The National Debt

[BigRob]

I don't know the exact deal u are getting on your debit/creditcards, but over here, when I'm in debt on my VISA they're charging me like 18,5%...

Well a debit card is simply the money you already have in your account.

I also have high interest rates, not that high, but I just pay it every month to avoid paying interest on it.

 

[GenSeneca]

Well a debit card is simply the money you already have in your account.

I also have high interest rates, not that high, but I just pay it every month to avoid paying interest on it.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot... Mine is less than 6% interest.... is yours in the double digits?

 

[BigRob]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot... Mine is less than 6% interest.... is yours in the double digits?

Depends on the card, but being a strapping young fellow mine has been around 13-14%.

 

[vyo476]

I keep telling myself that I'm going to apply for a debit card, and then it just doesn't seem to happen.

It'd be nice to have, especially since I've always disliked credit cards. Pretty much the only reason I have one is to build up my credit rating - I don't use it for much, outside of the occasional gas purchase. My parents, on the other hand, once purchased a car on a credit card. I haven't thought that was a wise move, but my mother swears up and down that it was the best thing for them.

Oh, and student credit cards are shams. My interest rate is something like 16%.

 

[vyo476]

Finances aren't exactly my area of expertise...but here we go.

1) National debt currently sits in excess of 10 trillion dollars.

Just out of curiosity's sake, how much of that actually exists in terms of physical money?

2) This means that your "share" sits at something like $30,000 a person. (give or take) I would argue however that based on income distribution throughout the country, the actual "per share" is somewhat different per person.

I'm with you so far. My first reaction: That's pretty steep.

3) Given this, if a taxpayer was given an incentive to "pay their share", would they do it?

4) If offered the option to "pay off their share" of the debt in exchange for further tax breaks and other incentives, like double or triple the amount paid qualifies for a tax write-off that can be carried over year to year and spread out, would anyone take it?

For example if I paid $50,000 to pay off my share, I could then write $150,000 dollars off my tax returns whenever I wanted. In small increments, or one lump sum, and it never expired.

Let's see if I'm still with you.

A) Dividing up the national debt between all Americans would mean about $30k per person.

B) You want to encourage people to "pay off their portion of the debt" by offering tax breaks proportionate to the amount paid.

5) While obviously we need tax revenue to still run the country, we would need to stagger the years that people could qualify to do this.

For example:
Year 1: Tax bracket X
Year 2: Tax bracket Y
Year 3: Tax bracket Z
and so on, until everyone has been encompassed into the system.

My first suggestion: Staggering the years in increments of two or three.

My second suggestion: Groupings should be according to region, in a random order. That way the progressive income tax doesn't crash when the highest tax bracket cashes in on their tax breaks.

6) I think that the lower tax rates as an incentive and the big tax write-offs are a good incentive to get people on board perhaps with this idea. Lower tax rates, over time do generate more revenue in a good economy, so if given time to implement the entire plan, I think the revenue boost would offset the small timeframe that might have a shortfall.

My third suggestion: Tentatively - a raise in the general tariff could help offset the loss of revenue while subsequently providing protection for American industry, encouraging those people with huge tax breaks in their hands to invest in American companies.

7) Of course this would require spending to be somewhat more controlled as well, but I feel that even if this plan only successfully dropped the debt 30-50% it would have been a huge success. Also, we could set a goal of simply shaving off a few trillion, as opposed to paying it all off, and I think we would have success.

We could try it as an experiment - set a relatively small goal, see what kinds of problems arise from attempting to meet it, and then adjust our plans accordingly, increasing the target amount gradually.

Also, we should take into account the debt of other countries that we own, which could lower this figure a bit, and then attempt to tackle that figure.

About how much do you think this would be?

 

[BigRob]

Just out of curiosity's sake, how much of that actually exists in terms of physical money?

Not sure exactly.

I'm with you so far. My first reaction: That's pretty steep.

It is pretty steep indeed, but I think under the revised plan some people will offer up much more than 30,000 and some will offer up much less.

Let's see if I'm still with you.

A) Dividing up the national debt between all Americans would mean about $30k per person.

B) You want to encourage people to "pay off their portion of the debt" by offering tax breaks proportionate to the amount paid.

Yes, we came up with the revised way to do this. Here is the breakdown.

When your year arrives you are able to pay in whatever amount you want. Could be 100 bucks, could be one million. You will then receive a tax credit for a certain % in return. Say if you put in $1000, you would own a tax credit worth $1400 or so (at a 40% rate). For many poor people this would not be very desirable, so a private market can be set up to allow business to purchase the tax credits at a discount.

