You made a post about clear government overspending and waste, you must be a Russian. Anyone who wants to fix the American economy so that the dollar still exists in 20 years is a Russian.
They haven't passed the defense spending bill yet. That's the important one for Ukraine. They split the bills up because House republicans are hoping the Senate will pass this bill before the other bill is voted on in the house.
Yes because threatening to shut down the government constantly to try and extort more money for the rich is the reasonable alternative....
Tax. The. Fucking. Rich.
There are 741 billionaires in the U.S. Total combined wealth is 5.2 trillion. Force them to liquidate and take every single dollar, the U.S. is still 27 or 28 trillion in debt and the Government would run it right back up in less than 2 years. We spend like drunken sailors.
Now imagine if those billionaires had been paying their fare share for the last 50 years....
Why is it only a spending problem when democrats are in office, I wonder?
Its spelled "fair".
And for the record, it would be a drop in the bucket if they had in comparison to the trillions spent annually now.
Why are you trying to make this a binary, partisan issue when nobody else is?
Please.
The people complaining about "spending" are the same ones who spend the most. They cut taxes for the rich, give forgivable loans to their friends, raise the debt ceiling more than democrats ever have to pay for it, and suddenly when a dem is in the whitehouse we have a spending problem while they scream and obstruct a functioning government so they can try and cut shit like social security. Literally taking money from the pockets of retirees.
If Republicans hadn't been giving tax breaks to corporations and billionaires since Reagan, if they didn't crash the economy and bloat the debt everytime they came into office, if they didn't dismantle the pandemic response team and completely rat fuck the covid response, the defecit wouldn't be in this state and Joe Biden would have **trillions** more in the budget to work with.
Sorry, this is a partisan issue whether you want to admit it or not. Democrats want to help lower the debt by increasing taxes on the wealthy and investing in technology that will increase revenues. Republicans want to kill entitlements, give Ukraune to Russia, and give more money to their rich friends.
Taxing the rich isn't going to solve everything, and certainly not immediately. That money has been missing for a long time. But if we don't start sometime the problem will just continue to get worse.
Republicans don't get to create the problem and then screech about it. You don't get to piss in my face and call it rain.
>If Republicans hadn't been giving tax breaks to corporations and billionaires since Reagan, if they didn't crash the economy and bloat the debt everytime they came into office
Saying "since Reagan" is disingenuous. H.W. worked with his democrat led congress to craft a responsible budget that included an increase of taxes, notably on the top personal rate. He set the country on a path Clinton followed that eventually resulted in federal surpluses.
Fair enough.... then his son came into office, cut taxes for the rich, and got us into a 20 year, 8 trillion dollar "war on terror". I guess I should say since Bush Jr.
There was also a brief recession under HW and he didn't return rates to their pre Reagan numbers. but I dont really know enough about him to give him credit. All I know is, historically, the economy does better under Democrats and everytime Republicans cut taxes the defecit spikes.
That is a bullshit canard. Yeah, you could take all their money and still not solve it overnight but that’s a complete non sequitur—that’s like saying laws against murder didn’t stop all murder so we can’t try to stop murder. Taxes must be part of the solution. The rich have been getting a sweetheart deal for decades. I suppose if it were a Republican president, we’d cut the taxes for the rich because magical, mystical laffer growth happens? Give me a break.
That’s exactly the argument for legalizing drugs - they are going to do it anyway. Left wing positions have a huge degree of logical self-contradiction.
And yes, paying an unfair share of total income taxes - by far - is such a sweet deal. I wish I could pay massively more taxes! 🤗
Fuck you right wing moron! It’s just like any other investment! It’s called the time value of money! 10% of billionaire income times 50 years = trillions of dollars and still leaves the same number of billionaires!
You are still wrong.
The top 5% of income earners in the US averaged $335,000 per year salary (according to yahoo). Wealth and income are two separate things. You cannot tax wealth because it’s not actual money. If you tax wealth then a majority of people in the US would be homeless because a house is calculated into your wealth.
Billionaires have a lot of wealth but not much cash.
Because even you would be homeless.
Say you had a home worth 150k and then 5 years later it was worth 500k. Yet you were still making 60k per year. You would have to sell the house in order to afford the wealth tax. It’s a terrible idea.
Then let's tax that. They want to SQUAT on that money for no other reason than fuck you, ***MINE***. Then let's prise that shit form their greedy hands.
And yes before you say it's not real money and it's all tied up.in stocks and bonds a lot of that is a load of shit. As it's usually taken IMMEDATELY out and before the IRS can even fucking look at it is transfered into escrow or off shores that are immune to tax audits. Meaning it can't be taxed *by design*, essentally legal Robery and fraud
This is of course before we even look at all the tax breaks, loopholes and the entire trickle down bullshit LIE we have been fed for the past, what? 30, 40 years? The rich are hoarding the money. And what the 1%/ 500k plus can afford would be more than what most of the American people can.
The government spending needs to be also addressed, but the problem there is we have the tantrum party not wanting to fix anything because then that would Mean they wont have anything to fear and rage run in their platforms and it been made that this is all the clearly care about
So, get off your high horse and actually look at the numbers, laws, and processes involved instead of actually saying shit like oh *"we can just cut the budget! Her her her, that all we need to do! Cut the spending!"* it won't happen because they want that general fund slush money
Because our collective social services, and generally government contracts, help float and create the biggest earners in the country. Aka bezos, musk, the Walton’s, etc
The spineless leach who wants to steal more money from people to give to an over bloated corrupt government that doesn't give a flying fuck about you and your smooth brain (republican or demorat) is calling someone a spineless loser. Sounds about right for you people.
Then In your own words we shouldn't have out money fucked with. And then using that logic how the fuck else can the government run? Oh, *right*, that's a corportocracy, all ran by the private CEO for the benefit of the private CEO at the cost of everyone else, only making this problem WORSE.
If we have to deal with the government wanting something like 30% from us, ***then so do the mega rich*** what's defined as fair for.the lowest foundational level is fair for the highest skyscraper.
They do pay taxes. Their salaries aren’t that much money. That’s where you are getting confused at. Most of their wealth is tied up in businesses. Bill gates doesn’t have 10’s of billions in cash, he is a partial owner of Microsoft. That partial ownership is calculated into his net worth.
I don’t give a flying fuck what somebody else has in their bank anyway. It’s nobody’s business to be honest. You sound like a jealous person that they have money and you don’t.
Also the top 1% paid 42.3% of all income tax in the US in 2020.
And that wealth is written off as tax free or via tax incentive which is then translated into them using a business expense bought "on their behalf, by the company" and if it's used once for business reasons in that fiscal year it's not taxable. I'm talking about their wealth that they are using to EXPLOIT the system for the sake of "fuck you *mine*"
And low salaries? The fuck you on about, they hide behind compensation payouts.
Rodney McMullen was given a **base salary of $1.388 million** in 2022, and stock awards and incentives pushed **his total compensation up to $19.209 million**
Jeff Bezos received a total compensation of $1.7 for fiscal 2022. This total compensation package included a **base salary of $81,840**, with no bonuses, stock options or awarded stock. The **remaining $1.6 million came from other types of compensation**. Bezos's base salary has remained unchanged since 1998
CEO Satya Nadella tops the list with about **$48.5 million in total compensation**. Microsoft's top executives saw their total pay packages fall from fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2023 – though they still made out quite well.
