Replies: 9
| visibility 562
|
All-In [46816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30720
Joined: 8/11/15
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64844
Joined: 7/13/02
|
I'm not a buyer. Not because I hate children
Apr 28, 2021, 10:04 AM
|
|
But can we all at least admit, in a bipartisan manner, that today in the USA, actually coming up with some program to justify a tax increase is kinda, I dunno, stupid?
He can tax the rich the exact same way he plans, ostensibly to save the children or whatever, and NOT spend a penny saving the children, and that tax increase still won't pay for all the other programs we've spent money on in the past to save the children. We still increase our debt and wouldn't even break even with a budget for once. Why something new?
I mean, at some point coming up with a reason just seems either disingenuous, or stupid, or both....either way.
Nope, I'm going to hold the line on tax increases on anyone.....UNTIL they sell it as a way to pay down debt, heck even balance a budget for once is a good start. No children saved, no healthcare for all, no utopian BS or sunshine blowing, nope, promise us nothing other than to rectify past fiscal irresponsibility. I'd actually fully support that tax increase. But if you're selling it to be revenue neutral to fund some program, no point.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30720
Joined: 8/11/15
|
Typically when you invest in moving children
Apr 28, 2021, 10:09 AM
|
|
out of poverty and providing better education, they go on to become adults with much more opportunity and ingenuity. You then have a working generation like this that can help expand the economy which, in turn, lowers deficits.
It's a long term strategy, but everything Biden has proposed so far is either revenue neutral, a researched investment with a ROI that makes it at least revenue neutral (see infrastructure) or both.
Of course, this is an investment that we are hoping will pay off 20 years in the future. There is no telling what our spending or debt situation may be then. So it may be too little too late.
And we all know spending and debt isn't going to go down by then.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97703]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64844
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Ok, I'll play your long ball game
Apr 28, 2021, 10:30 AM
|
|
It's an investment in our future. It will result in children somehow making more money as adults. I know PHd's who are homeless and millionaires who never graduated high school. But that's beside the point.
Let's assume the money is well spent, and reaps dividends as you suggest in the future. To what extent would those dividends, again in the future, eliminate our debt problem? I mean when we started this debt train and I was a kid my parents combined made far less than I make now. Yet as a child, we had a higher standard of living. Our GDP was around 2.5 trillion at that time when I was a kid. When we started on the debt train at that same time our national debt was $900 billion (32% debt to GDP ratio). Today those investments 40 years later have yielded a $19 trillion economy. HUGE increase. However, with all those investments, again ostensibly to secure our financial future, we now have a debt that's 1/3 higher than our entire economic output, and climbing. Our debt to GDP ratio has CLIMBED from 32% to 135%. So by your longball measure, the thousands of save the children programs in the past, funded with debt, has yielded what? MORE debt. No net benefit over decades of spending.
That's like saying, well, I'll not pay my credit card bill. In fact, I'll max it out. I'll just work harder at work, take on a second job, or go back to school and run up some more debt, so I can eventually pay down that past debt. Most people spend 10 years paying off student debt. Is the boost in your salary from the $200K education worth it in the long run? Then you still have that original maxed out credit card to address. And while you're doing that, how's that standard of living going? A college degree today is worth less than ever before.
Just doesn't work that way. I hear you selling it. I'm not buying it.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30720
Joined: 8/11/15
|
You're mixing micro with macro economics
Apr 28, 2021, 10:40 AM
|
|
which is a common mistake but it's why your credit card analogy doesn't fit.
There are multiple ways of dealing with the current debt but the two main ones that politicians focus on is
1. cut spending enough to be in a budgetary surplus, use that surplus to pay off the debt. This is what republicans champion. However, we would have to slash to ribbons many programs that help people, social safety nets and yes, even military spending.
2. Grow GDP and GNI to where the debt is a smaller percentage of the revenue. This is what many Dems are championing. Create bills that help people and provide an ROI. Like the infrastructure bill and bills to eliminate children of poverty (was a buzzword 10 years ago in education)
So for your credit card analogy, it's more like you put your wife through Harvard by spending 100K and when she graduates you use the higher income of 200K to increase the amount you can charge to your card to a 500K limit (which has an interest rate of 2%).
Message was edited by: FBCoachSC®
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11628]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9789
Joined: 5/17/02
|
LOL. I'm sure we'll get an ROI with all these handouts...
Apr 28, 2021, 11:51 AM
|
|
Dems assume that through better opportunities, we can eliminate the poor and the lazy.
That will never happen. There will always be poor and lazy people. No program will instill drive and hustle in someone.
In the late 90's we had an entire busload of 'poor' kids brought to my High School since it was a much better school. I don't think a single one graduated. And that's because their parents didn't value education and the kid didn't value the opportunity.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4679]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6557
Joined: 4/11/20
|
Re: Ok, I'll play your long ball game
Apr 28, 2021, 10:51 AM
[ in reply to Ok, I'll play your long ball game ] |
|
You are correct in that a college degree is worth less today and it’s absolutely not vital to success.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40927]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42943
Joined: 11/30/98
|
l have a lot of successful wealthy
Apr 28, 2021, 12:36 PM
|
|
clients with no or very little college education that pay me good money because I am smart. They then use the goods and services that I provided them to make a lot of money.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4679]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6557
Joined: 4/11/20
|
Re: l have a lot of successful wealthy
Apr 28, 2021, 6:16 PM
|
|
Yep the wealthiest people I know never went to college
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26499]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20637
Joined: 9/2/02
|
|
|
|
Replies: 9
| visibility 562
|
|
|