(01-20-2009 12:26 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Our depth quadrupled with the Red team in charge. I don't want to make this partisan. What i do want to know is WHAT are you willing to do. Our debt is unsustainable. Raising txes is political suicide. So what can we do? Tax oil.

I'm willing to see other regulations (EPA, OSHA, SEC/Commerce, Transportation, FTC, Treasury/IRS) simplified so that lawyers and accountants are no longer essential to doing everyday business.

I'm willing to see the FAR simplified so that procurement is faster and cheaper. Expect a 5-10% savings immediately.

With reduced and simplified regulations, I'm willing to see a bunch of gov't employees and contractors get RIFed. I'm willing to see every Drug Czar, Global Warming Czar, Automobile Czar, Comic Book Czar, etc, AND thier staffs (staves?) elminiated.

With this RIF, different branches in the gov't would need much lower budgets.
This would include
Dept of Education- slashed by 90-95%
Dept of Energy cut by 25%, eliminate bureaucracy, focus efforts on renewable resources
NASA- cut the Hubble refurbishing program, that's $1B, cut James Hanson and his cronies...and the rest of HHS by 25%.
DoD- $20B. I could give you cost savings of $500M right away from my own experience.
DHS- cut by 25%
Dept of Transportation- cut by 25%
HUD- cut by 35%
NSF- cut by 20%
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac- eliminate
Corp for Public Broadcasting- privatize/eliminate funding entirely
NEA- privatize/eliminate funding entirely

I'm willing to see Congress' pay cut by $40K/member.

All of this will dramatically reduce the property value of my home in NoVA...it may even cost me my job. But it's far easier to sit on your tail somewhere, clueless about what you write, and pretend you know some answers.

(01-20-2009 08:36 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's a crazy idea I know, I'm trying to think outside the box. If you could plan it out they could budget for it and remember I'm just delaying it for a month they still get the full principal paid. The logistics would be too hard I know. Taxing Oil is probably our best bet.

Before raising any tax, we need to realize that any tax will have the consequence of discouraging activity, If the same activity can be engaged in elsewhere with a lower tax burden, that activity will tend to move there. If your taxes are still lower than elsewhere, even after you raise them, then the negative effects will be minimized.

The beauty of the Bill Clinton tweaks to the tax rates was that he was able to increase tax revenues enough to balance the budget (when coupled with massive spending cuts) while still leaving our tax rates lower than the rest of the world. The rest of the world took note and worldwide tax rates have been falling dramatically in the last 15 years or so. Another trend in the rest of the world has been toward flatter tax structures.

Given that, let's take a quick look at how our taxes compare with the rest of the developed world.

Areas where our taxes are lower--Individual income taxes (primarily at the lower income levels), gasoline/diesel fuel taxes, consumption/sales taxes, social security taxes, excise taxes.

Areas where our taxes are higher--Corporate income tax (at least the top marginal rate, but cheaper at the lower income levels), dividend tax, capital gains tax, estate and inheritance taxes.

I believe that a major part of our current economic problem is that the way we tax has the effect of encouraging overconsumption at the same time that we discourage savings and investment. Restructuring our tax system more along the lines of the countries we are competing with would remove some serious competitive disadvantages. Your idea of increased fuel taxes fits that profile. Other suggestions are obvious.

The incoming administration's tax strategy seems almost 180 degrees out from this. I'm not optimistic.

(01-20-2009 09:06 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 12:26 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Our depth quadrupled with the Red team in charge. I don't want to make this partisan. What i do want to know is WHAT are you willing to do. Our debt is unsustainable. Raising txes is political suicide. So what can we do? Tax oil.

I'm willing to see other regulations (EPA, OSHA, SEC/Commerce, Transportation, FTC, Treasury/IRS) simplified so that lawyers and accountants are no longer essential to doing everyday business.

I'm willing to see the FAR simplified so that procurement is faster and cheaper. Expect a 5-10% savings immediately.

With reduced and simplified regulations, I'm willing to see a bunch of gov't employees and contractors get RIFed. I'm willing to see every Drug Czar, Global Warming Czar, Automobile Czar, Comic Book Czar, etc, AND thier staffs (staves?) elminiated.

With this RIF, different branches in the gov't would need much lower budgets.
This would include
Dept of Education- slashed by 90-95%
Dept of Energy cut by 25%, eliminate bureaucracy, focus efforts on renewable resources
NASA- cut the Hubble refurbishing program, that's $1B, cut James Hanson and his cronies...and the rest of HHS by 25%.
DoD- $20B. I could give you cost savings of $500M right away from my own experience.
DHS- cut by 25%
Dept of Transportation- cut by 25%
HUD- cut by 35%
NSF- cut by 20%
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac- eliminate
Corp for Public Broadcasting- privatize/eliminate funding entirely
NEA- privatize/eliminate funding entirely

I'm willing to see Congress' pay cut by $40K/member.

