• 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!

U.S. budget deficit to hit record $3.3 trillion this year, CBO says

The federal government obviously has no problem spending - the problem is that congress critters refuse to raise the taxes required to pay for it. The key number to watch is annual per capital federal spending (now normally over $12K) which would require about $4T in total federal revenue to balance the federal “budget”.

But the assumption that higher taxes are the only way to pay off a deficit is misleading. Spending has become a necessary part of pandemic recovery and widespread tax increases are not the way to bring the budget back nor see a successful health and economic recovery.
 
But the assumption that higher taxes are the only way to pay off a deficit is misleading. Spending has become a necessary part of pandemic recovery and widespread tax increases are not the way to bring the budget back nor see a successful health and economic recovery.

We have had federal “budget” deficits for decades which are not related to any temporary (or unexpected) emergency. Spending is simply more popular (politically rewarding?) than taxation.
 
Of course it can be defended from inside our borders. We have the largest airforce and navy on the planet. Offensive action is an act of war. We are not most nations.

No the U.S. cannot be defended from inside its own borders. It would be like a pro football team trying to defend its own goal line while giving the opponent the ball on the 1 yard line. Even if the opponent is a PeeWee (Pop Warner) football team of pre teenagers, the sheer proximity to the goal line would eventually allow them to score.

You can put 1960s era SCUD type missiles on the decks of cargo ships, put tarps over them so they can't be easily identified visually, and launch them by the hundreds into the largest cities in the US. All without coming close to U.S. territorial waters. And that's only one way off hand I can think of the U.S. being easily attacked.
 
No the U.S. cannot be defended from inside its own borders.
of course it can, as I've already stated. We have the largest airforce and navy on the planet.

It would be like a pro football team trying to defend its own goal line while giving the opponent the ball on the 1 yard line. Even if the opponent is a PeeWee (Pop Warner) football team of pre teenagers, the sheer proximity to the goal line would eventually allow them to score.
no, it would be nothing like that. It would be like a runner and 2 blockers were at the 50 yard line, and they are set upon by 50 defensive backs on the 50 yard line.

You can put 1960s era SCUD type missiles on the decks of cargo ships, put tarps over them so they can't be easily identified visually, and launch them by the hundreds into the largest cities in the US. All without coming close to U.S. territorial waters. And that's only one way off hand I can think of the U.S. being easily attacked.
and it would be easily destroyed after it fired. There would be no way to preemptively stop a ship carrying missiles we don't know about. lol
 
of course it can, as I've already stated. We have the largest airforce and navy on the planet.


no, it would be nothing like that. It would be like a runner and 2 blockers were at the 50 yard line, and they are set upon by 50 defensive backs on the 50 yard line.


and it would be easily destroyed after it fired. There would be no way to preemptively stop a ship carrying missiles we don't know about. lol

The fact that the ship gets destroyed means nothing. The U.S. can only stop preemptively a ship carrying missiles is by controlling all overseas major ports of call.
 
The fact that the ship gets destroyed means nothing. The U.S. can only stop preemptively a ship carrying missiles is by controlling all overseas major ports of call.
We have no authority to control ports not on our shores. We have no way to know if any ship in international waters is carrying missiles. Preemptive attacks do not change this fact.
 
We have no authority to control ports not on our shores. We have no way to know if any ship in international waters is carrying missiles. Preemptive attacks do not change this fact.

Authority doesn't matter. Only capability does.
 
driven by entitlement spending. Not sure why Americans believe we should be showering money on citizens who are no longer productive anyway. Sentimentality I guess.

Germany has the most extensive social system...and gargantuan budget surplus.
 
The deificit is only bad if the Democrats are in power.

And yes I find it funny that countries with a social welfare state has less of a deficit problem than the US (not that we don't have one, we do have a budget deficit, but it's nowhere near the bloated American deficit).
 
Germany has the most extensive social system...and gargantuan budget surplus.

And as you yourself have pointed out, next to no military. Unlike Germany, the U.S. doesn't have a superpower willing to protect us if it all hits the fan.
 
And as you yourself have pointed out, next to no military. Unlike Germany, the U.S. doesn't have a superpower willing to protect us if it all hits the fan.

You dont need such a gargantuan military. You know that as well as i do. Its a mafia that you support with your tax money. You could cut your defense spending by 50% and still have too much in the defense branch.
 
Authority doesn't matter. Only capability does.
lol of course authority matters. I'm capable of murdering anyone I want. But I have no authority to take another life unless it is in self defense. Same goes for acts of war.
 
