[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.3331

File: 1570579516006.jpeg (89.59 KB, 800x727, 800:727, 800.jpeg) ImgOps Google

The country is spending too much compared to what we take in. I think we all agree. But what to be done? I found this interesting calculator where you can roughly dictate policy and try to, not balance the budget, but sorta fix it.

http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer/

Let's just assume the premise on this website is right, that the estimates are good as far as estimates go, and the idea of getting the budget to the rates it asks is important. What I want to see is what people choose to do to reach the target.

I know how this kind of thing will bring out fighting, so I'm laying out rules and a goal. The goal is to learn from each other and give our opinions on the issues. The way we will do that is by posting our results, maybe adding comments about how you went about it, and then asking each other why we made the choices we did. What we will not do is criticise each others choices, not even in a productive way.

Good example:
>I see you chose to cut military personnel, do you feel that will hurt or position against our rivals? Do you feel it's worth the savings?

Bad example (please no do):
>wow, are you really going to cut spending to Medicare, are you heartless? How can you do such a thing!

And, once they tell you their rationale, that is it. This isn't a debate thread, there will be no arguing tolerated, even positive and good faith discussion is not for this thread. I just want to see what people come up with and hear about their values, even if I don't believe the same thing.

If for whatever reason you feel that you do not want to meet the budget goal set by the tool, I can entertain that too if you would like to justify it.

Here is my budget (I clicked print on the result page and pasted that here with minor formatting fixes):
Defense
---------
Return Defense Spending to 2017 Levels
Slow Development of New Weapons Systems
Reduce U.S. Navy Ship Construction
Allow Veterans to See Any Doctor Outside of the VA
Provide a Pathway to Citizenship for Undocumented Immigrants
Reduce The Number of Military Personnel

Education, Infrastructure, and Research
------
Offer Free Public College
Increase the Gas Tax by 10 Cents, Then Grow It in Future Years
Increase Infrastructure Spending
Replace Current Student Loan Subsidies with Income-Based Repayment

Social Security
--------
Eliminate the Payroll Tax Cap to Cover All Earnings
Raise Payroll Tax Rate by 1%
Means-Test Benefits for High-Earning Seniors

Health Care
-------
Increase Obamacare Subsidies
Modernize Medicare Cost-Sharing
Increase Medicare Premiums for High-Income Beneficiaries
Reform Medicare Drug Benefit
Reduce Medicare Drug Spending with Negotiation
Allow Private Plans to Compete with Medicare

Other Domestic Spending
---------
Return Non-Defense Spending to 2017 Levels
Invest in Clean Energy Research
Require States to Cover One-Quarter of the Cost of Food Stamps
Reduce Federal Worker Retirement Benefits

Individual Income Tax
-------
Repeal the 2017 Tax Law
Tax Capital Gains and Dividends as Ordinary Income Up to 28%
Tax Income Above $10 Million at 50%
Eliminate Preferential Rates for Carried Interest

Other Taxes
--------
Increase Corporate Tax Rate to 25%
Eliminate Business State and Local Tax Deduction
Repeal Targeted Corporate Tax Breaks
Move to Economic Depreciation
Reform Inventory Accounting Methods
Enact a Carbon Tax
Enact a Wealth Tax
Restore Estate Tax to 2009 Levels
Increase Cigarette and Alcohol Taxes
Eliminate the “Pass-Through” Business Deduction

Debt as Percentage of GDP
68%
2029

50%
2050


Savings relative to current law (billions) $8440

Your Savings
Defense 640
Investments -1110
Social Security 1260
Health Care 390
Domestic 720
Income Tax 1530
Other Taxes 5010


Ask me about my choices and/or post your own.

Also, thread OP image is just for flavor not a part of the topic.