All of this will dramatically reduce the property value of my home in NoVA...it may even cost me my job. But it's far easier to sit on your tail somewhere, clueless about what you write, and pretend you know some answers.

We could cut at least $20B off defense spending (DoD's own numbers) by bringing the troops home--from Germany and Japan. We should not be spending more to defend Germany and Japan the Germany and Japan are spending to defend Germany and Japan. While you're at it, kill the eastern European missile shield. Build ours here, but if they want one they can build it--and they can deal with the Russians' not liking it.

While you're cutting congressional salaries, cut the size of their staffs in half--same for the presidential staff, and administrative agency staffs--and eliminate the perks. No president should need a bigger staff than FDR needed to run WWII. If my congressman--or some bureaucrat--wants to fly down to see me, he doesn't need an Air Force charter; he/she can fly coach and put up with the same crap that the rest of us do.

I like the things that Torch and Owl came up with. I think any increase in taxation for our deficit should be matched with cuts in spending. The tax would be more palatable to the citizenry if this were the case. We need to start hearing "Do more with LESS". Sacrifice. 10% across the board cuts. I can't stomach our debt. I really can't. Pisses me off really. The Dept. of Education should be slashed. In my experience those types waste a hell of alot of trees and come up with new ideas to justify their jobs. I've had 6 courses of study in 15 years. You can bet I will have a new one in the next two years too.

(01-20-2009 05:37 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-19-2009 11:54 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Another creative idea I had was pass a law that all bills are suspended for one month. Make it Feb. 2010. All car payments house payments get pushed back one month. That month you pay the govt. half of your bills you keep the rest and spend it.

Do the car companies and the lenders get to tell their employees to forget their paychecks that month? If not, how do you propose to get them paid?

Well, they get paid too much anyway so they really don't need it. :rolleyes3:

Here's the approach I would take:

1. Go to something like the 15-15-15 tax plan implemented in a number of the former communist countries to stimulate growth. A social security tax, a business income tax, and a consumption tax, all at the same flat rate. Based on some numbers I ran, 15-15-15 works with the 30% prefund (see below) to raise sufficient revenues to have balanced the current budget before the "stimulus" spending.
2. With the lower corporate tax rate, you now don't need most of the corporate welfare programs. So ditch them.
3. Make all the other spending cuts proposed above.
4. Implement a version of the French health care plan. Get rid of Medicaid and phase out Medicare. I would have the federal government establish a very basic HMO for every man, woman, and child; this would cost about $3,000/person per year. You can rely on that exclusively (with long queues for most elective procedures), or you can supplement it with insurance that covers you to go into the private health care market for elective procedures, or you can supplement it with a health spending account, or you can use it as a voucher against the cost of comprehensive insurance (replacing the $250/person or $500/couple or so that your employer currently contributes to your health care if you have it at work). Among other things, this lifts a huge cost burden off the states.
5. Implement the Boortz-Linder prefund (the modern version of the Milton Friedman negative income tax) as the basic welfare program. A 15-15-15 tax plan plus a 30 percent prefund gives you sufficient revenues to have balanced the budget before the bailouts. Transfer the remaining welfare bureaucracy to the states, with each state able to pick and choose what programs to continue. Since we just saved them some money on health care, they should be better able to afford this.
6. Tax gasoline and diesel up to the price that alternatives are financially competitive. Ease the hardship on lower incomes by taking an allowable driving distance at a target MPG rate, and include the tax on the resulting gasoline use as part of the prefund amount.
7. Replace unemployment with work-fare. Set up a modern version of WPA/CCC/Americorps. If you're unemployed, you go down to the place where you used to go to sign up for unemployement compensation. They give you a physical, do some testing and interviews to figure out where you'd best fit, and assign you a place to start work tomorrow. You work 32 hours a week at minimum wage, and have 8 paid hours a week to look for work. You could use disestablished military bases and other disused federal facilities to house this new organization.
8. Raise excise taxes on tobacco and alcohol. For each, figure out (A) how much related injuries and illnesses and other society costs are each year, and (B) how much of each we consume. Divide A by B to get the tax rate.
9. Legalize drugs (at least marijuana) and tax them, following the same approach as alcohol and tobacco.
10. Implement a market-based approach to environmental compliance, that will focus more on actually cleaning up the environment and less on preserving jobs for environmental lawyers, consultants, and bureaucrats.
11. Implement user fees for some federal services that are currently free. Case in point, the National Parks system. Those can--and should--be self-sustaining.

