what is more important: reducing debt or stimulating the economy

How is that relevant?

Money is spent overseas usually for diplomatic reasons or to protect our own economic interests (the Middle East). Let me guess, (*)(*)(*)(*) the Phillipines?

Why the hell would you do that? Medicare gives health insurance to the elderly and Social Security gives them some extra income. They spend money into the economy. Would you rather them die? If they are dead, they can't spend money in the economy.

Unemployment gives money to the unemployed as temporary income to spend in the economy. To receive benefits for unemployment you have to have worked (usually at least 20 weeks), and are required to provide proof you are seeking employment.

What is your deal with those programs?

Also, paying off debt proves you have no idea what benefits us economically going forward.

 

Fair.

What the "poor" spend their money on is irrelevant to public policy. It is their money. You wouldn't want anyone else telling you what to spend your money on so this is a very thin argument.

They pay less taxes than the working class does. They pay themselves no salary and utilize the capital gains tax rates.

*Sigh* do you understand who gets unemployment?

In the case of unemployment, you have to work to receive it. "Freeing up money" to start business isn't logical.. since they weren't contributing much income while being on welfare or unemployed.

Irrelevant to your argument.

That happens. However, there are plenty of productive people on unemployment. Seasonal construction workers are the biggest ones where I come from. You have an irrational anger towards welfare.

Middle class don't hold offshore bank accounts like the wealthy do. I don't get what you are trying to prove here other than your irrational hatred for welfare.

Good point actually. What is your plan to fix this?

This is complete bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Our tax system is marginal. You aren't charged for your higher tax rate in the lower brackets. You may get bumped into a higher bracket and pay a higher tax rate, but it is impossible to pay more in taxes in the next bracket so that you will make less money just from getting a raise.

This is just wrong. Middle class have no reason to hide their money overseas; they don't have enough of it. Stop defending the uber wealthy. Unless you are uber wealthy? I know you aren't, because you wouldn't be on here you would have better things to do.

It is intentional economic uncertainty caused by crazy Washington politics.

 

Because you're essentially complaining about how the rich have received more of the growth than the lower class. You keep talking about rich with offshore accounts. Why do they put that money in offshore accounts? Because if they don't, you're going to STEAL it from them. Don't you put your valuables in a safe when people are coming to steal it? I certainly would.

And let me ask you. You say you've "dramatically" cut taxes on the 1%. Exactly where did you cut those taxes and by how much? Many of those people pay 50-60% of their income in taxes. That means .50 - .60 cents of every dollar is stolen by the government. If the rich are not paying their fair share... What percentage of every dollar should they be expected to pay out to the government?

I should have placed in that post that the money you're stealing from the rich (and everyone else who pays taxes) would be spent regardless. Just because it's placed in an off-shore account today doesn't mean it's not spent tomorrow. They're just trying to find a way to reduce the absurd amount of taxes you're stealing from them.

There are a dozen reasons to say "(*)(*)(*)(*) the Phillipines". When we have people in this country that are not able to feed their own children because we're sending money to the Lebanon or the Phillipines... then those other country's are just (*)(*)(*)(*) out of luck. It's not our responsibility to help them. How much help did they send during Katrina or 9/11? They sure as hell didn't want our help when they booted us out of the country at a pivotal time.

My deal with those programs is they're costly, inefficient, ineffective and they create a disincentive to produce.

The ONLY reason the elderly need that Medicare and Social Security is because people like you have stolen their money throughout their ENTIRE LIVES because you and your socialist elite think you're smarter and better than they are and you know better what to do with their money than they do. So rather than allow the people to provide for themselves, you STEAL their money and put it into a system that is FAR less effective while being FAR more costly and inefficient to run. In fact, you've taken their money and put it into a Ponzi scheme. Look at SS... You've stolen their money out of their paycheck and then you've gone and put it into a system in which YOU KNOW you'll never be able to pay back everybody who is putting into that system. YOU KNOW eventually the system is unsustainable and will collapse upon itself. Yet you're still taking their money, whether they like it or not, and putting it into a Ponzi scheme.

The people are FAR more capable of providing for themselves than you and the socialist elite give them credit for. They don't need you to steal their money for Medicare and SSI. They would be far better off taking that money themselves and investing it in vehicles that would provide them MUCH better coverage into their old age and into savings accounts that would provide far more income for them in their elder years than SSI does. But they CAN'T because you've been stealing their money.

