Would you support increasing taxes to pay down the national debt?

[CriticalThought]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

 

[holbritter]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

No thank you.

 

[mike2810]

Maybe.
Only if Congress stops pork barrel spending on pet projects, all programs are reviewed and where appropriate reductions are made. Most importantly the increase in taxes would go to pay down the debt, not be redirected for other uses.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

I prefer cutting wasteful spending to bring down the debt.

 

[Xelor]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

Red:

• To liquidate a material share of the national debt, I would not support increasing federal income taxes.
• To materially reduce the rate of increase to the national debt, I would support increasing federal income taxes.

 

[Praxas]

I prefer cutting wasteful spending to bring down the debt.

Yes and I'm sure everyone agrees what is "wasteful" to cut right?

 

[CaughtInThe]

I think we should cut taxes so that the deficit will explode.

 

[Perotista]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

I opposed Trump's tax cuts, the deficit and national debt being the main reason. To get a handle on the national debt, I doubt we ever will. To get that handles a combination of tax increases and spending cuts is needed. Just one or the other won't work.

So yes, I fully would support a tax increase as long as it was joined with real spending cuts. I mean real spending cuts, not this if my department was scheduled for a 10% increase over last year, but my department get a 5% increase. That isn't a spending cut although it sure would be portrayed big time as a 5% cut. A real spending cut would be if my department received 5% less money than it did the year before. That would be a real 5% cut and not the phony 5% cut from 10% scheduled increase down to 5%. That in reality is a 5% increase in spending.

 

[Crovax]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

No. If anyone thinks the national debt will ever be a penny less than it is now they are either ignorant or incredibly naive.

There is zero upside in paying off the debt. The goal is to eliminate the deficit and grow the economy to a point where the debt is meaningless

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

The national debt consists of bonds outstanding, and bonds are held by banks, retirement funds, the central banks of our trading partners, and various rich guys. To "pay down" the national debt, you need to extinguish some of those bonds, or simply replace them with reserves (instead of holding a bond, you would instead hold money in a bank, backed with reserves).

The only way to extinguish net government liabilities (which is what I think most people believe they are doing when they say "pay down the debt") is to run a tax surplus. And unless we are going to attempt to tax China on all the U.S. bonds they hold, or enact a wealth tax on super-rich Americans, the only way to run a tax surplus is to extract dollars from the active economy - the money we earn as income, and spend in the stores, which in turn gets invested to create more production, which is sold to create our income, etc.

Presently, the government adds about $1 trillion in deficit spending to the economy. If the government instead tries to run a tax surplus, you can subtract that $1 trillion right off the top of GDP, then subtract the tax surplus from GDP, and see what lopping $1.5 trillion off of aggregate demand does to the economy. (And that's not even attempting to calculate the knock-on effects of secondary and tertiary spending.) Don't expect tax receipts to remain anywhere near where they are now.

 

[sangha]

I prefer cutting wasteful spending to bring down the debt.

Such as?

 

[CriticalThought]

No. If anyone thinks the national debt will ever be a penny less than it is now they are either ignorant or incredibly naive.

There is zero upside in paying off the debt. The goal is to eliminate the deficit and grow the economy to a point where the debt is meaningless

A conservative arguing for Keynesian economics? What happened to austerity and broadening the tax base?

 

[Crovax]

A conservative arguing for Keynesian economics? What happened to austerity and broadening the tax base?

Eliminating the deficit is austerity not Keynesian

 

[Lutherf]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

No. But I'd be happy to cut federal spending to the point where the debt could be paid back in 20 years.

 

[Crovax]

No. But I'd be happy to cut federal spending to the point where the debt could be paid back in 20 years.

Without rasing taxes that would be nearly impossible.

 

[CriticalThought]

Eliminating the deficit is austerity not Keynesian

Uh huh. And exactly how do you envision that is accomplished?

 

[CriticalThought]

No. But I'd be happy to cut federal spending to the point where the debt could be paid back in 20 years.

I would like to cure cancer with jelly beans. Seems just as probable. But I would love to see what your dream federal budget would be.

 

[Sabre]

According to the numbers I have seen it would take all the income of the entire US about 3 years to pay it off. Any taxes you collect are akin to peeing in the ocean.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

.


Note - this question goes for everybody on this thread, not just Luther.

No. But I'd be happy to cut federal spending to the point where the debt could be paid back in 20 years.

Are you talking about extinguishing all government liabilities (bonds + reserves + cash), or replacing all outstanding bonds with reserves and/or cash (which would eliminate what we call "the debt")?

 

[Captain Adverse]

Such as?

End corporate welfare programs for one. For example? Get rid of farm subsidies for "million dollar" farm businesses. The major producers (top 10%) received 77% of all covered commodity subsidies between 1995 and 2016. They certainly don't need the boost, subsidies should be reserved for small family farms and local farm combines. Then there are Oil subsidies, and other business subsidies that could be pared down if not eliminated.

Then there is all that government printing, maintenance of empty government buildings, and why do we need so many damn pennies?

Here is a list of 24 things government wastes money on:

24 Stupidest Things the U.S. government Spends Money on

24 Stupidest Things the U.S. Government Spends Money On

Then there are always pork-barrel riders on most government bills.

 

[sangha]

End corporate welfare programs for one. For example? Get rid of farm subsidies for "million dollar" farm businesses. The major producers (top 10%) received 77% of all covered commodity subsidies between 1995 and 2016. They certainly don't need the boost, subsidies should be reserved for small family farms and local farm combines. Then there are Oil subsidies, and other business subsidies that could be pared down if not eliminated.

Then there is all that government printing, maintenance of empty government buildings, and why do we need so many damn pennies?

Here is a list of 24 things government wastes money on:

24 Stupidest Things the U.S. Government Spends Money On

Then there are always pork-barrel riders on most government bills.

That would not put a dent in the debt.

 

[joko104]

No. Even if that was given as the reason, the money would not be used to pay down the national debt. It would be spent buying votes.

 

[Bum]

No, but I would support decreased spending.

 

[Quag]

No, but I would support decreased spending.

No tax increase until the deficits are gone (force them to stop wasting cash) then 1% tax hike for every 10% pay decrease to politicians

 

[Conservative]

Simple question. Everyone loves to complain about the national debt, but who here would actually support a tax increase to pay it off?

NO, CUT SPENDING AND GROW OUT OF THE DEBT!!

Sure glad to see fiscally responsible Democrats running for the Presidency

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/green-new-deal-details-emerge-as-ocasio-cortez-preps-big-reveal