No politician wants to pay down the debt.So this June the Federal government will hit the limit on what it can borrow. What steps can be taken or will be taken to keep America running and why don't the Dems want to pay the debt down it seems like?
Subscribed and following!So this June the Federal government will hit the limit on what it can borrow. What steps can be taken or will be taken to keep America running and why don't the Dems want to pay the debt down it seems like?
Nah. I don't buy that.A consumption tax penalizes the poor. The millionaire that makes $10 million a year will not notice the price of food going up while someone making 20k a year will.
You need catholic Kings for that.Real one,not modern fakes.Taxes in general are just theft from the poorer peoples of Western nations.
These countries existed for a long time with way less taxes, I fail to see how we cannot return to that method of spending and taxing.
That, and public executions for billionaires who don't pay their taxes appropriately.
The underlying issue is that we have incomprehensibly higher economic complexity. No matter how you look at it, there's a need for a several-fold expansion of the government's scale simply to keep up with the increased variety of businesses. For instance, GMO foods weren't a thing when the EPA was founded, and if we ever want to enforce environmental regulations on imports so they aren't just reflexively dodged with offshoring we'll be needing whole new departments that may as well go to the EPA.These countries existed for a long time with way less taxes, I fail to see how we cannot return to that method of spending and taxing.
The underlying issue is that we have incomprehensibly higher economic complexity. No matter how you look at it, there's a need for a several-fold expansion of the government's scale simply to keep up with the increased variety of businesses. For instance, GMO foods weren't a thing when the EPA was founded, and if we ever want to enforce environmental regulations on imports so they aren't just reflexively dodged with offshoring we'll be needing whole new departments that may as well go to the EPA.
It's expanded far more than necessary, and it's a rambling inefficient clusterfuck, but when people make statements they're usually referring to the pre-flaming-river times when "environmental protection" wasn't a thing. Pollution is far too acute a threat to public health to be rid of agencies like the EPA. That's just the most obvious case-study in why "back to before the 20th century" will not go well.
And who gets to declare that the pollution is illegal? Congress doesn't have time to pass individual laws on every single compound, that's what bureaucracies like the EPA are for. Nor can you just ban everything, industry would completely grind to a halt if they could produce no emissions whatsoever. Even the greenest electric car produces some from the outgassing of its plastic components and oxidation of its lubricant. So you need somebody with the time and resources to regulate all these individual pollutants, run studies on exactly how much becomes critical and how much can be allowed to slide, and then regulate production accordingly.You seem to be assuming that the EPA is the cause of anti-pollution movements in the culture, not a symptom of it. You also seem to be ignorant to just how much damage organizations like the EPA cause.
I have a simple alternative to massive, complex government bureaucracies:
Dissolve them all. When somebody dumps waste into the river, rather than slapping them with dozens of bureaucratic fines, take them to court for criminal and civil damages.
Likely but not true. It would take a level of austerity and will to deny gubm't SWAG in order to pull off however.There is absolutely no way in the state of fuck the us can pay back our debt. We are long outside the remote possibility of that.
No, I'm stating that said regulatory body has had rather significant additions to its job in the form of whole new technologies applicable to its jurisdiction and there are very obvious improvements to ensuring existing regulations do what they're supposed to that would also necessitate additions to it.You seem to be assuming that the EPA is the cause of anti-pollution movements in the culture, not a symptom of it.
And what are you doing to enforce preventative regulations without an agency training inspectors and processing their findings? Without such, you are proposing we be reduced to strictly punitive measures after lives and land have already been ruined.When somebody dumps waste into the river, rather than slapping them with dozens of bureaucratic fines, take them to court for criminal and civil damages.
The United States can rather trivially pay off its debts with remarkably minor austerity measures, because the ratio of debt repayments plus government requirements to GDP is low enough we could gut spending and hike taxes to crush it in 20 years or so without necessarily collapsing the economy. More measured approaches with less risk of economic meltdown from system shock take increasing amounts of time, but we're in no danger of default with even the most basic of graft-purging measures.There is absolutely no way in the state of fuck the us can pay back our debt.
As opposed to a system where we already have corruption, incompetence, and ineptitude leading to lives and land being ruined, on top of the inhibitive effects of excessive regulation and bureaucrats on power trips trying to control everything?And what are you doing to enforce preventative regulations without an agency training inspectors and processing their findings? Without such, you are proposing we be reduced to strictly punitive measures after lives and land have already been ruined.
They've been arguing for this for more than a decade. Can you say power grab?As opposed to a system where we already have corruption, incompetence, and ineptitude leading to lives and land being ruined, on top of the inhibitive effects of excessive regulation and bureaucrats on power trips trying to control everything?
Did you know that just recently the EPA was arguing before the Supreme Court that they had regulatory power over basically everything water flows through in the US? Including drainage ditches, privately made artificial ponds, etc, etc?