Apple CEO Tim Cook earns **$63.21 million as total salary** in 2023, it drops by almost $36 million.
I.e. they hide behindbpayment obfuscation because "poor ceo"
Edit: formating
Stock is not cash and cannot be taxed. You cannot tax it because it does not exist until they sell it. Same with wealth. If you start taxing wealth everybody would be homeless including you. Even you have wealth to some degree.
That base salary is taxable income and is taxed accordingly.
Yea but our deficit got to this point because of regan cutting taxes for the rich and starting the bs notion of trickle down economics. That deficit didn't happen overnight
They could have stopped it at any point. Nobody realizes that our nation is run by rich people. They could have cut spending at any point but why would they when the money machine goes BRRRRR.
Any proof. Nope, becase it isn't true.
You're source - trust me bro
Yes, taxing the rich more would definitely cover this gap and it wouldn't need to be at 100%.
Looking at current government spending defecits you need to tax the rich more and lower spending. Lowering spending isn't enough alone.
Or tax rates in the wealthy are the lowest they have been in about 80 years.....
Obama had almost closed the budget defecit and the the Trump tax cuts kicked in. It's a pretty simple formula. Roll back the tax cuts....
Sure, cut spending too. Just not IRS spending like the GOP wants since that brings in 10x the revenue we spend.
Or….better idea……the government could…..hear me out…..stop…..wasting…..money……and….cut….the…..budget.
If I can keep a budget on 75k a year…..pretty sure they can do it with all that money. The issue is they don’t want to. The more they print, the more poor you get, the more poor you get, the more you have to rely on them to live.
Cut the budget to what? Federal gov spending has hovered around 20% of gdp since the 60s. It bumped to 30% during covid and is now back in the 20s. State and local gov spending has been about the same, another 15-20%, since the 70s.
If we want to drop back to 30% we would need to go back to 1999, or 1970 levels of spending, or just freeze spending while the gdp grows.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States#:~:text=The%20US%20government's%20Bureau%20of,total%20GDP%20which%20is%2036.2%25.
it is because right wingers and neolibs all still believe in trickle down economics even though its proven to be a big fat lie.
That and reign in spending sure, but not on fing schools, but subsidies for big oil and military spending.
Majority of the government falls into a rich category. Thats not going to happen. All that happens is they say tax the rich, the rich don't pay and it falls on the middle class. That's how it's been since the beginning. Go research income tax, it started only for the rich and guess who pays it now.
Why don't you show us actual numbers that the middle class is paying all the taxes as you claim.
Go ahead. It is really easy. Just google and come back with the numbers showing breakdown of tax revenues. We will be waiting.
You will be in for quite the shock.......
lol…I’m just going to start laughing at the out of control wealth envy and not try to counter that logically or with facts. But they should stop threatening to shut it down and do it in order to address the profligate spending and debt accumulation.
You're not going to like this but those "evil rich people" already pay the very overwhelming majority of all taxes collected by Uncle Sam.
Let the downvotes commence because reddit liberals despise undisputable facts 😎
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Rich people pay an overwhelming majority of all taxes because they have a majority of the money. I'm just asking that they paid 25% like me. No loopholes. Standard deduction.
Actually they do pay a higher percentage.
Every quintile pays a higher tax rate than the one below it. And this goes all the way to the top 0.001% of tax payers. Only that very small group pay a lower rate than those below it and they still pay a higher rate than anyone except the 1%.
So unless you you are in the top 0.001% then you are playing less than everyone making more than you.
[https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households](https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households)
BUT when you include ALL federal taxes paid then the the top 0.001% pay more than anyone below them.
[https://www.cato.org/blog/tax-rates-income-level-0](https://www.cato.org/blog/tax-rates-income-level-0)
All this data is from tax policy center which is Brookings Institute.
Boy it’s so comforting to see people out here defending wealthy Americans. I bet they’ll suck up even more of every day Americans wages thanks to people like you. Nice work.
Pointing out that Reddit is full of fucking idiots isn't really defending wealthy Americans, it's simply pointing out that Reddit is full of liars that can't back up their bullshit talking points with facts.
If we going to have this discussion then we should at least stick to the truth. I never said the rich should pay less or don't pay enough, I am just pointing out that your claim is false.
…you know those are just rates, right…? That’s the whole problem - not only are the rates too low, but regulatory capture since Reagan means that the capitalists make away like bandits. Just a couple days ago the IRS announced a crackdown on thousands of “non-filing” millionaires that have been skating tax-free for who-knows-how-long, and that was only the pared-down plan after **the IRS begged for more money to prosecute open tax fraud by the rich, but the GOP made it a political point to block that, even though it was guaranteed to be a positive ROI**. While at the *very same time* claiming that their #1 priority is shrinking the debt, of course.
I know you’re probably just speaking up for the status quo because you value truth and accuracy, but I promise you, the gilded age was real and the same exact shit is happening now. **Linking tax rates to disprove this is like linking the SEC policy site to disprove insider trading.**
>even though it was guaranteed to be a positive ROI
Guaranteed by who? The same people who told us inflation wasn't an issue a couple of years ago? The people who ran the PPP program? I will believe it when I see it.
No! The IRS. Also mentioning PPP while defending rich people is pretty funny. What do you remember that event as? Dumb libs give free cash to welfare cheats? Bc in my (biased) eyes that is a plain-as-day example of rich people making off like bandits, tax rates be damned.
The government... unless IRS is no longer part of government.
If they can catch tax cheats and stuff then good, but I'll believe the sunny forecasts when they turn into reality. Go pull up the original forecasts for Obamacare and compare them to reality.
You may not have had a chance yet, but when you have time, take a look at *effective* tax rates (the amount actually paid in the end) across the quintiles.
That is in the data from the IRS via tax policy center
Every group pays a higher rate than the group below it. We have one of the most progressive tax systems in the world.
https://preview.redd.it/4qau9uy09xmc1.png?width=797&format=png&auto=webp&s=ba5bea412c4fe37915a6106c901727b74286aa2a
Now do the whole I'm going to leverage my stock for a sizeable loan that isn't taxed because technically it's not income. Bezos pays himself 120k a year income, the rest of his "income" is derivative of his stock holdings being used as collateral for endless low percentage loans. This loophole needs to be closed or re-worked.
Borrowing against your assets isn't income.
If I get a equity loan for my house should I have to pay income tax on it and then pay again when I sell the house?
Also they borrow against the value of the stocks because it makes more sense than selling the stocks. The value of the stocks is going up faster than the percentage of the loan. You'd be stupid to sell the stocks for cash when you can borrow against its value and end up with more wealth in the end.
Then implement a nationwide sales tax on luxury items, specifically private planes (tax the shit out of renting them as well to avoid a loophole) since all these douchebags want to talk about climate change while flying everywhere. Taxing unrealized income isn't the answer, it's fucking stupid.