 No.3332

File: 1570582560914.jpg (60.88 KB, 500x619, 500:619, Toshinou_Kyouko_Rum_Raisin.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

From http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer/ :
>Enact a Wealth Tax: This option would impose a wealth tax on net worth over $10 million. The tax rate starts at 0.1% and ramps up to 1% for net worth over $19 million.
Based on my understanding, a wealth tax is a direct tax and therefore an unapportioned wealth tax (like this one) would require a Constitutional amendment.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_tax#U.S._constitutional_law)  I guess that doesn't matter if this is a "play God" scenario, but in case people want to try to stick to what is likely to be politically feasible, it's a consideration.

 No.3333

Annoying thing with the military budget is, we've essentially got the force composition to take on the entire world. Completely unnecessary. The absolute most I'd go with would be double your most powerful rival. Even that's a bit extreme.
We definitely need to cut it down a fair ways. Though I don't know if that'd ever fly by the military industrial lobyists.

 No.3334

>>3332
That's a good point, though honestly almost nothing here is that feasible. I'm personally just going with the god mode here, because I just want to see how people make their choices and learn from that.

Would you like to fill out the budget yourself?

>>3333
Good input, would you like to fill out the full budget? It takes a few 5-10 minutes but I thought it was kinda fun and educational.

Also, nice quads.

 No.3335

>>3334
The problem is more I don't really know enough about a lot of this to really to feel like anything I did would be practical in it.
I'll give it a go through I suppose. Might be interesting at least.

 No.3336

>>3335
On the internet, nobody knows what they are talking about ^_^

It's just for fun, and to see what people prioritize and care about and why that is.

 No.3338

File: 1570586250909.png (25.2 KB, 402x555, 134:185, Crassius_Curio.png) ImgOps Google

>>3336
Annoyingly I lost most all my progress trying to find a good way to copy-paste it. I had managed to get it to the same rate, but, I hadn't taken as much time to pick through the 2nd time around so doubtless some things are different. I swear the 2029 bit was a bit more even with the 2050 bit, as well. Unfortunate.

I feel like there should be more to take out in social security. But, maybe that's more to do with always hearing how young people'll never see a penny of it, and all that.

Defense
End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan $630B
Return Defense Spending to 2017 Levels $850B
Slow Development of New Weapons Systems $60B
Reduce Foreign Aid and International Program Spending $150B
Tighten Border Security and Build a Border Wall $140B
Reduce The Number of Military Personnel $50B
Education, Infrastructure, and Research
Increase Infrastructure Spending $560B
Devolve K-12 Education to the States $480B
Replace Current Student Loan Subsidies with Income-Based Repayment $120B
Social Security
Slow Initial Benefit Growth $180B
Means-Test Benefits for High-Earning Seniors $120B
Health Care
Replace Obamacare with State Grants $460B
Modernize Medicare Cost-Sharing $220B
Increase Medicare Premiums for High-Income Beneficiaries $160B
Reduce Medicare Drug Spending with Negotiation $210B
Reform Medicare Provider Payments $210B
Allow Private Plans to Compete with Medicare $280B
Block Grant Medicaid and Grow Per-Person Spending With Medical Inflation $390B
Other Domestic Spending
Eliminate 19 Independent Agencies/Commissions $40B
Reduce the Cost of the Federal Workforce $170B
Reduce Federal Worker Retirement Benefits $200B
Eliminate Farm Subsidies $160B
Individual Income Tax
Tax Capital Gains and Dividends as Ordinary Income Up to 28% $230B
Eliminate the Mortgage Interest Deduction $220B
Limit the Charitable Deduction $320B
Eliminate Preferential Rates for Carried Interest $20B
Other Taxes
Eliminate Business State and Local Tax Deduction $250B
Repeal Targeted Corporate Tax Breaks $120B
Move to Economic Depreciation $290B
Reform Inventory Accounting Methods $70B
Restore Estate Tax to 2009 Levels $280B
Increase Cigarette and Alcohol Taxes $180B

 No.3339

>>3338
Cool, thanks for going through it!

>Annoyingly I lost most all my progress trying to find a good way to copy-paste it. I had managed to get it to the same rate, but, I hadn't taken as much time to pick through the 2nd time around so doubtless some things are different.
Lol, that exactly precisely happened to me too. I just ran through it a second time and hoped it was about the same.

