Solutions?
- Thread starter Seattle
- Start date
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
You got me. Great idea. Take all the wealth of the top more successful people and pay off the debt. Then what? Do we stop spending at that point? Let's start now?
Do it as a percentage.
Take the wealth of all the people over X. (Choose X as you like.) A percentage of that is taken to pay the deficit, so the deficit is zeroed out. In my choice of X that percentage is 20%; you can choose a different X if you like.
This will do two things.
1) Eliminate the deficit
2) Give the most powerful people in the US a VERY VERY strong incentive to reduce government spending.
So yes, let's start now.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
We already have a very, very strong incentive. Let send a message though. I agree. Let's send them all of your wealth and we'll really shock them and then they can reduce spending enough to balance the budget and then after many years of doing that we can grow our way out of the debt.
Should you ever recover in maybe 10 or 20 years, we'll take all of your money again and really, really, reenforce that message and get them on the right track again.
I'll even work to try to get you a Congressional Medal of Honor for your sacrifice.
Let's do it!
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
It depends what you mean by "take care of you."
We have the NHS but this is not free, we have deductions out of our salary all of our working life that pays for that.
One hopes we do not need it when we are younger and hale.
People who lose their jobs need support and we support them. We also expect those people to try and find employment again.
We look after people who cannot find work due to disabilities.
If you want a fair society that is. Depends on what kind of society you want.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I'd like a society that we can afford. We have a debt to GDP ratio of 122%. I think it's pretty high for you guys as well, over 100%. Programs are great. We have to be able to afford them and the debt only goes up. It's not sustainable. It's high enough that more taxes isn't going to fix it.
???
Clearly you don't understand wealth or incentives but the issue is the scale of what we are talking about.
TheVat
Registered Senior Member
Always reassuring
And the eternal straw man, forever shambling through all balanced budget discussions, that anyone thinks only taxes can greatly reduce the national debt.
Here's the real fix: raised income taxes through all the upper middle class and up, corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, VAT (luxuries, non-essentials, or it is regressive on the poor), paired with means-testing for entitlements (TheVat should not be receiving social security, btw, in case anyone thinks I wouldn't walk that talk) and the United States reducing its military forces and arsenals to self-defense and no more than 20 warheads aimed at principal targets (anything more is insane overkill and planetary holocaust)(Herman Kahn could think like a psychopath, doesn't mean the rest of us have to).
Thanks for the Manhattan Institute talking points.
And the eternal straw man, forever shambling through all balanced budget discussions, that anyone thinks only taxes can greatly reduce the national debt.
Here's the real fix: raised income taxes through all the upper middle class and up, corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, VAT (luxuries, non-essentials, or it is regressive on the poor), paired with means-testing for entitlements (TheVat should not be receiving social security, btw, in case anyone thinks I wouldn't walk that talk) and the United States reducing its military forces and arsenals to self-defense and no more than 20 warheads aimed at principal targets (anything more is insane overkill and planetary holocaust)(Herman Kahn could think like a psychopath, doesn't mean the rest of us have to).
Well, it only took five pages to go from "I want to discuss real solutions" to your usual ad hominem bullshit.
So much for solutions.
I was looking through that thread and came upon this, in the final post:
(Emphasis mine.)
Speaking only to the bolded portion: Yeah, they are! It's great if Bill Gates wants to donate to education, but he's got no business dictating the terms for such--he ain't the Secretary of Education. Moreover, he doesn't know a damn thing about education or education philosophy. He's got a long--and well-documented--history of this sort of thing.
And that's going back a decade or two, today that's rather insignificant compared with the outsized "influence" billionaires are exerting upon an ostensibly democratic system.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
He's not the Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon is. Along with Musk and Trump, how are they doing? I'd think you would prefer Gates?
Billionaires aren't the problem. People voting for politicians to spend more than we take in is the problem. People never learn. Argentina is a good example of that.
Still shilling for the Republicans, not surprised, they have no shame.
Yep. Hence pass laws that will pose equally impactful penalties on billionaires if the budget is not balanced - and all that outsized influence gets used to reduce spending rather than give themselves tax breaks.
A lot of conservatives are either more honest or less confused than you here. Your claim that "the rich are paying more than their fair share" has precisely nothing to do with thinking "critically". You claim this because "Jesus" (scare quotes because your Jesus has nothing to do with the Jesus in the Bible) and/or Ayn Rand told you it was fair.