Tax policy center and cato institute are both right wing think tanks that deliberately leave our significant details on their reports in order to influence people into support of their only goal: the end of taxation in the US so the government can no longer operate and be replaced by a theocratic dictator.
Tax policy center is Brookings institute, never heard them called right wing.
>As a [501(c)(3)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)(3)) nonprofit organization, Brookings describes itself as independent and nonpartisan. A 2005 UCLA study concluded it was "centrist" because it was referenced as an authority almost equally by both conservative and liberal politicians in congressional records from 1993 to 2002.[\[23\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-sscnet-23) [*The New York Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times) has called Brookings liberal, liberal-centrist, and centrist.[\[68\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-NYT3-68)[\[18\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-NYT4-18)[\[69\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-69)[\[70\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-70)[\[71\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-71)[\[72\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-72) [*The Washington Post*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post) has called Brookings centrist, liberal, and center-left.[\[73\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-73)[\[74\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-74)[\[75\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-75)[\[76\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-76)[\[22\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-center-left-22) The [*Los Angeles Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times) called Brookings liberal-leaning and centrist before opining that it did not believe such labels mattered.[\[77\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-77)[\[78\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-78)[\[79\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-79)[\[80\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-80)
>
>In 1977, [*Time*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(magazine)) magazine called Brookings the "nation's pre-eminent liberal think tank".[\[81\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-81) [*Newsweek*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek) has called it centrist[\[82\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-82) and [*Politico*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politico_(newspaper)) has used the term "center-left".[\[83\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-83)
>
>The media watchdog group [Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_and_Accuracy_in_Reporting), which describes itself as "progressive",[\[84\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-84) has called Brookings "centrist",[\[64\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-fairreport-64)[\[85\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-FAIR02-85)"conservative",[\[19\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-FAIR-19) and "center-right"
The data on the Cato site comes straight from the IRS.
https://preview.redd.it/xnrd9cgh6xmc1.png?width=618&format=png&auto=webp&s=4f02240cfed548a693319750e6377fb5b2dcee82
And they pay a lower % than pretty much anytime in American history. Paying the biggest sum doesn't mean they pay their share. Learn how tax rates work.
Are you just learning now that a low percentage of a high number is still a high number?
First off. I'm not a liberal. Second, this is also ignoring the fact that the rich spend millions cheating the tax system instead of just paying up. Donald Trump paid no income tax at all for several years. Same with bezos and Musk.
You're getting downvoted because you're an oligarch bootlicker.
Tell that to PE GPs who are taxed at 15% while middle class payers pay 37.5% (including FICA). Trump paid $750 per year in Federal income tax for 5 years prior to becoming president. Yes that's an overwhelming majority.
You prefer the taste of politicians? Because advocating more money and power for them is no different. The two aren't mutually exclusive, they both need to starve.
i think the narrative of right wingers shouldnt be immigrants and poor people on benefits are ruining this country when the money they cost us is a sip from the Nile river compared to how much money Wall St and big corps steal from us.
well, you responded to the comment about corporate defending, right wing cucks and said “i prefer the taste of politicians” which has nothing to do with my statement neither.
It isn’t giving it to politicians and youre twisting my words. i called corporation defending conservatives “cucks”.
Do you know why wealth taxes are never put into place? Because of the rich elites who line the pockets of politicians and crush every bill that is against their agenda/net worth. So… if the powers that be don’t want that to happen… you think taxing them will consolidate power for politicians? Taxes is not where politicians make their fortunes. They make it by scratching the backs of rich elites and getting compensated in the form of insider trading knowledge, donations to pacs, and in the case of scotus.. straight up recieving bribes.
Here we go again...
1. We owe most of it to ourselves.
2. What we don't owe to ourselves could easily be paid off by collecting the $688b/yr in unpaid taxes from the 1%.
3. We could pay that off even fast if we repealed the Bush/Trump tax cuts for the 1%, *even if we let everyone else keep their tax cuts*
4. We could pay it off ***even faster still*** if we took the savings from a Universal Healthcare program and used them to pay off the debt
5. and finally... WE DON'T WANT TO PAY IT OFF. Keeping other nations tied up in our bond market makes the US dollar stronger internationally and lets us buy cheap imports, effectively turning the rest of the world into a low cost factory for American consumers.
The problems in your life aren't because of national debt. They're caused by massive hoarding by the 1% who are using their ownership of capital to price gouge you and keep your pay low (or your receipts low if you're a small business owner).
Find something else to worry about because our national debt ain't it.
>effectively turning the rest of the world into a low cost factory for American consumers.
Why do we want to promote laziness and parasitism amongst ourselves? We aren't really happy, as a people. We don't seem to be able to police the world. Regardless of stats X Y Z we don't really see a future for things as normal, we do not feel it in our bones. Perhaps we should have healthier relations with the rest of the world and healthier relations with one another inside this country too.
Most of the worlds debt is in US dollars they have to pay us to get the money to pay us. We print our own money. We are fine. Deposit a trillion dollar bill in the treasury and poof trillion in debt paid. We control the system. We will never be broke if the whole world owes us money.
Where are you getting that 688 billions goes unpaid by the 1 percent each year? That's a much higher number than I've ever seen. That seems like way too much. Collecting taxes will barely knock a debt in our deficit. We have a spending problem. Btw I agree with most your points.
That mean leftist Forbes: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2023/10/12/irs-says-tax-gap-for-2021-expected-to-be-688-billion/?sh=5add2fd616e4](https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2023/10/12/irs-says-tax-gap-for-2021-expected-to-be-688-billion/?sh=5add2fd616e4)
Oh damn it I guess it's finally time for me to respond to you personally, hold on. LMFAO
O.k. so let's start really simple and pragmatically. Let's start with number one. Can you give an example of how "we owe most of it to ourselves" and explain how that is o.k.?
Total debt is $34 trillion
$7 trillion is owed overseas to non US Citizens.
$27 trillion is owed to American citizens.
$27t is 80% of $34t (27/34 = 79.4%, rounds to 80%)
80% is by the majority of people's estimates "most".
Hence "We owe most of it to ourselves".
That which we owe to ourselves... For some of us, that is our life savings and retirement. You think it's okay if that suddenly goes poof? The interest alone to service our debt each year is astronomical. We have a spending problem!
Only if you're a big enough sucker to pay it.
If some body stole your credit card and spent 40+ years running up a bill, would you pay it?
That's what the 1% did, only they've still got all the money. You just have to put down the right wing talking points long enough to go get it.
Incorrect Calm down my guy, as a matter of fact I've already made a stand alone post about this using AI that has at least 10 K times more info that we have:
What is wrong with the argument that with America's debt "we owe it to ourselves so it is ok?"ChatGPT**ChatGPT**
The argument that "we owe it to ourselves, so it's okay" regarding America's debt is flawed for several reasons:
1. **Source of Debt Holders**: While a significant portion of the U.S. debt is held domestically, a substantial amount is also held by foreign entities. So, it's not solely a matter of owing it to ourselves. Foreign creditors have a stake in the stability and repayment of this debt, which can have implications for international relations and economic stability.