Yeah, the options don't give you as much granularity as you would like, but maybe that's a good thing since it's just supposed to be casual for our purposed here.

>End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
I'm sorta a dove more than a hawk, but I actually decided against ending the war. I think I remember hearing how we scaled back our involvement in Afghanistan and it was leading to a resurgence in ISIS control in the area, to the point the Afghanistan government could be under threat of collapse. So I felt it made sense to keep the funding going to provide stability to the region. Do you feel like that is a concern for you?

>Increase Infrastructure Spending
Not really a question, but I think that was a good call. I liked squeezing in improvements alongside the cuts and infrastructure seems like a good place to start. Maybe I could ask, of all the places you might have spent an extra half trillion dollars, did you have a specific reason you chose here rather than say, putting some of that towards free public college or keeping the charitable deduction?

>Eliminate Farm Subsidies
I'm curious about this one, you've chosen a few of the more right leaning options such as building the border wall and replacing obamacare, which is fine of course. But as best I understand keeping the farm subsides would also be a more right leaning choice. I'm just wondering what your thoughts are on farm subsidies, since you decided they'd get the chop.

Kind of a random one, but you decided not to slow production of naval ships. I sorta felt like that was one of my easier cuts, did you think increased naval production is particular important for the country? or is that just how things sorta fell in place?

 No.3341

hi friends! Please note the following changes to board operating procedure:

https://ponyville.us/townhall/res/3340.html

 No.3346

>>3339
>Do you feel like that is a concern for you?
Yes and no. It's something to keep an eye on, but, I don't think it requires boots on the ground, so to speak.
I like a "slap the hand" type of approach. When a kid reaches for the cookie jar, you don't sit on him for the next hour. A simple slapping of the hand suffices.
I'd say, essentially, utilize our air superiority when it comes to such things, and otherwise leave it alone. Won't win hearts and minds, but, it should at least stop people from hitting our embassies and assets in the area.

Of course, I'm not a military strategist. I can't really say with any kind of certainty.
It's just my more natural inclination I guess. Trying to force people to be good doesn't work, so I lean towards just punishing them when they do bad.

>Maybe I could ask, of all the places you might have spent an extra half trillion dollars, did you have a specific reason you chose here rather than say, putting some of that towards free public college or keeping the charitable deduction?
Yes. Infrastructure in the United States is really quite terrible. I think that this is also one of the best options to take for a further increase in economic growth, given that a more efficient and reliable infrastructure is pretty significant for healthy businesses.
Education is hit-and-miss as far as predicted effects goes, and charity is often just a matter of throwing it at interest groups who spend more time advertising than actually helping.
Mostly, though, it's one of the few fields I'm a little familiar with, and so most comfortable making a call on.

>But as best I understand keeping the farm subsides would also be a more right leaning choice.
Keep in mind, that's mainly because of the regions where the right gets a lot of its votes.
My reasoning is mostly my dealing with farmers. The ones I know don't really worry about it at all, since the way they see it, either the crop goes, and they get money, or it fails, and they get money. Some don't even plant, sometimes. Usually for fairly sensible reasons. Predictions of weather and seasons, expenses being not worth the investment. But, it makes it look a tad complacent to me.
This isn't one I know a ton on the economic side, though. It's pretty much only based on my personal interactions with the farmers in my area. They're far too relaxed about it all. Seem almost bored, honestly. Bored people probably shouldn't be getting subsidies, I think.

This said, though, I do not think farm subsidies are a right wing principle. I think it's more a side effect of allies, if that makes sense.
>, did you think increased naval production is particular important for the country?
Yes. Naval assets are our most used military asset as I understand it, both in terms of force projection, security, logistics, and policing.
Of all military investments, naval ships makes the most sense to me. Especially considering the nation's position, geographically.
I think you can make a decent argument for maintaining national security while drastically decreasing military buildup and manpower across the board, so long as you maintain a powerful enough navy.
After all, you don't need to fight an enemy army if they can never make it to shore.

