CSNbbs

I just went by some gas stations that were chasing a1.95 for gas. We burn over 374 million gallons of gas a day. Factor in diesel and we would be well north of 100 million dollars a day if we dedicated that revenue stream to only paying off our debt. People wouldn't complain about paying 2.20 a gallon a bit. I would be tempted to go to 50 cents a gallon when it gets this low. 200 million a day would make a serious dent. To get this I would be willing to raise the age of social security and a freeze in govt. spending at today's levels.

Thoughts? 200 million a day probably north of that realistically at 50 cents a gallon. That's a billion dollars every 5 days. Every 50 days 10 billion. 500 100 billion. 5000 1 trillion. 50000 10 trillion. Now I can multiply by 2. 100000 20 trillion.

100,000/365

Gosh that's 273 years. Maybe we go to a dollar. Just know every year we keep growing this thing the bigger pain we feel when we pay it off.

I pay enough now to support the government and its operations. It is not my fault it pisses it away on useless boondoggles.

A huge chunk of the 1.95 is already made up of taxes.

Um, no.

I like Owls idea of using privatization of the interstate highway system using tolls as way to help pay down the debt. These toll roads are giant money makers.

Do we have a revenue problem or do we have a spending problem?

I think half of every political candidate contribution should go towards the debt. Money to PACs, candidates, national parties, state parties, etc. No exceptions. The money spent on politics is out of hand and leads to candidates beholden to special interests. If donors/PACs are going to screw us by buying candidates, they might as well give us a reach around and help pay down the debt.

No more taxes!

I am ok with $2.00 a gallon as long as it only applies to people who have taxation with representation.

Illegals have plenty of representation.

(08-30-2015 10:28 AM)Paul M Wrote: [ -> ]Illegals have plenty of representation.

But DC residents do not.

(08-30-2015 09:37 AM)Smaug Wrote: [ -> ]Do we have a revenue problem or do we have a spending problem?

The later. Unfortunately...I see nothing that is going to quell that.

For one, you dont balance the debt. You balance the budget so that you have no debt.

And if you want to know how not to get into debt, I can recommend this book. It's only one page long.

Dont Get Into Debt Book

I filled up yesterday at 2.40 a gallon.

You realize we have other so called "lock boxes".

(08-30-2015 10:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]For one, you dont balance the debt. You balance the budget so that you have no debt.

And if you want to know how not to get into debt, I can recommend this book. It's only one page long.

Dont Get Into Debt Book

Government debt isn't nearly the issue it is now, if we also understand that during times of growth, taxes must be levied to pay off the debts we incurred when times were lean. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line we abandoned that latter principle, and the political spectrum has changed so much that a two party solution, like the one we reached in the 90's, is literally impossible.

(08-30-2015 09:37 AM)Smaug Wrote: [ -> ]Do we have a revenue problem or do we have a spending problem?

Spending problem. What's worse is the liberals/tax-and-spenders (not necessarily the same group) know this and refuse to recognize this.

(08-30-2015 09:48 AM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]No more taxes!

Whether or not you're serious with this, I 100% agree.

(08-30-2015 11:42 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-30-2015 10:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]For one, you dont balance the debt. You balance the budget so that you have no debt.

And if you want to know how not to get into debt, I can recommend this book. It's only one page long.

Dont Get Into Debt Book

Government debt isn't nearly the issue it is now, if we also understand that during times of growth, taxes must be levied to pay off the debts we incurred when times were lean. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line we abandoned that latter principle, and the political spectrum has changed so much that a two party solution, like the one we reached in the 90's, is literally impossible.

Taxes are always levied. Its a simple issue of that when there's a windfall, liberals want to spend more. Then when the windfall is gone, the government entity is in even depper sh*t because now they have more outstanding liabilities.

(08-30-2015 12:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-30-2015 11:42 AM)UCF08 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-30-2015 10:37 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]For one, you dont balance the debt. You balance the budget so that you have no debt.

And if you want to know how not to get into debt, I can recommend this book. It's only one page long.

Dont Get Into Debt Book

Government debt isn't nearly the issue it is now, if we also understand that during times of growth, taxes must be levied to pay off the debts we incurred when times were lean. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line we abandoned that latter principle, and the political spectrum has changed so much that a two party solution, like the one we reached in the 90's, is literally impossible.

Taxes are always levied. Its a simple issue of that when there's a windfall, liberals want to spend more. Then when the windfall is gone, the government entity is in even depper sh*t because now they have more outstanding liabilities.

That's simply not true, historically speaking. Debt was almost always incurred during times of war or during economic downturns, and then paid off. That's regardless of whether or not there were relative liberals or conservatives in power at the time.