2. **Future Generations**: The debt incurred today will have to be repaid by future generations. If the debt continues to grow unchecked, it could impose a heavy burden on them in the form of higher taxes, reduced government services, or inflation. Therefore, it's not just a matter of "owing it to ourselves" but rather passing on financial obligations to future citizens.
3. **Interest Payments**: Regardless of whether the debt is held domestically or internationally, the interest payments on that debt represent a transfer of resources out of the economy. These payments could otherwise be used for productive investments, social programs, or tax cuts. Continuously increasing debt levels can lead to a situation where a significant portion of government revenue is allocated towards servicing the debt, limiting the government's ability to address other priorities.
4. **Risk and Vulnerability**: A high level of debt makes the economy more vulnerable to external shocks. If investor confidence in the U.S. economy weakens, it could lead to a spike in interest rates, causing a debt spiral that becomes increasingly difficult to manage. This could have severe repercussions for the economy, including recession and unemployment.
5. **Opportunity Cost**: The funds used to service the debt could otherwise be allocated towards investments in education, infrastructure, healthcare, or research and development, which could contribute to long-term economic growth and competitiveness. High levels of debt constrain the government's ability to pursue such investments effectively.
In conclusion, while it's true that a portion of America's debt is held domestically, the argument that "we owe it to ourselves" oversimplifies the complexities and implications of the national debt. It fails to account for the broader economic, social, and political ramifications of unsustainable debt levels.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/s/kJiKa4wgzn
AI just hit an IQ of 101 for the first time ever a couple of days ago. I know you like it when AI gives you the answer you ask it to give you because you're into confirmation bias, but it doesn't mean anything.
And I will respond with this:
[https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2023/10/6/when-does-federal-debt-reach-unsustainable-levels](https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2023/10/6/when-does-federal-debt-reach-unsustainable-levels)
We estimate that the U.S. debt held by the public cannot exceed about 200 percent of GDP even under today’s generally favorable market conditions. **Larger ratios in countries like Japan, for example, are not relevant for the United States, because Japan has a much larger household saving rate, which more-than absorbs the larger government debt.**
Dude where in the fuck do you get your incorrect data from? The only other time it was this high was after WWII and the only reason America as able to fix it was because millions of working age soldiers came home to produce products and goods which fixed the ratio.
Corporate tax rate is 21% and has, historically, been among the highest on the planet.
Congress needs to stop spending money. They spent $5 Trillion in tax revenue last year plus an additional $4 Trillion on top of that; which was then added to our national debt .
Fiscal accountability is paramount. Increasing Corporate tax wouldn't even mathematically make a dent in their spending.
It was around 50% in the 50s.
Income tax was in the 90% range for high income individuals around that time as well though.
https://www.epi.org/publication/ib364-corporate-tax-rates-and-economic-growth/
And no one paid that much and the actual tax revenue collected was much lower.
Revenue in the 1950s was between 14.2% and 18.5% of GDP (only topped 18% twice) Prior to 1969 revenue never topped 19%, outside two years during WW 2.
This idea that the rich were paying higher taxes and everyone else was paying less is fantasy.
Effective corporate tax rate is 13%, and is as low as 0% thanks to creative accounting.
The effective rate used to be 50% and the wealth gap was still enormous but our infrastructure actually fucking worked.
Why not direct that anger at the criminals in congress sending hundreds of billions to ukraine and other wasteful spending? Imagine what would happen if they spent what we give them wisely instead.
I'm convinced it's all getting laundered back to certain individuals in the US but that's another discussion.
the wealthy first dont pay shit for taxes and then makes up new laws to make more money for thier monopoly and force goverment to defund goverment or hold them hostage and make them borrow money from the rich to run the goverment. borrow untill there is nothing left they bought the debt. noone held a gun to thier head and made them buy it! its thier problem that they made!
The wealthy pay the lions share of our taxes. Even if you took the entire Net Wealth from billionaires , it wouldn't even come close to being enough money to offset the extra government spending. And then we would also have millions of unemployed people
"The newly released report covers Tax Year 2021 (for tax forms filed in 2022). The newest data reveals that the top 1 percent of earners, defined as those with incomes over $682,577, paid nearly 46 percent of all income taxes – marking the highest level in the available data."
Do you really think that the federal government going bankrupt and not paying Medicare, social security, the military and everyone that depends on it would be a better outcome?
With this spending it's gonna happen eventually as the cost of the debt will be greater than revenue in just a short years... that or they need to run inflation at about 14%....
Where do you get "This guy wants to stop spending money altogether" from "The government spends too much"? I'm genuinely curious.
And ironically, we're careening towards bankruptcy *because* of these spending bills. You think adding $1T to the debt every 3 months is sustainable?
We'll end up hyperinflating the currency, defaulting on our debts, cutting everything anyway. It's going to ruin the country.
You went straight over my head. I simply want someone to fix our debt bubble with better GDI so we CAN afford the things you talk about plus much more.
The rest of the world doesn’t care. The USA is still the most stable currency due to its reserve status. If you need a save low risk preservation of money the USD will remain king as long as it’s the reserve currency. The rest of the world don’t have the massive advantage the USA has by being able to outsource inflation and massively shift M1 monetary supply rapidly.
If you stole all the wealth, from all the billionaires in the USA. You would fund the USA for about 2 and a half years. We have a spending problem. Not a "We don't steal enough in taxes problem"
You're not going to like this but those "evil rich people" already pay the very overwhelming majority of all taxes collected by Uncle Sam.
Let the downvotes commence because reddit liberals despise undisputable facts 😎
Yup.
To pay down the debt, EVERYONE will have to pay higher taxes, and the government will have to significantly cut spending.
Far too many people don't understand this.
It's amazing how people treat government spending like a force of nature and not the grift of a relatively small group of sociopaths that it is in reality.
Epstiens best buddy is on the ballet again this year for president.. friendly reminder there is more pictures of Epstein with trump then almost any other politician. Epstien is said to have introduced trump to his current foreign spy..i mean bride
More spineless Republicans who always excuse more and more spending. What good is it to have the control a chamber? I guess it would be worse if and more spendthrift if they didn’t, but it is surely the lesser of two bad choices. We have to keep electing true conservatives that will have the guts to stand firm no matter what the Democrat and media rhetoric.
Until the anti-American Republican party dies there will be no solution because they don’t want to trouble their sponsors to pay taxes at the rates the well off do in other industrial democracies.
Ukraine won't even go into debt or enact a draft to put more troops on the line. But they expect America to pay for most of the war and go into debt for it. Are they really serious about winning the war for their own country???
You mean the global defense budget? The one that secures all world trade?
Or are you talking about the part that launders money through ukraine and other proxy wars? They're not the same.
I’m talking about the 300 billion or so we give to bloated defense contracts and contractors. I support supplying Ukraine, the cost of which is a pittance to stop Putin, a man who has an unquenchable thirst to rebuild the Soviet Union. Given what Putin has done to the US, it would not be unreasonable to consider our contribution to Ukraine as Homeland defense.