It's one of the things where I wish there was a bit more information or exploration on as far as the options in the budget thing. I feel like I could easily cut the airforce in half, and the Army nearly entirely, if the Navy could cover the gaps effectively as I believe they can.
Granted, this is meaning less long-term sitting on stuff, more temporary expeditions and defensive actions. But, being separated from every other major power by water would leave me to think focusing on that aspect'd be the best way to go.  

 No.3347

>>3334
>Would you like to fill out the budget yourself?


Defense
End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan $630B
Freeze Defense Spending for Two Years $270B
Reduce The Number of Military Personnel $50B

Education, Infrastructure, and Research
Replace Current Student Loan Subsidies with Income-Based Repayment $120B

Social Security
Raise the Normal Retirement Age to 69 $70B
Slow Initial Benefit Growth $180B

Health Care
Modernize Medicare Cost-Sharing $220B
Reform Medicare Drug Benefit $110B
Reduce Medicare Drug Spending with Negotiation $210B
Enact Medical Malpractice Reform $30B
Reform Medicare Provider Payments $210B
Allow Private Plans to Compete with Medicare $280B
Block Grant Medicaid and Grow Per-Person Spending With Medical Inflation $390B

Other Domestic Spending
Reduce Federal Worker Retirement Benefits $200B

Individual Income Tax
Tax Capital Gains and Dividends as Ordinary Income Up to 28% $230B

Other Taxes
Eliminate Business State and Local Tax Deduction $250B
Enact a Carbon Tax $1250B
Enact a Value-Added Tax $2280B
Eliminate the “Pass-Through” Business Deduction $600B

Debt as Percentage of GDP
70%
2029
50%
2050


Savings relative to current law (billions) $7580

Your Savings
Defense 950
Investments 120
Social Security 250
Health Care 1450
Domestic 200
Income Tax 230
Other Taxes 4380

 No.3348

>>3346
That's all really great, thanks for sharing! I'm especially happy to get your perspective on the farm subsidies, since I don't have much depth of experience in that department.

And yeah, I like the way you approach our military and emphasis on naval power. It makes sense given the geography.

I didn't what to make this much of a back and forth, just to keep the thread simple and minimize people stepping on each other's toes. I know strong opinions on a lot of the issues in the budget. But I am very glad to have heard your take. Thanks a bunch for participating, feel free to ask about anyone else's perspective if you feel like it ^_^

 No.3349

>>3348
Certainly. It was definitely informative, for a lot of it. You really need to cut out a ton of stuff to balance the budget much. And of course, that's leaving aside potential new expenses.
It's not something I ever really looked in to all that much, to be honest, before.

 No.3351

>>3347
Interesting approach. I see you went with the VAT, which is a huge chunk of money to add to the budget. I don't really know much about vat, but my gut instinct is that it would be pretty harmful to domestic business, and I guess consumers by proxy. I could be wrong though, all taxes are a bit harmful by design so it's a matter of figuring out of its a harm that's worth it. What's your thoughts on it?

Another interesting choice was raising the retirement age. My dad turned 63 recently and did a slightly early retirement, he just was too old for the work I guess. Do you think it's worth the savings? Any other comments about it?

Another interesting one, a small saving on enacting medical malpractice reform. I mean, 30 billion is still a lot of money, but for the scale of this budget it is peanuts. I personally put extra thought into this smaller budget item though. I felt like capping statues of limitation on reporting medical malpractice to a year, or three for children, was a dangerous thing to put in place. It takes time for things to be uncovered and a suit to be filed was my thought. Did you think much on it, or have any comments about it?

It looks to me that you chose entirely to cut without adding anything for health, education, infrastructure, etc. Is it safe to say that was a deliberate choice? Any comments about why you had nothing you felt you wanted to add to the budget?

>>3349
Yeah, it was pretty informative! And all that cutting doesn't even balance it, you're just not really deep in the red. For me, it feels unintuitive to even have a deficit at all, I'm pretty firmly in the spend only what you take in camp. But I guess, some economists think it's okay and healthy to run some amount of deficit, as I understand it.

