, but (see #2).
Oh dear.Wherever money is cut, it should be reprovisioned in areas where the value is higher (no, Doge is not a good example, they are cutting without any consideration to the long term costs).
I appreciate your taking the time and effort to express your views on taxation and redistibution of tax funding. I disagree almost completely, but I'm not trying to imply that your views are nonsense - - many Americans feel the same way you do. Very few Americans share my views about small government and lower taxes, maximizing liberty and freedom. (TOO few, actually).Now that's not a hard fast rule, there are going to be times when returning money to the federal government might be necessary. But anyone that has their pants on fire screaming about hyperinflation is right around the corner has to realize that this claim has been around as anyone alive today.
"Paying it back to the government" is a bizarre concept to me. The money that govenrment takes from us (in taxes) is still OURS. . . it still belongs to us stiffs who busted our asses working for it. The government's job is to allocate OUR money - money that was taken from us (in the form of income taxes).
Seems the rise of America since the 1930th to the most powerful and until recently one of the most admired nations in the world.That's redistribution of wealth, which is not really a valid function of government. It's Marxist nonsense, and has been going on in America since the 1930s.
"The reason this country continues its drift toward socialism and big nanny government is because too many people vote in the expectation of getting something for nothing, not because they have a concern for what is good for the country." - Lyn Nofziger
Trump is trying (in vain) to eliminate government over-reach and in turn, restoring (some) liberty and freedom to the People. Naturally, as a libertarian, I respect that.
The government creates money and spends it into the economy. Then it takes some back to manage inflation among other things."Paying it back to the government" is a bizarre concept to me. The money that govenrment takes from us (in taxes) is still OURS. . . it still belongs to us stiffs who busted our asses working for it. The government's job is to allocate OUR money - money that was taken from us (in the form of income taxes).
I think eliminating spending is the only way to reduce taxes.
Friedman followed this by saying that cutting taxes should be equaled by reductions in spending and I enumerate the problem with that above."I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible." - Milton Friedman
That's just it, your ideas might result in "liberty and freedom" for a very select few, and for the masses they would be subjected to economic coercion masquerading as "choice".Very few Americans share my views about small government and lower taxes, maximizing liberty and freedom. (TOO few, actually).
And where did government GET their own money?The government has its own money, you know.
LOL . Good lord!Not everything it spends comes from taxes; the "national debt" is basically a record of money (or bonds) that the government has created and spent into the economy and not taxed back.
Poor people buy cheaper things, and the net NST paid on those items would be less. Also, poor people often buy Thrift Store items, which would be exempt from the NST because the NST was paid when these items were new.
Any and all used items are exempt from the NST - including motor vehicles.
NST is not imposed on Eggs which are sold at the grocery store. No foods in the grocery store would be subject to the NST. (Beer and alcohol sold at the grocery store might be subject, depending on the state)
Anyways, we're WAY off topic here. This thread is about Trump's proposal to eliminate taxes for people who earn less than $150,000 per year. What are your thoughts on that? Do you support it, or oppose it?
And where did government GET their own money?
Somebody had to earn it, OR it had to be borrowed from a bank cartel. When the government borrows money, it lowers GDP, and in turn lowers growth. When the government overspends, and over-taxes, tax revenues go DOWN forcing them to borrow even more.
"If socialists understood economics, they wouldn't be socialists." - Friedrich Hayek
LOL . Good lord!
As a former technical sales person for Dell, I can tell you first hand the amount of stuff that people get to write off is absurd. Why have a businesses meeting in a stuffy downtown building? Have it at top shelf hotel, or even better a vacation destination (don't worry you can write it off as a "business meeting". We'll have a day or two of meetings, and maybe a conference where no one will miss you. The value of what get's written off on a week like that is easily the wage of a Starbucks employee get's paid in year.
And where did they GET their own money?
I worked for Dell in Tysons Corner VA, about 10 miles from the Center of DC. It is the Mecca of small startups looking for no-bid contracts they can start a company with. Once they get their foot in the door, hell yeah.Have you ever gone out to eat with start-up entrepreneurs?
No president can write the laws. A president has power to make Executive Orders.It's almost like the president doesn't get to write the laws.
And Democrat Congress people, too.The Republican Congress people have to do this.
Yes, fiat money is created by government. But taxpayers make the GDP that allows government to create it. If nobody produced anything to warrant the creation of new fiat money, and the government kept creating it, then the money (and the economy) would collapse in a matter of hours or days.The government created it. All you need to prove this to yourself is ask yourself, in a fiat economy what comes first, taxes paid to government or spending paid to taxpayers?
O dear.Simple, the government creates dollars and people earn them and use them to pay taxes. If you can't understand this, you will always misunderstand how government spending works.
there literally isn't a feasible plan with $37 trillion in debt
it will never stop now - our Democrats and Republican's in our Fed Govt have spent us into a spiral that will NEVER stop
if you can link me to ANY valid plans to tackle this national debt I'd love to see it - seriously - because I have yet to read anything that can show how it can be fixed. Not now
The government didn't "create" the money that they take from taxpayers. Those monies are taken from the taxpayers who worked hard for it. We actually earned that money. It was not "created" and it did not just magically pop into existence.
You sure have peculiar ideas on how government is funded.
The government created it. All you need to prove this to yourself is ask yourself, in a fiat economy what comes first, taxes paid to government or spending paid to taxpayers?
Simple, the government creates dollars and people earn them and use them to pay taxes. If you can't understand this, you will always misunderstand how government spending works. Now, even if you come to terms with the way things work, you don't have to like it, but your conception of how government spending works is wrong.
Here, this illustrates how it works.
Now I use "credit and debit. Credit is inflows, and debits are outlays. The private sector can really be thought of as the US private sector + foreign sector.
View attachment 67570157
Another way to look at this is like this:
I appreciate your efforts, here. Thank you.
During my undergrad I took Micro & Macro as electives (for my own desires), and was slated to take the next class in the sequence - Money & Banking. It was taught by one of the local Fed directors.
Unfortunately I ran out of electives outside my major, and it broke my heart to not take the class. I still regret it 'till this day. Very much so.
It doesn't really work that way.My guess is they will just try to inflate the debt away.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?