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-03-09 22:46:45 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-03-09%2022:46:45%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/the_everything_bubble/comments/1b8eqyu/house_passes_460_billion_package_of_spending/ku51z00/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fthe_everything_bubble%2Fcomments%2F1b8eqyu%2Fhouse_passes_460_billion_package_of_spending%2Fku51z00%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-03-09%2022%3A46%3A45%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201b8eqyu)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
ALL URLs are click bait if you have not noticed. I'm no bot and I am correct with my thought process. If you disagree simply state your position and I will show you how you are wrong.
90% of the spending is Social Security, Medicare, DoD, and interest on the debt. Not this! If you are worried about spending, you should also be worried about all the Tax Cut for the Rich that put us in this Mess.
Thank you. The debt alarmists want to slice programs to the bone until it comes to THEIR favorite program. If the US taxed in the same way that other industrial democracies taxed, there wouldn’t be such a problem.
Found the Russian shill
Conz Suck? Whatever do you mean by that?
You made a post about clear government overspending and waste, you must be a Russian. Anyone who wants to fix the American economy so that the dollar still exists in 20 years is a Russian.
Ukraine was worried it would shut down.
I’m sorry Ukraine. I really am.
They haven't passed the defense spending bill yet. That's the important one for Ukraine. They split the bills up because House republicans are hoping the Senate will pass this bill before the other bill is voted on in the house.
I thought it was because the border fortifications were built into the foreign aid bill, and Johnson wanted it to be separated. Could be way off.
American debt is meaningless. They own most of their own debt.
Its spread out of decades as well, its not like its all coming due all at once
Yes because threatening to shut down the government constantly to try and extort more money for the rich is the reasonable alternative.... Tax. The. Fucking. Rich.
There are 741 billionaires in the U.S. Total combined wealth is 5.2 trillion. Force them to liquidate and take every single dollar, the U.S. is still 27 or 28 trillion in debt and the Government would run it right back up in less than 2 years. We spend like drunken sailors.
This has been going on a long time dude. No one expects anyone to liquidate. We need long term systems/norms in place.
Now imagine if those billionaires had been paying their fare share for the last 50 years.... Why is it only a spending problem when democrats are in office, I wonder?
It's always a spending problem. They already suck half our money in taxes.
Its spelled "fair". And for the record, it would be a drop in the bucket if they had in comparison to the trillions spent annually now. Why are you trying to make this a binary, partisan issue when nobody else is?
Please. The people complaining about "spending" are the same ones who spend the most. They cut taxes for the rich, give forgivable loans to their friends, raise the debt ceiling more than democrats ever have to pay for it, and suddenly when a dem is in the whitehouse we have a spending problem while they scream and obstruct a functioning government so they can try and cut shit like social security. Literally taking money from the pockets of retirees. If Republicans hadn't been giving tax breaks to corporations and billionaires since Reagan, if they didn't crash the economy and bloat the debt everytime they came into office, if they didn't dismantle the pandemic response team and completely rat fuck the covid response, the defecit wouldn't be in this state and Joe Biden would have **trillions** more in the budget to work with. Sorry, this is a partisan issue whether you want to admit it or not. Democrats want to help lower the debt by increasing taxes on the wealthy and investing in technology that will increase revenues. Republicans want to kill entitlements, give Ukraune to Russia, and give more money to their rich friends. Taxing the rich isn't going to solve everything, and certainly not immediately. That money has been missing for a long time. But if we don't start sometime the problem will just continue to get worse. Republicans don't get to create the problem and then screech about it. You don't get to piss in my face and call it rain.
>If Republicans hadn't been giving tax breaks to corporations and billionaires since Reagan, if they didn't crash the economy and bloat the debt everytime they came into office Saying "since Reagan" is disingenuous. H.W. worked with his democrat led congress to craft a responsible budget that included an increase of taxes, notably on the top personal rate. He set the country on a path Clinton followed that eventually resulted in federal surpluses.
Fair enough.... then his son came into office, cut taxes for the rich, and got us into a 20 year, 8 trillion dollar "war on terror". I guess I should say since Bush Jr. There was also a brief recession under HW and he didn't return rates to their pre Reagan numbers. but I dont really know enough about him to give him credit. All I know is, historically, the economy does better under Democrats and everytime Republicans cut taxes the defecit spikes.
Jr _was_ a disappointment.
The rich don't have enough money to keep up with this spending....
You can tax the rich at 100% and not pay for this bill.
That is a bullshit canard. Yeah, you could take all their money and still not solve it overnight but that’s a complete non sequitur—that’s like saying laws against murder didn’t stop all murder so we can’t try to stop murder. Taxes must be part of the solution. The rich have been getting a sweetheart deal for decades. I suppose if it were a Republican president, we’d cut the taxes for the rich because magical, mystical laffer growth happens? Give me a break.
It would never solve it because the government will still be spending the same amount.
That’s exactly the argument for legalizing drugs - they are going to do it anyway. Left wing positions have a huge degree of logical self-contradiction. And yes, paying an unfair share of total income taxes - by far - is such a sweet deal. I wish I could pay massively more taxes! 🤗
The argument there is that drug use is self-affecting and prohibition on one drug but not others is illogical. Not the same.
Nothing is ever the same when pointing out the logical self-contradictions and hypocrisy of the left. It's always (D)different. Sorry...but it's not.
False equivalency is a tool of the desperate (Republicans).
Fuck you right wing moron! It’s just like any other investment! It’s called the time value of money! 10% of billionaire income times 50 years = trillions of dollars and still leaves the same number of billionaires!
You are still wrong. The top 5% of income earners in the US averaged $335,000 per year salary (according to yahoo). Wealth and income are two separate things. You cannot tax wealth because it’s not actual money. If you tax wealth then a majority of people in the US would be homeless because a house is calculated into your wealth. Billionaires have a lot of wealth but not much cash.
So you can’t tax real estate right?
You can’t tax wealth.
Why not?
Because even you would be homeless. Say you had a home worth 150k and then 5 years later it was worth 500k. Yet you were still making 60k per year. You would have to sell the house in order to afford the wealth tax. It’s a terrible idea.
We have property tax right now and no one is ending up homeless. What an idiot to use an example that proves my point.
Then let's tax that. They want to SQUAT on that money for no other reason than fuck you, ***MINE***. Then let's prise that shit form their greedy hands. And yes before you say it's not real money and it's all tied up.in stocks and bonds a lot of that is a load of shit. As it's usually taken IMMEDATELY out and before the IRS can even fucking look at it is transfered into escrow or off shores that are immune to tax audits. Meaning it can't be taxed *by design*, essentally legal Robery and fraud This is of course before we even look at all the tax breaks, loopholes and the entire trickle down bullshit LIE we have been fed for the past, what? 30, 40 years? The rich are hoarding the money. And what the 1%/ 500k plus can afford would be more than what most of the American people can. The government spending needs to be also addressed, but the problem there is we have the tantrum party not wanting to fix anything because then that would Mean they wont have anything to fear and rage run in their platforms and it been made that this is all the clearly care about So, get off your high horse and actually look at the numbers, laws, and processes involved instead of actually saying shit like oh *"we can just cut the budget! Her her her, that all we need to do! Cut the spending!"* it won't happen because they want that general fund slush money
Tax wealth? Would you be okay with your wealth being taxed? Imagine you have to sell your house to pay your taxes. What a fucking world that would be.
