Here's an Idea...Start Saving
The government has a spending problem.
It maybe a worse problem than Brittney Spears on a spending spree after a divorce. I’ve heard those black American Express cards require $100,000 per month in charges to keep it active. I’d last 14 days, but I digress. So what do we need to do?
First, get the spending under control. While I am all for helping out beneficial research and development, and helping out unfortunate Americans, it seems any laws going to the desks of our leaders is not simply for one thing. This leads to a veto and one party criticizing the other for trying to hurt America.
Seriously? If you want to help, stop attaching the pork and work together to curtail spending.
Now, back to the debt. The second thing we have to do is increase taxes. Yes, I said it. But, we DO NOT do it right now. We do it when we can afford it. We have to pay down the debt. We all caused it, that is, all of us who are voters. Take the blame and move on.
Hopefully, a one or two percent tax hike will not hurt much. Heck, Wisconsin government workers got hit with a 5.8 percent tax and those people are still with us. Okay, call that 5.8 percent what you want, but if it comes out of your paycheck, that’s a tax. Please don’t tell me how they should be paying for their retirement, everyone I’ve talked to agrees with you and if you write in about teachers, I’ll address that later.
Now, we have cut spending and increased taxes during good times, what’s left? Drumroll please… How about we save. I know, us Americans are saving. We save in case we loose our job, need to buy a new car, have a sick child, buy a house, etc. We save so we can afford for our future, or combat financial stress due to an unfortunate event. Why doesn’t the government do that? (The only government I’ve heard of doing that is in Virginia. They have a savings and are in a position to combat future recessions in their state.)
If the government could save money, what would you say? I can hear it now. Why are our taxes so high when the government has excess money? I want my money back. These same people want the government to help them if they run into financial troubles. Whether you are a Democrat or Republican, if you are in trouble, you hope the government bails you out. We are $15 trillion in debt and yet are numb to that number.
Why? How much is that? We can’t envision that. We have seen a million dollars on the final table of the World Poker Tour, but that’s it. Here’s something to chew on, if we spent $1 million a day since the birth of Christ, we would be around $790 billion in debt. That’s right, not even a trillion, and we are talking $15 trillion in debt! Like it or not, we need to face the problem we all have caused, and that will be all Americans need to sacrifice.
In the future, let’s start a government savings program to pay for our next recession. Like it or not, there will be one and that you can bank on.
kbb
4:25 pm on Monday, January 30, 2012
We had a federal budget surplus, not long ago. The Republicans were appalled, and called for tax cuts. Imagine if we instead paid down the debt. In January of 2001, the CBO project that the US would be debt-free by 2007. Then something terrible and tragic happened - Bush was inaugurated. After trillions in tax cuts, war spending, and the worst recession since the Depression, I can understand why the idea of the government "saving" money is a foreign concept.
Steve
11:00 pm on Monday, January 30, 2012
Don't forget about all those liberal socialist that took over congress in 2007and blew all the record income those tax cuts created!
I forgot who won the last election but I don't see a white guy in the white house anymore. Maybe the new guy could control the spending. Oh wait.... give him a call see if he's on board.
kbb
11:55 am on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Steve, the surplus was long gone by 2007, and the "income" raised by the tax cuts never materialized, just as it never materialized under Reagan. It wasn't until Bush I and Clinton raised taxes that the federal budget began to improve. Oddly, despite Republican rantings, the economy also grew very nicely under the higher tax rates during the 90's.
As for spending during a recession, only an idiot would cut government spending during a recession. It's the best way to create a depression. Several European countries are trying the "austerity" approach. In the year and a half since the UK instituted austerity measures, there GDP has gone from slow growth to flat line. Spain, another "austerity" country, is clearly heading for a double-dip. I'd much rather see the government invest in projects that must get done, directly creating economic activity, than wait around for the ultra-rich to start trickling on us.
Bryant Divelbiss
5:25 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
European countries waited until they had little choice but to make severe cuts. Italy raised taxes a little over a year ago and were in need of a bailout recently. The best reforms would be entitlement reforms like Paul Ryan proposed where the savings are down the road but puts deals with unfunded liabilities creating confidence we can deal the major issues.
Bryant Divelbiss
5:28 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
The greatest threat in the world is high level of debt. Actually cutting $200 billion out of this years budget would be positive with the confidence it would give that we are ready to deal with our issues in a serious way. Combine that with Obamacare repeal and the economy would be way better off.
