- This topic has 9 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 months, 3 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
First, let’s start with the problems:
- Social security is running out of money.
- America has been the world’s policeman for eighty years.
- America pays 70% of the cost of NATO.
- American manufacturing has been decimated.
- The trade deficit has nearly doubled since Joe Biden has been in office.
- Inflation is horrific.
- The American consumer had a brief respite in terms of adding real income during Trump’s first term, but before and after their purchasing power shrank.
- We have bent over backwards to allow other countries access to our markets since WWII, and allowed other countries to charge tariffs on our goods. We created a prosperous Japan and contributed to a prosperous China by allowing a Communist nation access to our markets and protection on the world’s waterways.
- There was a global coronavirus pandemic that killed nearly 15 million people and China was never called to account.
- We have had an open borders policy — realistically — since the early 1970s. Over 14% of the residents in the United States — probably more — were born elsewhere.
So here’s the radical solutions:
- Charge foreigners $5 million each to get into the United States to become permanent residents.
- Charge those here illegally $5 million each. They pay an immigration surtax. Most won’t get to $5 million, but if they’re here, they need to pay up.
- Consumers owe $18.5 trillion. Convert non-mortgage consumer debt into 6.54% fixed loans administered by the U. S. Government (2% higher than 30 year T bond rate). That’s about $6.67 trillion. This turns into $135 billion in earnings for the Federal government and eliminates a nasty part of Wall Street that preys upon Main Street — Wall Street votes Democratic anyway. Gives relief to citizens.
- The other $17.83 trillion are mortgages. Federal government should provide mortgages. Get rid of the mortgage industry.
- Allow citizens to buy their way out of Social Security for half their contributions. Between FICA and Medicare contributions, I’ve “invested” $584,000 over my career. The government can keep $292k, I want the other $292k, and I want it now. That will relieve the government of future obligations and give consumers some breathing room and increase consumer spending.
- Convert all tariffs to reflect that of other countries, and if a foreign company wants access to American markets, that company’s government needs to pay an access fee or that company builds a factory in the USA, just as many Japanese and Korean and British and German companies have.
- Institute a wealth tax. A big one. Punitive for super rich people, two-thirds of whom support Democrats in any event.
- Increase the social security age.
- Eliminate “disability” Social Security payments.
- Close all American prisons and export prisoners to South America. Current prison guards and administrators can be retrained to work in new American manufacturing companies.
- Institute trade schools and classes in American high schools. Not every kid needs to go to college.
- Institute lifetime learning / retraining. The average American’s skills go obsolete pretty quickly, and in the face of AI, that will happen doubly so.
- Quadruple the number of H-1B visas and other work-related visas.
- Enact “deficit reduction” estate tax in order to reduce the American Federal deficit. If you lived here, you benefited from the deficit runup. If you were fortunate enough to succeed, you need to help pay it down.
That’s for starters.
Any other thoughts?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
Something here for everyone to dislike.
I don’t like the idea of bringing consumer finance onto the government balance sheet any more than I liked brining student loans into it. Student loans became the next political patronage lever, imagine if every single consumer had government debt that politicians can play “vote buying” with
I want far fewer people dependent on the government for their financial well being, not far more!
____________________________________________________________
Sic transit gloria mundi (so shut up and get back to work)-
Something here for everyone to dislike. I don’t like the idea of bringing consumer finance onto the government balance sheet any more than I liked bringing student loans into it. Student loans became the next political patronage lever, imagine if every single consumer had government debt that politicians can play “vote buying” with I want far fewer people dependent on the government for their financial well being, not far more!
Oh, I agree. All I’m saying is that it would immediately put a lot of money back into consumer’s pockets, turn into a revenue source for a government that desperately needs it and completely screw Wall Street which has been preying upon consumers for…a very long time. And the fact is, no entity can force you to pay like the government can. They track you the entire way.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
-
Not mine, but pretty much sums up the problem. To be clear, paying taxes for non-infrastructure government generally does not improve the economy. There are rare exceptions (NASA innovations, the Internet, etc.) of stuff funded by public research that gains commercial acceptance, but a lot of what is publicly funded nowadays is not that kind of research.
——————————
In 2010, federal spending was $3.456 trillion—14.6% of GDP.
In 2023, it hit $6.134 trillion—22.8% of GDP.
That’s a 78% increase in spending in just 13 years.
And what do we have to show for it?
Nothing.
-
Not mine, but pretty much sums up the problem. To be clear, paying taxes for non-infrastructure government generally does not improve the economy. There are rare exceptions (NASA innovations, the Internet, etc.) of stuff funded by public research that gains commercial acceptance, but a lot of what is publicly funded nowadays is not that kind of research. —————————— In 2010, federal spending was $3.456 trillion—14.6% of GDP. In 2023, it hit $6.134 trillion—22.8% of GDP. That’s a 78% increase in spending in just 13 years. And what do we have to show for it? Nothing.
Rogpodge, I like the way you hit numbers, they’re realistic.
Sometimes, even the Wall Street Journal misuses numbers. For example, today’s WSJ has an article on how Trump’s import/export math does not incorporate services. That’s the headline. So I was expecting an article that balances services and goods, and how we actually don’t have a trade deficit.
Buried way, way down in the article is the fact that the USA has a $1 trillion trade deficit…but the services surplus is $295 billion. And they point out that is up from $77 billion since 2000. So in other words…the services surplus doesn’t come close to solving the trade deficit and the growth has basically been limited to inflation since then.
Trump’s Trade Math Ignores a Major Export: American Services – WSJ
I understand why they did it. WSJ is essentially the journal of services and they don’t want their ox gored, especially since they’ve been feeding off of the American economy for centuries.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
In fact, the WSJ should stick to inflation announcements, given that inflation cooled back down…
Inflation Cooled to 2.4% in March, Lower Than Expected – WSJ
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
In fact, the WSJ should stick to inflation announcements, given that inflation cooled back down… Inflation Cooled to 2.4% in March, Lower Than Expected – WSJ
Consumer prices went down 0.1% last month, first dip in five years.
US consumer prices post first decline in nearly five years
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
Inflation declined again.
Breaking: New Inflation Numbers Crush Democrats’ Narrative About Trump’s Tariff Strategy
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
-
The slight deflation is driven by declining energy prices. Oil and gas prices are down. So fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve! (Another short-sighted Biden policy done for political purposes).
On another note, those price drops aren’t uniform. In the West, gasoline prices are still high.
On another note, China is ramping up its coal fired plants now that it has sort of cleaned up some of their air. They are going with the all energy sources policy that I advocate for, but is panned by people who believe magic solutions (that aren’t nuclear) exist.
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.