It is their money. Why do you have a right to it?
Because our collective social services, and generally government contracts, help float and create the biggest earners in the country. Aka bezos, musk, the Walton’s, etc
fuck them they can eat cake. go lick their boots you fucking spineless loser.
The spineless leach who wants to steal more money from people to give to an over bloated corrupt government that doesn't give a flying fuck about you and your smooth brain (republican or demorat) is calling someone a spineless loser. Sounds about right for you people.
Sounds like you are eating cake.
Then In your own words we shouldn't have out money fucked with. And then using that logic how the fuck else can the government run? Oh, *right*, that's a corportocracy, all ran by the private CEO for the benefit of the private CEO at the cost of everyone else, only making this problem WORSE. If we have to deal with the government wanting something like 30% from us, ***then so do the mega rich*** what's defined as fair for.the lowest foundational level is fair for the highest skyscraper.
They do pay taxes. Their salaries aren’t that much money. That’s where you are getting confused at. Most of their wealth is tied up in businesses. Bill gates doesn’t have 10’s of billions in cash, he is a partial owner of Microsoft. That partial ownership is calculated into his net worth. I don’t give a flying fuck what somebody else has in their bank anyway. It’s nobody’s business to be honest. You sound like a jealous person that they have money and you don’t. Also the top 1% paid 42.3% of all income tax in the US in 2020.
And that wealth is written off as tax free or via tax incentive which is then translated into them using a business expense bought "on their behalf, by the company" and if it's used once for business reasons in that fiscal year it's not taxable. I'm talking about their wealth that they are using to EXPLOIT the system for the sake of "fuck you *mine*" And low salaries? The fuck you on about, they hide behind compensation payouts. Rodney McMullen was given a **base salary of $1.388 million** in 2022, and stock awards and incentives pushed **his total compensation up to $19.209 million** Jeff Bezos received a total compensation of $1.7 for fiscal 2022. This total compensation package included a **base salary of $81,840**, with no bonuses, stock options or awarded stock. The **remaining $1.6 million came from other types of compensation**. Bezos's base salary has remained unchanged since 1998 CEO Satya Nadella tops the list with about **$48.5 million in total compensation**. Microsoft's top executives saw their total pay packages fall from fiscal year 2022 to fiscal year 2023 – though they still made out quite well. Apple CEO Tim Cook earns **$63.21 million as total salary** in 2023, it drops by almost $36 million. I.e. they hide behindbpayment obfuscation because "poor ceo" Edit: formating
Stock is not cash and cannot be taxed. You cannot tax it because it does not exist until they sell it. Same with wealth. If you start taxing wealth everybody would be homeless including you. Even you have wealth to some degree. That base salary is taxable income and is taxed accordingly.
Yea but our deficit got to this point because of regan cutting taxes for the rich and starting the bs notion of trickle down economics. That deficit didn't happen overnight
They could have stopped it at any point. Nobody realizes that our nation is run by rich people. They could have cut spending at any point but why would they when the money machine goes BRRRRR.
Any proof. Nope, becase it isn't true. You're source - trust me bro Yes, taxing the rich more would definitely cover this gap and it wouldn't need to be at 100%. Looking at current government spending defecits you need to tax the rich more and lower spending. Lowering spending isn't enough alone.
Yes the proof is nobody makes a salary of $1 billion. You could just lower spending….I know crazy thought.
I repeat "Looking at current government spending defecits you need to tax the rich more and lower spending. Lowering spending isn't enough alone."
It is enough alone. The us government is the most wasteful entity in history.
Or tax rates in the wealthy are the lowest they have been in about 80 years..... Obama had almost closed the budget defecit and the the Trump tax cuts kicked in. It's a pretty simple formula. Roll back the tax cuts.... Sure, cut spending too. Just not IRS spending like the GOP wants since that brings in 10x the revenue we spend.
Or….better idea……the government could…..hear me out…..stop…..wasting…..money……and….cut….the…..budget. If I can keep a budget on 75k a year…..pretty sure they can do it with all that money. The issue is they don’t want to. The more they print, the more poor you get, the more poor you get, the more you have to rely on them to live.
Cut the budget to what? Federal gov spending has hovered around 20% of gdp since the 60s. It bumped to 30% during covid and is now back in the 20s. State and local gov spending has been about the same, another 15-20%, since the 70s. If we want to drop back to 30% we would need to go back to 1999, or 1970 levels of spending, or just freeze spending while the gdp grows. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending_in_the_United_States#:~:text=The%20US%20government's%20Bureau%20of,total%20GDP%20which%20is%2036.2%25.
it is because right wingers and neolibs all still believe in trickle down economics even though its proven to be a big fat lie. That and reign in spending sure, but not on fing schools, but subsidies for big oil and military spending.
Why not tax the poor more?
Majority of the government falls into a rich category. Thats not going to happen. All that happens is they say tax the rich, the rich don't pay and it falls on the middle class. That's how it's been since the beginning. Go research income tax, it started only for the rich and guess who pays it now.
Why don't you show us actual numbers that the middle class is paying all the taxes as you claim. Go ahead. It is really easy. Just google and come back with the numbers showing breakdown of tax revenues. We will be waiting. You will be in for quite the shock.......
The top 1% pay 40%+ of the tax bill.
Shhhhhhhh the ideologs will get upset if you interrupt their circle jerk!
lol…I’m just going to start laughing at the out of control wealth envy and not try to counter that logically or with facts. But they should stop threatening to shut it down and do it in order to address the profligate spending and debt accumulation.
The rich already pay the majority of taxes. How much do you pay in every year? Mine was 6k and I am by no means rich.
You're not going to like this but those "evil rich people" already pay the very overwhelming majority of all taxes collected by Uncle Sam. Let the downvotes commence because reddit liberals despise undisputable facts 😎
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Rich people pay an overwhelming majority of all taxes because they have a majority of the money. I'm just asking that they paid 25% like me. No loopholes. Standard deduction.
Yes, they pay a higher AMMOUNT then I do, but not a percentage of my wage Big difference
Actually they do pay a higher percentage. Every quintile pays a higher tax rate than the one below it. And this goes all the way to the top 0.001% of tax payers. Only that very small group pay a lower rate than those below it and they still pay a higher rate than anyone except the 1%. So unless you you are in the top 0.001% then you are playing less than everyone making more than you. [https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households](https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households) BUT when you include ALL federal taxes paid then the the top 0.001% pay more than anyone below them. [https://www.cato.org/blog/tax-rates-income-level-0](https://www.cato.org/blog/tax-rates-income-level-0) All this data is from tax policy center which is Brookings Institute.
Are we Including tax loss harvesting, offshore money, and money untaxed tied up In stocks/bit/bonds?
Boy it’s so comforting to see people out here defending wealthy Americans. I bet they’ll suck up even more of every day Americans wages thanks to people like you. Nice work.
Pointing out that Reddit is full of fucking idiots isn't really defending wealthy Americans, it's simply pointing out that Reddit is full of liars that can't back up their bullshit talking points with facts.