I'm glad you got a little from the exercise, I was hoping the thread would be educational.

 No.3353

The Debtfixer link doesn't seem to work for me.  Did it go down, or does it still work for everyone else?

 No.3354

>>3353
I just tried it, seems up to me. I tried it in incognito, so I don't think mine was cached.

 No.3355

>>3354

Very odd.  It says it can't find the IP address when I try to use the link.

 No.3356

>>3351
> gut instinct is that it would be pretty harmful to domestic business
Hmm... that's a good point that I didn't consider.  A VAT tax will make American-made stuff less competitive with foreign imports.

>retirement age
I think Social Security is a timebomb and most people are aware of this and are saving in private accounts for retirement.  Personally, I'm not counting on receiving anything substantial from Social Security when I retire.

>I felt like capping statues of limitation on reporting medical malpractice to a year, or three for children, was a dangerous thing to put in place.
I wasn't particularly fond of that either.  Personally I'd excise that (or lengthen the statute of limitations) and just enact the caps on non-economic and punitive damages.

>It looks to me that you chose entirely to cut without adding anything for health, education, infrastructure, etc. Is it safe to say that was a deliberate choice?
I wanted to increase infrastructure spending by some amount, but the only options were zero and a very large amount, so I choose zero.  How much do you think would be a good amount for the federal govt to spend on public infrastructure annually?  Half a trillion per year seems an awful lot to me.

 No.3357

>>3355
Who is your DNS provider?

 No.3358

>>3357

CenturyLink, maybe?  Is that what would count as a DNS provider?

 No.3359

>>3358
Yeah, they're probably it if they are your ISP and you haven't configured a different DNS provider.  

For me, www.crfb.org is resolving to 162.249.104.42.  Can you try  
ping www.crfb.org
 and see what address it resolves to for you?

 No.3360

File: 1570596799248.png (13.85 KB, 972x423, 108:47, Capture.PNG) ImgOps Google

>>3359

I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, but I'm still getting nothing.

 No.3361

>>3356
Hmm, I see what you mean about social security. I guess I'm coming from a position of optimism about the system, while also not banking on there being anything left for me by the time I retire. Kinda worries me, not many people are putting away enough money for retirement is what I'm hearing.

Yeah, if the cap wasn't there, the rest of the reform is good. I was working under the constraints of the tool and figured it was safer to forgo the 30 billion. But with full control I'd take it the same way you are saying.

Makes sense, again the tool isn't really granular enough for our preferences, I'd end up cutting more from military personally if I could. As to how much to spend on infrastructure, I get the feeling we aren't spending enough, so between no increase and a large increase, I'd go with the latter. It's a good way to stimulate the economy I imagine, as long as we aren't just repaving good roads to do something with that money. Half a trillion is a huge piece is money, it's kinda amazing to make decisions on that scale. It makes that 30 billion before feel like pocket change a bit!

Thanks for participating ^_^

 No.3363

>>3360
Hmm, it is resolving to the same IP address as for me.  (And it doesn't respond to PINGs for me either.)  What browser are you using?  Can you take a screenshot of the error message?

 No.3364

File: 1570597644890.png (13.85 KB, 787x474, 787:474, Capture.PNG) ImgOps Google

>>3363

I've tried it in both Chrome and Firefox.  This is Chrome's message.

 No.3365

>>3361
> Kinda worries me, not many people are putting away enough money for retirement is what I'm hearing.
Oh, now that you mention it, I kinda recall that as well.  It is worrying.  I wonder if UBI will ever catch on.  That would address both lack of jobs and lack of retirement savings, but at a great dollar cost in the budget.

>>3361
>Thanks for participating ^_^
And thank you for the making the thread -- it is an interesting topic!

 No.3366

>>3364
>This is Chrome's message.
>ERR_NAME_RESOLUTION_FAILED
Well that's a DNS error alright.  Surprising that
ping
succesfully resolved it but Chrome and Firefox are failing.  Have you tried Internet Explorer?