Also unemployment is one of the most abused systems in this country. I know you don't care because you think it's just taking back money from the evil capitalist corporations. However, unemployment is a MASSIVE cost on the population. Do you think the businesses just take this loss by paying out unemployment and keeping prices the same? Absolutely not. They take into account an average of what they're paying out in unemployment every year when they determine their prices for their products and services. Paying out this ridiculously wasteful program of unemployment costs every single consumer, every single time they go to the store to purchase anything. You think you're hurting the businesses... but you're not... you're hurting the consumer. Without this massively wasteful socialist program, the American people would have much more money in their pockets to spend.

I understand unemployment may be helpful and some of these people are really working hard to find a job. However, the requirements are ridiculously low. You have to show that you've applied to 2 jobs PER WEEK and those certifications are rarely verified. There should be drug tests for people receiving unemployment. I don't know how many applications you can put in, in a 6 or 8 hour day putting in apps, but I'd assume it's probably quite a few more than 2 PER WEEK. Those numbers should be increased drastically and should be randomly sampled to verify the record. The amount of times you're allowed to have unemployment consecutively should be addressed as well. There are people (especially in call centers) who get jobs for 6 months and then start to tank their numbers so that they get fired and they can collect unemployment. I worked at call centers when I was a little younger and they even talk about it in the orientation and training. There is a lot of fraud in unemployment that could be curbed.

Really, that's funny because we're using 7% of our spending every year for Interest on that debt. Maybe $300B/year doesn't mean a lot to a socialist.... but it does to a capitalist.

 

A god economy will take care of a lot of problems. but the last thing anyone in Washington seems to be doing is removing the barriers and lessening regulations to promote a growing economy.

What's the old saying that liberals live by: "If you want them to eat cake, you have to break a few eggs," or something like that.

 

That's ludicrous. If they're spending THEIR money... then by all means spend away and spend it on anything you want. If you're spending MY money that you stole out of my check... then it DOES concern me what they're spending MY money on.

They pay less taxes than the working class does. They pay themselves no salary and utilize the capital gains tax rates.

Name one higher tax bracket that pays less than the one below it. They get taxed MORE for capital gains than if they were taking it as income!!! WTF are you talking about. The double taxation on capital gains guarantees that. This is what I mean. You use dishonest tactics by acting like capitals gains don't have a double taxation rate to rile up the populace into class warfare.

Yes I do. Do you? Because if you think it's just people who got laid off... you're sadly mistaken.

No see. The reason it frees up money is because YOU as the employee don't pay anything into unemployment. The BUSINESS pays into unemployment. If they lay you off and you can't find a job, THEY pay you for sitting on your ass at home. If you took away the massive amounts of fraud, businesses wouldn't have that expense to pay out... at least not as large... and they would have more money for other things such as hiring or expanding.

Actually it's not irrelevant. We would also have many, many more jobs if the illegals weren't taking them away from americans. Not to mention, the illegals are driving prices for goods and services up while decreasing the rate of pay that some americans are able to receive for doing the same work they used to do for more money. But I'm sure you don't have a problem with that do you?

I don't disagree that there are some people on unemployment who genuinely DESIRE to be productive and are working hard every day to try to get a job. I wouldn't use seasonal construction workers... they know they're going to be out of work, they should prepare themselves with another job. If they neglect to do so... why should everybody else be punished so that these guys can enter into a career in which they KNOW they're only going to be working for 3/5 of the year and spend the other 2/5 (*)(*)(*)(*)ing off leaching off of everybody else?

That WAS my point. The middle class are paying 30% of the taxes in this country and they don't have off-shore bank accounts to put their money into. They're just getting bent over and screwed by people like yourself and the socialist elite who are appropriating their money and spending it on things that YOU think they should be spending it on.

If he's a healthy and capable individual... you take away his welfare. As I said before. It's strange that a large percentage of these people who are getting unemployment (which remember is supposed to just hold you over until you can find a job)... can't seem to find a job while the unemployment checks are rolling in... but all of a sudden as soon as that check stops... they find a job within a few weeks. It's almost miraculous.

Are you crazy? Let's say I'm making $36,240 taxed at 15% = $5,436 in taxes. Now I get a little tiny raise. I'm now making $36,260 taxed at 25% = $9,065. Now explain to me again why in the **** would I be more productive to earn that tiny raise?

I think you missed the point... see three comments above.

Yeah... that's what I said... socialism.

 

It is unlikely in my life time that Americans will ever pay down a single dime of debt.

Obama has budgeted annual deficits through 2023 and we don't know what happens after this ten year period.

I don't personally see the impetus that is going to create 10-15 million jobs for the unemployed and it is fact that every day the population increases and demand on the government increases...this is not a formula for paying down debt but instead accumulating more debt...