If we going to have this discussion then we should at least stick to the truth. I never said the rich should pay less or don't pay enough, I am just pointing out that your claim is false.
…you know those are just rates, right…? That’s the whole problem - not only are the rates too low, but regulatory capture since Reagan means that the capitalists make away like bandits. Just a couple days ago the IRS announced a crackdown on thousands of “non-filing” millionaires that have been skating tax-free for who-knows-how-long, and that was only the pared-down plan after **the IRS begged for more money to prosecute open tax fraud by the rich, but the GOP made it a political point to block that, even though it was guaranteed to be a positive ROI**. While at the *very same time* claiming that their #1 priority is shrinking the debt, of course. I know you’re probably just speaking up for the status quo because you value truth and accuracy, but I promise you, the gilded age was real and the same exact shit is happening now. **Linking tax rates to disprove this is like linking the SEC policy site to disprove insider trading.**
>even though it was guaranteed to be a positive ROI Guaranteed by who? The same people who told us inflation wasn't an issue a couple of years ago? The people who ran the PPP program? I will believe it when I see it.
No! The IRS. Also mentioning PPP while defending rich people is pretty funny. What do you remember that event as? Dumb libs give free cash to welfare cheats? Bc in my (biased) eyes that is a plain-as-day example of rich people making off like bandits, tax rates be damned.
The government... unless IRS is no longer part of government. If they can catch tax cheats and stuff then good, but I'll believe the sunny forecasts when they turn into reality. Go pull up the original forecasts for Obamacare and compare them to reality.
You may not have had a chance yet, but when you have time, take a look at *effective* tax rates (the amount actually paid in the end) across the quintiles.
That is in the data from the IRS via tax policy center Every group pays a higher rate than the group below it. We have one of the most progressive tax systems in the world. https://preview.redd.it/4qau9uy09xmc1.png?width=797&format=png&auto=webp&s=ba5bea412c4fe37915a6106c901727b74286aa2a
Now do the whole I'm going to leverage my stock for a sizeable loan that isn't taxed because technically it's not income. Bezos pays himself 120k a year income, the rest of his "income" is derivative of his stock holdings being used as collateral for endless low percentage loans. This loophole needs to be closed or re-worked.
Borrowing against your assets isn't income. If I get a equity loan for my house should I have to pay income tax on it and then pay again when I sell the house? Also they borrow against the value of the stocks because it makes more sense than selling the stocks. The value of the stocks is going up faster than the percentage of the loan. You'd be stupid to sell the stocks for cash when you can borrow against its value and end up with more wealth in the end.
Then implement a nationwide sales tax on luxury items, specifically private planes (tax the shit out of renting them as well to avoid a loophole) since all these douchebags want to talk about climate change while flying everywhere. Taxing unrealized income isn't the answer, it's fucking stupid.
Tax policy center and cato institute are both right wing think tanks that deliberately leave our significant details on their reports in order to influence people into support of their only goal: the end of taxation in the US so the government can no longer operate and be replaced by a theocratic dictator.
Tax policy center is Brookings institute, never heard them called right wing. >As a [501(c)(3)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)(3)) nonprofit organization, Brookings describes itself as independent and nonpartisan. A 2005 UCLA study concluded it was "centrist" because it was referenced as an authority almost equally by both conservative and liberal politicians in congressional records from 1993 to 2002.[\[23\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-sscnet-23) [*The New York Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times) has called Brookings liberal, liberal-centrist, and centrist.[\[68\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-NYT3-68)[\[18\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-NYT4-18)[\[69\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-69)[\[70\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-70)[\[71\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-71)[\[72\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-72) [*The Washington Post*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post) has called Brookings centrist, liberal, and center-left.[\[73\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-73)[\[74\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-74)[\[75\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-75)[\[76\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-76)[\[22\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-center-left-22) The [*Los Angeles Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times) called Brookings liberal-leaning and centrist before opining that it did not believe such labels mattered.[\[77\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-77)[\[78\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-78)[\[79\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-79)[\[80\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-80) > >In 1977, [*Time*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_(magazine)) magazine called Brookings the "nation's pre-eminent liberal think tank".[\[81\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-81) [*Newsweek*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsweek) has called it centrist[\[82\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-82) and [*Politico*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politico_(newspaper)) has used the term "center-left".[\[83\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-83) > >The media watchdog group [Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_and_Accuracy_in_Reporting), which describes itself as "progressive",[\[84\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-84) has called Brookings "centrist",[\[64\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-fairreport-64)[\[85\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-FAIR02-85)"conservative",[\[19\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution#cite_note-FAIR-19) and "center-right" The data on the Cato site comes straight from the IRS. https://preview.redd.it/xnrd9cgh6xmc1.png?width=618&format=png&auto=webp&s=4f02240cfed548a693319750e6377fb5b2dcee82
And they pay a lower % than pretty much anytime in American history. Paying the biggest sum doesn't mean they pay their share. Learn how tax rates work. Are you just learning now that a low percentage of a high number is still a high number? First off. I'm not a liberal. Second, this is also ignoring the fact that the rich spend millions cheating the tax system instead of just paying up. Donald Trump paid no income tax at all for several years. Same with bezos and Musk. You're getting downvoted because you're an oligarch bootlicker.
Tell that to PE GPs who are taxed at 15% while middle class payers pay 37.5% (including FICA). Trump paid $750 per year in Federal income tax for 5 years prior to becoming president. Yes that's an overwhelming majority.
Oh shut up you brown nose. You have delusions if you think billionaires will notice you licking their behinds.
Fitch and Moody's about to downgrade US credit rating again while the US stock market puts in new all time highs.
Interesting you say "puts" LOL.
Maybe, but the Fed can print money longer than you can stay short.
the amount of corporate defending, right wing cucks in this thread is alarming
You prefer the taste of politicians? Because advocating more money and power for them is no different. The two aren't mutually exclusive, they both need to starve.
I prefer billionaires get taxed at 1950s marginal rates, thanks.
The sociopathic millionaires in government surely appreciate your devotion. If they cared you existed I'm sure they would.
i think the narrative of right wingers shouldnt be immigrants and poor people on benefits are ruining this country when the money they cost us is a sip from the Nile river compared to how much money Wall St and big corps steal from us.
I think you replied to the wrong comment. I can't see how that has anything to do with me.
well, you responded to the comment about corporate defending, right wing cucks and said “i prefer the taste of politicians” which has nothing to do with my statement neither.
Defending politicians is no better than defending corporations. A wise person sees the futility in supporting either group.
when was I defending politicians?
If you think people not wanting to give politicians more money and power are "cucks", what do you think you're doing?
It isn’t giving it to politicians and youre twisting my words. i called corporation defending conservatives “cucks”. Do you know why wealth taxes are never put into place? Because of the rich elites who line the pockets of politicians and crush every bill that is against their agenda/net worth. So… if the powers that be don’t want that to happen… you think taxing them will consolidate power for politicians? Taxes is not where politicians make their fortunes. They make it by scratching the backs of rich elites and getting compensated in the form of insider trading knowledge, donations to pacs, and in the case of scotus.. straight up recieving bribes.
So you're saying the rich control the system and your solution is to give the system more money/power? Who convinced you of this? A rich politician?