You dont need such a gargantuan military. You know that as well as i do. Its a mafia that you support with your tax money. You could cut your defense spending by 50% and still have too much in the defense branch.

The U.S. military is NOT "gargantuan". It is 30-40% smaller than it was at the end of the Cold War. And don't start babbling about our defense budget as though that is an indicator of our militaries size. Only the idiots at this forum do that.
 
And as you yourself have pointed out, next to no military. Unlike Germany, the U.S. doesn't have a superpower willing to protect us if it all hits the fan.
We could recall every foreign troop, close every foreign base and cut the military budget in half and still be the most powerful military on the planet, and fully capable of defending against any attack by a foreign invader.
 
We could recall every foreign troop, close every foreign base and cut the military budget in half and still be the most powerful military on the planet, and fully capable of defending against any attack by a foreign invader.

But we couldn't protect our citizens overseas or protect our economic interests overseas.

To say nothing of fulfilling our military agreements with foreign nations.

And out of our military budget, what EXACTLY would you cut in order to get the budget down by 50%? Or I'll make it easier for you. What would you cut to get it down by 25%?. You can't do it without crippling the U.S. military.
 
Just a drop in the bucket compare to the budget during WWII.
 
But we couldn't protect our citizens overseas or protect our economic interests overseas.
we have no authority to do so.
To say nothing of fulfilling our military agreements with foreign nations.
already stated we should not be defending other nations. those treaties need abolished.
And out of our military budget, what EXACTLY would you cut in order to get the budget down by 50%?
Already stated. Recall all foreign troops, close all foreign bases and place 2/3 of the personel on reserve status
Or I'll make it easier for you. What would you cut to get it down by 25%?. You can't do it without crippling the U.S. military.
cutting the budget in half would in no way cripple the US military. We would still be the most powerful military on the planet.
 
we have no authority to do so.

already stated we should not be defending other nations. those treaties need abolished.

Already stated. Recall all foreign troops, close all foreign bases and place 2/3 of the personel on reserve status

cutting the budget in half would in no way cripple the US military. We would still be the most powerful military on the planet.

Being the "most powerful" on the planet isn't enough. And recalling troops and closing bases will not come close to eliminating 50% of the budget

Nor will putting 2/3rds of personnel on reserve status. People in the reserves still get some pay and benefits not to mention have to receive training and be equipped whether they are reservists or not.

Once again, you and your ilk don't have a clue about U.S. military spending.

And you abolish treaties BEFORE cutting the military that you designate to fulfill those treaty commitments. Not after.
 
It's fine, folks, they'll remember that huge deficits are bad if Biden wins and go back to insisting that it's a "spending problem", therefore we should get rid of any program that helps poor people, then blow the deficit up even further and increase spending when its their turn.
 
We have had federal “budget” deficits for decades which are not related to any temporary (or unexpected) emergency. Spending is simply more popular (politically rewarding?) than taxation.

I understand that and agree deficits have been common-place on the balance sheet. However, my point is that higher taxes are not an answer to curbing the deficit. Other measures need to be sought before embarking on that path. It's reckless and dangerous within this fragile economy.
 
But we couldn't protect our citizens overseas or protect our economic interests overseas.

To say nothing of fulfilling our military agreements with foreign nations.

And out of our military budget, what EXACTLY would you cut in order to get the budget down by 50%? Or I'll make it easier for you. What would you cut to get it down by 25%?. You can't do it without crippling the U.S. military.

You have no authority to protect overseas and protect interests overseas. Give up imperialism and have a better live.
 
I understand that and agree deficits have been common-place on the balance sheet. However, my point is that higher taxes are not an answer to curbing the deficit. Other measures need to be sought before embarking on that path. It's reckless and dangerous within this fragile economy.

The only “other measures” possible are spending cuts which are also off the table “within this fragile economy”. IMHO, it is ridiculous to try to constantly assert that we have had a “fragile economy” for decades requiring annual federal “budget” deficits.
 
Wrong

Its because of guys like you who never listened

yes. it's not like our debt has exploded under Republicans Presidents or anything...

"We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt. ... Well, I would say over a period of eight years. And I’ll tell you why.”
Donald Trump
 
You have no authority to protect overseas and protect interests overseas. Give up imperialism and have a better live.

According to the U.S. Constitution we do. And to an American that should be the final say.
 
Back
Top Bottom