 No.3368

>>3366
I just noticed that in your screenshot,
ping
didn't resolve the name!

 No.3369

>>3368
>>3366

It is true, it resolved neither the name or the IP address.  Or I guess it resolved the IP address and just failed to receive anything from it.

 No.3370

>>3364
I guess you need to go to urlfixer first :3

No but seriously, that's odd. Are you on a VPN or anything? Do you have a phone with mobile data you can try it on?

 No.3371

>>3370

I'm not on a VPN.  Loading it on my phone did seem to work, though?

 No.3372

>>3371
At this point, I'm about to suggest rebooting your machine lol.  But perhaps try this instead to just flush your DNS cache:

    ipconfig /flushdns

 No.3374

File: 1570599924571.png (147.32 KB, 1280x1600, 4:5, 1266349.png) ImgOps Google

No need to. It's already fine.

This is a trick every single bank, nation state, and corporation uses. When cashflow reaches a large enough amount for financing reasons. Large entities, it is important to note, don't have collateral. The US government backs it's debts with bonds, which are also debt. This is for reasons that I don't feel like going into right now because I assume everybody already knows it. I don't know the exact numbers but this is interesting because I was doing off the cuff numbers for personal finance reasons and dedicating a similar amount of my own income (which I cannot because I do not issue stocks or bonds and so cannot use them as collateral) to interest payments as governments and corporations would increase my cashflow by about 10 times with no long term effects on my financial health beyond an excellent credit score. It's likely different for a government.

We like debt as a percent of GDP for some reason, but in the grand scheme of things it is pointless. The government doesn't own the GDP, and the GDP isn't being used to pay the debt or measure governmental holdings. It's an off the cuff measure used to compare the size of economic bases. Neither number has anything to do with the other and comparing them is a very very strange exercise. Interest payments to total income is a better measure. At certain scales tricks like using debt to pay interest become options that aren't immediate suicide. Again, most large financial entities openly engage in this because it is just common sense. Total dollars in debt is completely irrelevant if you have no intention of making that number zero. Individuals get sick or want to retire or stop making money or get married or have to buy a car or other things that complicate financing and which they would struggle under if they had a large debt load because owning things on collateral is a liability. These risks are limited to individuals and families.

I would say that certain key experts do not agree with the assessment, seeing that all credit indexes give the US a AAA rating (besides S&P who gives the US an AA+ rating). These ratings don't exist just for fun. They are terms of negotiations. They are an estimation of risk from people who generally see risk as desirable. The estimation from the people whose entire lives revolve around debt, financing, and valuation, is that the financials are healthy and there is either little reason or absolutely no reason to worry about payments. And. I mean. Since the collateral for our debt is more debt and the only thing defaulting affects is our ability to take out debt, so while the consequences are broad and far reaching they're also strictly limited to the world of debt and money lending.

Granted... that AA+ from S&P is a tiny bit concerning. Very few nations have AAA ratings and the distinction doesn't really mean anything, but many of the indexes give a negative outlook so ti's safe to say that we're approaching the limits of our financial wizardry for now. We may have to shift over to a different breed of shuffling hats around until they all fit if the payments increase too sharply yet.

 No.3376

>>3374
Another thing is that the federal government's debt is denominated in US dollars, and the government can literally just print the money to pay its debts.

 No.3378

>>3371
Sweet, well just do the thing on your phone then!

>>3374
Hmm, so I guess you are electing to reject the premise of the tool. I think I disagree with you, that a deficit is fine but the one we have is just too much, but appreciate your thoughts on the matter!

>>3376
Not going to open up a discussion on the matter, but I believe that never really worked out well for any country that tried to solve a debt problem. Hyperinflation is a downward spiral that's hard to pull up from.