I believe this approach would stimulate significant growth in the US economy. The key to me would be watching export sales, which I believe have to increase significantly for us to get out of this economic mess. If they do pick up, then we're on the right track. If they don't, then we may need to take more active steps to bring that about.

(01-20-2009 01:27 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  4. Implement a version of the French health care plan. Get rid of Medicaid and phase out Medicare. I would have the federal government establish a very basic HMO for every man, woman, and child; this would cost about $3,000/person per year. You can rely on that exclusively (with long queues for most elective procedures), or you can supplement it with insurance that covers you to go into the private health care market for elective procedures, or you can supplement it with a health spending account, or you can use it as a voucher against the cost of comprehensive insurance (replacing the $250/person or $500/couple or so that your employer currently contributes to your health care if you have it at work). Among other things, this lifts a huge cost burden off the states.

A good start, possibly necessary as a transition, but I'd rather see health insurance become a standard consumable, like car insurance.

It needs to be detached from employers, b/c that's a contrived situation that means being unemployed is a double whammy.

Insurance companies then need to be more transparent w/ their books given people's health is at risk.

It also needs better enforcement for payments. Everyone (physicians, patients, etc) suffers when insurance companies withhold payments to collect interest on the "float". BTW, that ought to be enforced against everyone, but certainly enforced among insurance and gov't contractors.

GEICO health insurance would likely be a great buy.

Quote:6. Tax gasoline and diesel up to the price that alternatives are financially competitive. Ease the hardship on lower incomes by taking an allowable driving distance at a target MPG rate, and include the tax on the resulting gasoline use as part of the prefund amount.

Too high of a tax, especially on diesel. I agree w/ the refund part, b/c I like the fair tax code.
Also should engage a competition on alternatives, w/ the prize being the adoption of standards by the DOC, DOT, etc. Then the winner has a leg up to develop products and supply chains, and customers have reduced risk.

Side note, anyone remember that it was Standard Oil that developed the supply chains that we have today, making the auto possible? Maybe that anti-trust mentality is a little overstated, and maybe Rockefeller deserves more credit than disdain.

Quote:7. Replace unemployment with work-fare. Set up a modern version of WPA/CCC/Americorps. If you're unemployed, you go down to the place where you used to go to sign up for unemployement compensation. They give you a physical, do some testing and interviews to figure out where you'd best fit, and assign you a place to start work tomorrow. You work 32 hours a week at minimum wage, and have 8 paid hours a week to look for work. You could use disestablished military bases and other disused federal facilities to house this new organization.

Agree 100%. This country has lots of projects that could use some help: replanting after forest fires, levy building, etc. Don't want to work? Don't get paid.
We'd see a return of mining town type communities. For good or ill. But, people would have opportunity.

Need plans for single mothers as well.

Interesting ideas, Owl. I like the thought process, but I'm certainly not any kind of economist therefore I can't gauge just how it effects the overall economy.

I really think welfare needs to become a work-fare program. Giving handouts with nothing expected in return is just a terrible idea all around...

CHANGING ONE ITEM COULD SOLVE THE TAX PROBLEM

Royalties on products developed on taxpayer funded research and development programs. If taxpayers could reap the benefits instead of the multi-national corporations, some day we, our children, our children's children, might not even have to pay taxes.

(01-20-2009 02:03 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  CHANGING ONE ITEM COULD SOLVE THE TAX PROBLEM

Royalties on products developed on taxpayer funded research and development programs. If taxpayers could reap the benefits instead of the multi-national corporations, some day we, our children, our children's children, might not even have to pay taxes.

Taking a product to market involves much risk. I don't begrudge such a person their profits, even if they didn't do the invention.

Furthermore, how far back to you go on R&D? Does research that isolates and "discovers" ytterbium get royalties if it's eventually used in a device?

Dr and Owl

Great points.

And here is the front page of the newspaper in response.

"Programs slashed, new fees instituted. Women, children and minorities hardest hit."

Here is what I am doing. I pay my taxes every year. In return, I expect my government to use the money wisely and not spend it like a meterosexual homosexual in an Apple Store.

Seems I am doing my part, but the government gets a massive FAIL.

(01-20-2009 03:39 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Dr and Owl

Great points.

And here is the front page of the newspaper in response.