 

Trick question they are one in the same. An economy paying its debts attracts investment because of financial stability and that causes stimulation. Unless of course it is because of a big tax burden. That has the opposite effect. Spending cuts are the way to go. No need to be spending more then 50% of the economy like they do today when you count compliance costs.

- - - Updated - - -

Your marginal rate would go up. Not the rate on all the money you made just what gets into that bracket. The rest is all good though.

 

Fair enough... I still say we need to pay off our debts though.

 

Agreed. The only way they will though is by repudiation. Big hidden taxes, don't buy bonds.

 

Obviously the answer is to increase the economy then reduce the debt.

 

Its unfortunate. Adding more debt habitually is a very bad long term policy.

- - - Updated - - -

Dang! Why didnt any administration before just think to turn the economy knob to a higher setting? Genius!

 

Keynesian stimulus obviously isn't working so debt reduction should take priority.

 

I agree that merely bailing out the wealthiest for their life choices is not the most stimulating for our economy.

 

"...bailing out the wealthiest for their life choices..."

Taxcutter says:
Say what? Your mindless envy is showing.

 

Is it "mindless envy" when the right claims the same thing, but only of the least wealthy?

 

Why? Show me how debt reduction benefits this country. Raising taxes and cutting jobs during a recession recovery does NOTHING to help this country.

- - - Updated - - -

We've been doing it for over 200 years and we are still functioning just fine, actually.

Governments can roll over debt indefinitely; that is how they operate. You are not a government so you are required to pay back your debts.

 

Most of the billionaires disagree with you on that notion. They pay less of a % in taxes than you an I do.

You have a disease where you think taxes are stealing. You really need to get this checked out. Taxes are a method of curbing inflation for the government so it can redistribute its services back into its population without having to print or borrow more money. Those are facts. Try citing them for a change.

The top rate dropped from 70% to 28% under the Reagan Tax cuts. The top rate is currently 39.6%. Additionally, that 39.6% is not on your entire income. We have a marginal tax system, so the rate you pay 39.6% on is only every dollar you make over $400,000. Once again your numbers are incorrect (as is your unhealthy opinion on the government "stealing" U.S. dollars from your bank account).

If it is offshore it is spent outside of the country, or the taxes are not being redistributed into the United States economy. Please explain to me how this benefits our country.

Great foreign policy. (*)(*)(*)(*) the rest of the world. Maybe a category 5 hurricane will hit your hometown and I hope other countries point and laugh. We have the resources to help other countries and in the case of natural disaster we should lend a hand. Hell, as the greatest influence on our planet's deteriorating health, we bear most of the responsibility.

Again, more bullcrap.

Medicare is more efficient than our current healthcare system and has higher approval ratings.

Furthermore, the reason social security exists is because the elderly were the most impoverished group before it was implemented. When the elderly have money (and time due to retirement) they can spend money into the economy.

Again, you show your ignorance on fiscal policy. There is nothing unsustainable for a monetary sovereign government in a fiat currency system, as I've specifically proven to you in countless posts. Cutting these services is simply a means to keep the government for providing what it can provide to its citizens. There is no factual evidence that exists that says any of the monetary sovereign powers cannot sustain spending. Governments operate by spending and borrowing money. Feel free to find some facts to disprove this. Once you stop being brainwashed, maybe you will wake up and demand more of your corrupt country.

Again, stealing is weak argument.. but your opinion is paramount in your own fantasy land. Yes, I believe everyone should be saving but you have no factual evidence once again to prove that Social Security is a waste. The approval ratings of Medicare and Social security are almost unanimous. Feel free to verify.

Oh yea, unemployment is a massive detriment to you. Unemployment is paid for by the employers taxes, not anyone else in society. Their taxes, not their profits.

More personal hatred and no facts to support your argument. Sure, some of it may be true but you have yet to construct some evidence as to how unemployment should be eliminated.

7% of our GDP to service interest, but 18% to service our corrupt health care system.

Yea, you tell me how capitalism is working better than other countries that run a more mixed economy. We spend 2.5 times as much as the next most expensive country with socialized medicine. We have a lower standard of disposable income than "socialist" norway. U.S. families average a lesser net worth than "socialist" Canada. The pressure is on you to prove how raw capitalism will save this country. Minimum wage and labor regulations were created to curb the capitalist bull(*)(*)(*)(*) when it got out of hand. That is because raw capitalism DOES NOT WORK.

Your arguments are nothing more than bitter rants with no facts. The numbers you cite are also flat out wrong. Refine them and they will be received better in discussion.