 No.3379

Defense
End the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
Reduce U.S. Navy Ship Construction
Allow Veterans to See Any Doctor Outside of the VA
Reduce Foreign Aid and International Program Spending
Provide a Pathway to Citizenship for Undocumented Immigrants
Reduce The Number of Military Personnel
Education, Infrastructure, and Research
Increase the Gas Tax by 10 Cents, Then Grow It in Future Years
Replace Current Student Loan Subsidies with Income-Based Repayment
Social Security
Raise the Normal Retirement Age to 69
Slow Initial Benefit Growth
Means-Test Benefits for High-Earning Seniors
Health Care
Modernize Medicare Cost-Sharing
Increase Medicare Premiums for High-Income Beneficiaries
Reform Medicare Drug Benefit
Reduce Medicare Drug Spending with Negotiation
Enact Medical Malpractice Reform
Reform Medicare Provider Payments
Allow Private Plans to Compete with Medicare
Other Domestic Spending
Return Non-Defense Spending to 2017 Levels
Reduce the Cost of the Federal Workforce
Reduce Federal Worker Retirement Benefits
Individual Income Tax
Extend the 2017 Tax Law
Tax Capital Gains and Dividends as Ordinary Income Up to 28%
Tax Income Above $10 Million at 50%
Eliminate the Mortgage Interest Deduction
Limit the Charitable Deduction
Eliminate the State and Local Tax Deduction
Reduce Retirement Account Contribution Limits
Eliminate Preferential Rates for Carried Interest
Replace the "Cadillac Tax" with a Cap on the Health Insurance Tax Exclusion
Other Taxes
Increase Corporate Tax Rate to 25%
Eliminate Business State and Local Tax Deduction
Repeal Targeted Corporate Tax Breaks
Move to Economic Depreciation
Enact a Financial Transactions Tax
Enact a Carbon Tax
Enact a Value-Added Tax
Enact a Wealth Tax
Restore Estate Tax to 2009 Levels
Enact a Temporary Payroll Tax Holiday
Increase Cigarette and Alcohol Taxes
Eliminate the “Pass-Through” Business Deduction
Debt as Percentage of GDP
55%
2029
-12%
2050


Savings relative to current law (billions) $12290

Your Savings
Defense510
Investments300
Social Security1330
Health Care1220
Domestic1140
Income Tax840
Other Taxes6950


I ended up doing a lot more than I expected.

 No.3380

>>3379
Wow, you went above and beyond! Nice ^_^

Getting to a surplus by 2050 is an achievement. Can I assume you are a less government is better type? Or maybe just a balanced budget type?

In either case, it's hard for me to tell what programs you didn't chop, if any from the long list. What did you decide to keep and why did you feel it was important?

 No.3381

>>3380
Also, do you feel like those many cuts and that much tax will hurt the people, business, and economy? What's your thoughts on that?

 No.3382

>>3380

I'm definitely a less government sort of person, but ultimately I don't know if that's reflected given how many taxes I added.  I do distinctly recall increasing infrastructure spending, because a lot of that is downright hazardous right now.  I didn't cut health care, but that was a pretty involved part of the survey, so I don't think I can summarize the changes.

>>3381

Now that I've gone through the whole thing and seen the results, the first thing I might revise is the VAT, which I'm definitely concerned about, but seems largely unnecessary.  There might be a couple others I'd revise, but not necessarily anything major.  Overall I don't think any of the taxes I approved would significantly harm anyone, and some might be a gain on multiple levels.  I've always been fond of a wealth tax, for example, because taxing net worth should ideally encourage spending (as opposed to taxing income, which encourages...not making money).  I don't think hoarding assets is a healthy thing for anyone involved, including the hoarder.

 No.3383

>>3382

Also, I mostly refrained from cutting programs that helped the poor.  I can remember a few exceptions, but even as someone who sees and government as an ideal, I didn't want to rip the rug out from under anyone who was already having trouble standing.

 No.3384

>>3382
>I've always been fond of a wealth tax, for example, because taxing net worth should ideally encourage spending (as opposed to taxing income, which encourages...not making money).  I don't think hoarding assets is a healthy thing for anyone involved, including the hoarder.
I think I agree with this sentiment very closely!

Anyway, thanks for participating ^_^

>>3383
Gotcha, I like where your priorities lie!


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]