"Programs slashed, new fees instituted. Women, children and minorities hardest hit."

Touche Lord Stanley.

(01-19-2009 11:54 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I get it when FO talks about stealing wages. I get it when people talk about cutting spending. What I don't get is quadrupling the debt in 8 yrs. What sacrifices are YOU specifically willing to make to get OUR country out of this rut we are in. I would immediately institute a 75 cent tax increase on oil. I would also work one day for my country. Another creative idea I had was pass a law that all bills are suspended for one month. Make it Feb. 2010. All car payments house payments get pushed back one month. That month you pay the govt. half of your bills you keep the rest and spend it. These are so of my ideas. I would like to know what YOU would be willing to do to help your country.

Huh? You would still owe the money, this just delays the payment for a month.

To help pay off the national debt, I would live within my means so there is NO need for a bail out plan (personally I only have a mortgage so I don't play unless I can pay). I would pay my taxes on time. This ain't no JFK moment, My country is spending billions on pork, is doing NOTHING to educate individuals on economic responsibility and personal financial accountability. So what can my country do for me ... LIVE WITHIN ITS MEANS!!! Until the US government spends only an amount equal to its income how can we expect individuals to do so and why should we be willing to sacrifice to pay off the national debt if our leaders won't adopt a balanced budget amendment? I will be happy to help with the debt retirement when our spineless leaders show they will make tough decisions and begin to live within the means of this nation.

(01-19-2009 11:54 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I would like to know what YOU would be willing to do to help your country.

What would I do for my country? On top of

Pay current taxes
Not break any laws
Keep a clean, responsible house
Work hard so my company is successful
Volunteer through my neighborhood association
Etc.
Etc.
Etc.

I've done everything right. I have little debt outside of one car payment and a mortgage I put 10% down, I've not been arrested, I pay my taxes on time, I am a good neighbor, volunteer and civic member. I donate a fair amount of my money, both pre tax and post tax, to the United Way and other local charities. I contribute to the economy by purchasing consumer goods, I have adequate savings, I make yearly care packages to our troops overseas, I tip the mailman at Christmas, I don't rake leaves into the street, I buy US made beer and bourbon, and I follow NIU athletics (directional state schools are the epitome of supporting your country / hah!)

Shite, I even shovel my neighbors walkway when she is out of town.

Why is the government asking me to do MORE?

Government is using R&D for the public good. Corps. have only one allegiance. Money. So if a breakthrough is made on taxpayer dime, the taxpayer should reap benefit from the R&D provided to the Corps. products.

(01-20-2009 12:06 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Tell them I will no longer be complicit in the ruination of my country and not give any more.

Exactly. I'm willing to get rid of the federal gov't. We don't need it. Institute a Fair Tax and let the states collect it. Cut all federal spending out other than the military (which should be decreased too, i.e. get rid of most foreign bases and deployments). We have to get rid of all social programs to have any chance of making it economically as a country. Social Security will destroy this country. It's a ponzi scheme bigger than Maddoff's.

(01-20-2009 04:47 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(01-20-2009 12:06 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Tell them I will no longer be complicit in the ruination of my country and not give any more.

Exactly. I'm willing to get rid of the federal gov't. We don't need it. Institute a Fair Tax and let the states collect it. Cut all federal spending out other than the military (which should be decreased too, i.e. get rid of most foreign bases and deployments). We have to get rid of all social programs to have any chance of making it economically as a country. Social Security will destroy this country. It's a ponzi scheme bigger than Maddoff's.

Hell yeah! City states. I wanna be Sparta.

Seriously though, it's not a bad plan. The Fed is too damned big.

Quote:“The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all that have preceded it.” ---Robert E. Lee after the Civil War

(01-20-2009 04:46 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Government is using R&D for the public good. Corps. have only one allegiance. Money. So if a breakthrough is made on taxpayer dime, the taxpayer should reap benefit from the R&D provided to the Corps. products.

Do that and the only thing you'll accomplish is to chase R&D away from the US as fast as manufacturing is now leaving. At least, corporate sponsored R&D. You'll still have the pure science academic R&D, of course.

If a business can't expect to make money doing something, then it has no incentive to do it. For the life of me, I cannot understand why this concept is so difficult to grasp.

(01-20-2009 03:39 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Dr and Owl

Great points.

And here is the front page of the newspaper in response.

"Programs slashed, new fees instituted. Women, children and minorities hardest hit."

The really sad thing is that women, children, and minorites would be precisely the people who would NOT be hardest hit. But explaining a dynamic economy to someone with a journalism degree and a leftist lean is something that's not happening.