 

Again, more "stealing." It honestly sounds childish. It is your citizen duty to pay taxes. If you don't like it then get out.

Yes, crooked. Investment income earns income. That income should be taxed at the same rates, not less.

Again, completely wrong. Capital gains tax rates are less than earned income tax. There is no double taxation. If you are taxed on your $1, and your $1 becomes $1.20, why is that $.20 exempt to the tax code or subject to a lesser tax rate? That $.20 is additional earned income and should be taxed appropriately. Double taxation would be if you were taxed again on the entire $1.20, not the $.20.

Yes, you can get unemployment being terminated. The employer must prove they had good reason to fire you. If you quit you won't receive unemployment. I am very familiar with how it works. Your personal hatred doesn't make the argument any stronger.

They hired you and laid you off. That is their problem, not mine. The business itself pays for unemployment through its taxes, not its profit line. Therefore, I don't see where your argument is.

I do have a problem with immigration actually. I am for a point system like other enlightened countries have. It would make immigration beneficial to our economy. The reason why we won't tackle immigration is because business owners like having cheap unskilled labor that they can pay less for. Until that changes, I don't see us "doing the right thing" and cleaning up our immigration policy. That is capitalism for you, not socialism.

Everyone else isn't being punished. The business pays for it through their 39.6% tax rate.

Why, because the rich won't pay their fair share? I already explained how above. This is not "socialist elite" you are describing rich tax evasion.

Oh brother, more stealing. Cut it out. It is already old. Grow up.

OMG. Unemployment is crap money first of all. It is usually about 50% of what you made after working at least 20 weeks. You have to work to get it, and it isn't an incentive to stay on unemployment like you say. Bills don't go anywhere.

More bullcrap. I'm getting sick of your misinformation.

That is not how our tax system works!

If you are in a 15% tax bracket $36,240 and get a raise to the 25% tax bracket at a hypothetical $36,260, you would be taxed the same on your first $36,240, and taxed at 25% for your next $20. Your tax liability would be $5,441, not $9,065. Thank you for displaying your complete ignorance of our "stealing" tax system.

Learn what it means, then compare it to your thin, misguided arguments.

I'm done debating with you. Too much bitterness and hostility.

 

Tighten our belts implies making sacrifices. Doing that will take a big turnaround in the way society judges people; and honestly is going to hurt business.

There was a time when there were relatively few businesses here that depended on US consumers entirely. Most of them also employed plenty of US workers. Exports were a big part of our production economy. (Think back 50 years or so) Now our domestic business depends almost entirely on US consumers and employs less, and less and less.

Other than trade restrictions, and new foreign trade agreements favoring domestic businesses, there is nothing Washington can do about this.

Neither republicans nor democrats favor that course, so we are left with stimulus or austerity solutions which do nothing in the long run. Government jobs can do a lot of good, but once they account for more than half of domestic income the result is disastrous and fast. Austerity without increased personal income just amounts to a lot of very poor and very angry people. Combine that with reduced worker rights and we have a wonderful recipe for exploitation. It might work out for your great grandchildren, but only if the next two generations get through the fallout intact.

It may already be too late for big solutions. The global economy has gone too far and has too much momentum to be stopped.

In any case I think your point is appropriate, we need to start thinking a little smaller about our lifestyles and planning a little further into our personal futures if we want to survive as individuals.

 

The government cannot pay off the national debt ever. If it does that, everything stops. Federal debt = Private Sector Wealth. To pay back national debt, the balance on both sides will have to be 0.

 

"Show me how debt reduction benefits this country."

Taxcutter says:
Debt reduction slows inflation.


"The government cannot pay off the national debt ever."

Taxcutter says:
It did so in 1836.

 

It's probably already been said ,I haven't read all the posts, But stimulating the economy will result in an overall reduction in the debt

 

In 1836 we were not on a fiat money system based upon debt.

 

They gave Obama billions to stimulate the economy and he spent most of it bringing back his union based Police, fire and teachers that were laid off. Then he asked for around 50 billion more for the same thing. What happened to rebuilding infrastructure? We're not interested in helping the Party get votes. If he had used it on infrastructure, he may have gotten another batch of money.

 

Well I wont fault you for honest ignorance. Governments go bankrupt all the time, and it isn't without economic effect. Check Argentina for example. And I'm astonished that you actually having heard of Greece. Or Germany's financial woes of the early 1900s. Have you heard of Spain? The collapse of their empire was precipitated by their debt problems.

States can just go bankrupt, like people can, but it can be devestating, just like with people.