For example, you put $1000 and get a tax credit worth $1400. A company (like GE) can come to you and buy your tax credit off of you for $1250 or so. This gives an immediate return to anyone who buys into the program and at the same time amounts to business buying tax credits worth more than they pay for them. So it amounts to a stimulus and a tax break at the same time.

My first suggestion: Staggering the years in increments of two or three.

My second suggestion: Groupings should be according to region, in a random order. That way the progressive income tax doesn't crash when the highest tax bracket cashes in on their tax breaks.

Yea, we decided that we would stagger it based on social security number to make it more evenly balanced.

My third suggestion: Tentatively - a raise in the general tariff could help offset the loss of revenue while subsequently providing protection for American industry, encouraging those people with huge tax breaks in their hands to invest in American companies.

I can agree with that for income, but at the same time we can expect to see resulting tariffs from most of our trading partners, which would not be beneficial to anyone in my view.

We could try it as an experiment - set a relatively small goal, see what kinds of problems arise from attempting to meet it, and then adjust our plans accordingly, increasing the target amount gradually.



About how much do you think this would be?

Yea, I think that if we set a target of 3-4 trillion it would be doable. I think that this would not pay off the debt in the short term, but it would pay it down at the very least, and a 5-6 trillion dollar debt is better than 10 trillion in debt in my view.

Thanks for the suggestions and response though.

 

[vyo476]

Not sure exactly.

Ah, well, I figured it was a shot in the dark anyway. In all likelihood no one knows.

It is pretty steep indeed, but I think under the revised plan some people will offer up much more than 30,000 and some will offer up much less.

Yes, we came up with the revised way to do this. Here is the breakdown.

When your year arrives you are able to pay in whatever amount you want. Could be 100 bucks, could be one million. You will then receive a tax credit for a certain % in return. Say if you put in $1000, you would own a tax credit worth $1400 or so (at a 40% rate). For many poor people this would not be very desirable, so a private market can be set up to allow business to purchase the tax credits at a discount.

For example, you put $1000 and get a tax credit worth $1400. A company (like GE) can come to you and buy your tax credit off of you for $1250 or so. This gives an immediate return to anyone who buys into the program and at the same time amounts to business buying tax credits worth more than they pay for them. So it amounts to a stimulus and a tax break at the same time.

I just had a thought - the benefit afforded could be made progressive, so that the higher one pays, the higher the percentage of the benefit dealt out. So, just for example, a payment of $1000 pays out at 40%, a payment of $10,000 pays out at 60%, etc., with a cap of, say, 75% at $100,000.

This would increase the incentive for those who can afford to pay for others to do so - kind of the progressive income tax in reverse.

Yea, we decided that we would stagger it based on social security number to make it more evenly balanced.

I can agree with that for income, but at the same time we can expect to see resulting tariffs from most of our trading partners, which would not be beneficial to anyone in my view.

So don't do it randomly - do it demographically, based on consumption of certain goods. Raise tariffs on those goods while those people are "cycling" through the plan; by the time the response of foreign markets starts to hurt that sector of our economy, a new cycle comes up, the tariff is removed, and things go back to normal for them.

Or we could do it by region, if specific regions still favor certain imports, and plan it in advance to shuffle around the tariff on certain items. It would be incredibly complicated, would take a ton of time examining demographics reports and trade records, and would potentially create an economic house of cards that could fall at any time, severely debilitating a specific region's economy. What do you think?

Yea, I think that if we set a target of 3-4 trillion it would be doable. I think that this would not pay off the debt in the short term, but it would pay it down at the very least, and a 5-6 trillion dollar debt is better than 10 trillion in debt in my view.

I don't think there is any way to pay off the debt in the short term that wouldn't destroy our economy, our government, or both, so gradually into the fire we must go.

If the first round succeeds in reducing the debt by 3-4 trillion, another cycle can be attempted. It would only take three to eliminate the debt completely.

Thanks for the suggestions and response though.

Of course.

 

[Phoenix68]

Thats why people like him vote Democrat... Let someone else do all the thinking.

.

.​

WHEW!!!!​

You can tell this is looooong before Spanky Trump started leading his cultists, around, by their collective-noses!!!!​

 

[Phoenix68]

.
Aww, gee....the new, '23 yachts must be coming-out, soon.
.
The 1%ers / High-Roller$ are putting-on a full-court-press!!!!​

 

[Phoenix68]

View attachment 4199
.
Aww, gee....the new, '23 yachts must be coming-out, soon.
.
The 1%ers / High-Roller$ are putting-on a full-court-press!!!!​

.

.
Yeah....this same asshole thinks we need more-competitive health-care, as well....see which state wins the Smallest Body-Count contest!!!
.
​