If you want to eliminate the deficit and address the debt, then take money from the exceedingly rich. Explain why that doesn't work--I don't give a shit whether or not you think it's wrong or unfair, because that means nothing to me.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Why Taxing the Rich Won't Solve the Deficit or National Debt
Many argue that the way to fix the U.S. deficit and national debt is to take money from the exceedingly rich. While this may seem like a straightforward solution, the reality is that it doesn’t work for several reasons. Below is a breakdown of why this approach fails, supported by data and real-world examples.
1. The Math Doesn't Add Up
- The U.S. annual deficit is $1.5 - $2 trillion, and the national debt exceeds $34 trillion (U.S. Treasury).
- The total wealth of U.S. billionaires is about $5 trillion (Forbes Billionaires List). Even if the government confiscated every dollar from billionaires, it wouldn’t even pay off 20% of the debt.
- This money is also a one-time source—it does not address ongoing annual deficits.
2. Wealth Is Not Liquid Cash
- Billionaire wealth is tied up in stocks, businesses, and real estate, not sitting in bank accounts.
- To seize this wealth, the government would need to sell off these assets, crashing markets and destroying companies that employ millions.
3. Capital Flight & Tax Avoidance
- France’s Wealth Tax (ISF) led to 12,000 millionaires leaving the country, forcing France to repeal it (New York Times).
- Sweden and Denmark also scrapped their wealth taxes after seeing negative economic impacts (BBC).
- Higher taxes lead the wealthy to move assets overseas or restructure their businesses, reducing taxable income.
4. Impact on Investment & Economic Growth
- The exceedingly rich invest in startups, businesses, and innovation. If their wealth is seized or heavily taxed, they stop investing.
- Reduced investment leads to slower economic growth, fewer jobs, and ultimately lower tax revenue.
- Studies from the OECD confirm that excessive taxation leads to capital flight and economic decline (OECD Tax Report).
5. Government Spending Is the Real Problem
- Tax revenues are already at record highs, but spending outpaces revenue growth (Heritage Foundation).
- Historically, governments that collect more in taxes tend to increase spending rather than reduce debt (CATO Institute).
Conclusion
While increasing taxes on the rich may contribute some revenue, it is nowhere near enough to eliminate the deficit or pay off the debt. Sustainable solutions require spending cuts, economic growth, and smart tax policies that encourage investment rather than drive wealth out of the country.
For real deficit reduction, the focus should be on controlling government spending, promoting economic expansion, and broadening the tax base responsibly rather than relying on extreme wealth taxation that has failed in other countries.
I don't give a shit what chatGPT has to say--YOU explain the reasons. Remember, you're all about critical thinking, right?
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
You just don't give a shit period. I have explained all this before. You bring up Jesus and Ayn Rand. If I explained, you'd say you needed sources, so I had Copilot get the sourcing. I'm not going to do a research paper just to deal with your nonsense obviously.
Supposedly you are literate so you should be able to read and even follow up with the links. Now you childishly want me to spoon feed your lack of economic knowledge.
You can either read it and respond or not. I don't give a shit either.
You mean to say that you gave it a premise and it wrote everything else--well, if you were being honest, that is.
Sometimes I think that maybe you're a leftist impersonating a conservative. Not a tactic I admire, but it's interesting, I guess. If the goal is to show that conservatives are averse to critical thinking and doing even the most basic and rudimentary "research", that conservatives embrace lying and fallacious reasoning, and that there is in fact no separation between fiscal conservatism and social conservatism, i.e., overt bigotry, elitism, rape advocacy, etc., then you have succeeded. Congratulations!
Figured I'd see what ChatGPT had to say about raising taxes on the rich, if we're doing the ChatGPT thing:
==========================
Increasing taxes on the wealthy is considered important for several reasons:
- Income Equality: Wealth disparities can lead to social and economic imbalances. Higher taxes on the rich can help redistribute wealth and reduce income inequality.
- Funding Public Services: Increased tax revenue from higher rates on the wealthy can be used to fund essential public services such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure, benefiting society as a whole.
- Economic Stability: Greater taxation on the rich can help stabilize the economy by providing government funding for social programs that support lower-income individuals, which can stimulate demand in the economy.
- Reducing Deficits: Higher taxes can help decrease budget deficits and reduce national debt, contributing to long-term economic health.
- Social Responsibility: Many argue that those who benefit the most from the economic system should contribute more to its upkeep, helping to maintain a fair and functioning society.
- Encouraging Investment in Communities: Tax revenues can be used to invest in community development and programs that promote growth and opportunity in disadvantaged areas.
======================
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
That's not what I did and it is interesting that you choose to never comment on the substance even though it's been laid out for you. What exactly is it that you disagree with in that post?