Craig
11:14 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
To "invest" in infrastructure as a way to spend ourselves out of a recession/ depression would require having money to spend. Our GDP is lower than our debt! It is not possible to spend MORE.
Investing money we don't have is what started the whole problem to begin with. Time to slash expences and keep the US from defaulting. With Europe, their social programs are the last straw to break the camel's back.
Ben Hogan
7:21 am on Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Only an idiot would propose raising taxes during a recession!!!!!!!
Jay Sykes
1:27 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
What is the marginal tax rate required, on high income earners(250k+),during the 10 or so years(Bush I - Clinton) of tech/stock/economic boom, to eliminate the national debt and have saved/banked the $15 trillion that we now owe?
Bryant Divelbiss
5:14 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Savings? Even Tea Party People like Rand Paul were just asking to get to balanced over an 8 yr period with Cut Cap & Balance and that was called "extreme". Cutting Government employees costs is not a tax. When your employer charges more for insurance or cut benefits as has happened to most in the Private Sector in recent years that is not a tax even though it reduces your take home pay.
Bryant Divelbiss
5:20 pm on Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Taxes are scheduled to rise next year and again under Obamacare so unless those are reduced or eliminated we should not worry about raising taxes, it is done and is in the baseline the debt commission used. We should cut spending which must include long term fixes to entitlement programs before we even discuss tax increases. If we are not fixing entitlements then we will have fiscal crisis so we might as well not raise taxes and just crash.
M. Chavannes
5:17 pm on Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Bryant, it is obvious where you stand and I look forward to your comments about health care in an up coming blog of mine. With that said, I do hope we can agree on one thing, the definition of a tax. A tax is anything that the government levies on your paycheck, property or from sales. Therefore, government employees are paying a type of tax with the mandate. I am on your side that government employees should pay for the benefits they have so long received for free. Also, please let's agree to speak in terms of government employees, not educators. There is enough hatred towards good educators out there right now and more rhetoric is not needed. They do provide a needed service to our economy.
With all that said, why do you think people aren't so upset with the fact our legislators only work 105 days a year and receive full benefits after one term? I'm surprised we haven't heard about that yet.
Bryant Divelbiss
6:38 am on Thursday, February 2, 2012
You can not use that definition of a tax when the employer is a government. It just lacks common sense. It is what it is a reduction of compensation that most in the private sector already have faced. Calling what is clearly a spending cut a tax is annoying. As for the legislators that is one of the more impressive parts of this reform the GOP took away the special retirement multiplier for elected officials. Although it by law can not go into effect until after the next election. Legislators have to go back to districts and meet with voters so it is not totally fair to say they only work 105 days. Either way it is not an important issue.
Craig
3:47 pm on Thursday, February 2, 2012
Mr Chavannes, while it may be a perception of hatred toward good educators, that is really not the case. It may be true that many have directed their comments toward your profession because of over generalization. But much of it was from seeing teachers protesting in Madison last Fall. I remember clearly thanking the teachers from MFSD for not abandoning the students to run off to Madison.
Many of the Falls teachers went to Alberta's office and held a protest- on their own time. That earned some respect from people on both sides.
We may not agree politically, but that doesn't mean I have contempt for you or your profession.
I am very fortunate I can say my child is a former student of yours.
JustMe
3:33 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012
Does that make the white house now the black house?
Born Free
1:51 am on Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Lets say that if the 56 million people actually still have jobs 10 years from now and all earned the same amount of money like the Marxists want the deficit Obama alone has added, is adding and will add with his programs alone by then will in ten years will be up to extra $400.00 per week (at current dollar value) in federal payrol tax (not including FICA) taken out of their checks. That figure also doesn't reflect, (besides any increace in FICA) the interest needed to pay the Fed. What doesn't get covered at that time from your checks will still be paid at the usual places on the usual items you buy out of your spendable income provided you have any spendable income left at all.
Typical yearly single digit inflation of around 3% won't get you near that $400 per week increace so yes you'd better start saving now!
Tax the rich? Better ask yourselves why people like multi millionaire Obama can avoid paying their fair share too. He is the rich, he is the wealthy. He and his millionaire buddies are the ones writing the tax loop holes and laughing all the way to a Chicago bank "SHORE BANK" ( http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/shorebank.php ).
You Democrats bought a junk bond - Obama. Your so scared of being called a racist if you disagree with Obama's Chicago politics that people all over the internet can hear your knees knocking. You've been hung you out to dry via political correctness and desperately codependant now on your friends for your approval.