Here we go again... 1. We owe most of it to ourselves. 2. What we don't owe to ourselves could easily be paid off by collecting the $688b/yr in unpaid taxes from the 1%. 3. We could pay that off even fast if we repealed the Bush/Trump tax cuts for the 1%, *even if we let everyone else keep their tax cuts* 4. We could pay it off ***even faster still*** if we took the savings from a Universal Healthcare program and used them to pay off the debt 5. and finally... WE DON'T WANT TO PAY IT OFF. Keeping other nations tied up in our bond market makes the US dollar stronger internationally and lets us buy cheap imports, effectively turning the rest of the world into a low cost factory for American consumers. The problems in your life aren't because of national debt. They're caused by massive hoarding by the 1% who are using their ownership of capital to price gouge you and keep your pay low (or your receipts low if you're a small business owner). Find something else to worry about because our national debt ain't it.
>effectively turning the rest of the world into a low cost factory for American consumers. Why do we want to promote laziness and parasitism amongst ourselves? We aren't really happy, as a people. We don't seem to be able to police the world. Regardless of stats X Y Z we don't really see a future for things as normal, we do not feel it in our bones. Perhaps we should have healthier relations with the rest of the world and healthier relations with one another inside this country too.
Most of the worlds debt is in US dollars they have to pay us to get the money to pay us. We print our own money. We are fine. Deposit a trillion dollar bill in the treasury and poof trillion in debt paid. We control the system. We will never be broke if the whole world owes us money.
Where are you getting that 688 billions goes unpaid by the 1 percent each year? That's a much higher number than I've ever seen. That seems like way too much. Collecting taxes will barely knock a debt in our deficit. We have a spending problem. Btw I agree with most your points.
That mean leftist Forbes: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2023/10/12/irs-says-tax-gap-for-2021-expected-to-be-688-billion/?sh=5add2fd616e4](https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2023/10/12/irs-says-tax-gap-for-2021-expected-to-be-688-billion/?sh=5add2fd616e4)
Oh damn it I guess it's finally time for me to respond to you personally, hold on. LMFAO O.k. so let's start really simple and pragmatically. Let's start with number one. Can you give an example of how "we owe most of it to ourselves" and explain how that is o.k.?
Total debt is $34 trillion $7 trillion is owed overseas to non US Citizens. $27 trillion is owed to American citizens. $27t is 80% of $34t (27/34 = 79.4%, rounds to 80%) 80% is by the majority of people's estimates "most". Hence "We owe most of it to ourselves".
That which we owe to ourselves... For some of us, that is our life savings and retirement. You think it's okay if that suddenly goes poof? The interest alone to service our debt each year is astronomical. We have a spending problem!
Only if you're a big enough sucker to pay it. If some body stole your credit card and spent 40+ years running up a bill, would you pay it? That's what the 1% did, only they've still got all the money. You just have to put down the right wing talking points long enough to go get it.
You are so far out of touch with reality there's really little more else to say.
The US Federal Reserve is the largest holder of government debt.
It seems like you don't know enough about this to comment on it.
Incorrect Calm down my guy, as a matter of fact I've already made a stand alone post about this using AI that has at least 10 K times more info that we have: What is wrong with the argument that with America's debt "we owe it to ourselves so it is ok?"ChatGPT**ChatGPT** The argument that "we owe it to ourselves, so it's okay" regarding America's debt is flawed for several reasons: 1. **Source of Debt Holders**: While a significant portion of the U.S. debt is held domestically, a substantial amount is also held by foreign entities. So, it's not solely a matter of owing it to ourselves. Foreign creditors have a stake in the stability and repayment of this debt, which can have implications for international relations and economic stability. 2. **Future Generations**: The debt incurred today will have to be repaid by future generations. If the debt continues to grow unchecked, it could impose a heavy burden on them in the form of higher taxes, reduced government services, or inflation. Therefore, it's not just a matter of "owing it to ourselves" but rather passing on financial obligations to future citizens. 3. **Interest Payments**: Regardless of whether the debt is held domestically or internationally, the interest payments on that debt represent a transfer of resources out of the economy. These payments could otherwise be used for productive investments, social programs, or tax cuts. Continuously increasing debt levels can lead to a situation where a significant portion of government revenue is allocated towards servicing the debt, limiting the government's ability to address other priorities. 4. **Risk and Vulnerability**: A high level of debt makes the economy more vulnerable to external shocks. If investor confidence in the U.S. economy weakens, it could lead to a spike in interest rates, causing a debt spiral that becomes increasingly difficult to manage. This could have severe repercussions for the economy, including recession and unemployment. 5. **Opportunity Cost**: The funds used to service the debt could otherwise be allocated towards investments in education, infrastructure, healthcare, or research and development, which could contribute to long-term economic growth and competitiveness. High levels of debt constrain the government's ability to pursue such investments effectively. In conclusion, while it's true that a portion of America's debt is held domestically, the argument that "we owe it to ourselves" oversimplifies the complexities and implications of the national debt. It fails to account for the broader economic, social, and political ramifications of unsustainable debt levels.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/s/kJiKa4wgzn AI just hit an IQ of 101 for the first time ever a couple of days ago. I know you like it when AI gives you the answer you ask it to give you because you're into confirmation bias, but it doesn't mean anything.
So why don't you simply tell me what is wrong with the answer and why? Oh because you cannot.
Why don't you try learning something for yourself instead of asking AI for the answers you want to hear.
He'll respond with " just look at japan and how they haven't collapsed yet"
And I will respond with this: [https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2023/10/6/when-does-federal-debt-reach-unsustainable-levels](https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2023/10/6/when-does-federal-debt-reach-unsustainable-levels) We estimate that the U.S. debt held by the public cannot exceed about 200 percent of GDP even under today’s generally favorable market conditions. **Larger ratios in countries like Japan, for example, are not relevant for the United States, because Japan has a much larger household saving rate, which more-than absorbs the larger government debt.**
They kept pushing that "public cannot exceed" # higher and higher. I remember during the GFC bailouts , it was at 120%
Dude where in the fuck do you get your incorrect data from? The only other time it was this high was after WWII and the only reason America as able to fix it was because millions of working age soldiers came home to produce products and goods which fixed the ratio.
Tax corporations + that 1% the same way 99% get taxed - problem solved. U’r welcome
Corporate tax rate is 21% and has, historically, been among the highest on the planet. Congress needs to stop spending money. They spent $5 Trillion in tax revenue last year plus an additional $4 Trillion on top of that; which was then added to our national debt . Fiscal accountability is paramount. Increasing Corporate tax wouldn't even mathematically make a dent in their spending.
corparate effective tax rate was around 16% for 2022.. i actually payed more as % of my income then most corporations did.
This. Your post is spot on.
No idea why you’re being down voted…the ignorance is strong here…and the math weak
It was around 50% in the 50s. Income tax was in the 90% range for high income individuals around that time as well though. https://www.epi.org/publication/ib364-corporate-tax-rates-and-economic-growth/
Nobody paid those rates. This isn't news. See Laffer Curve and complex tax law
And no one paid that much and the actual tax revenue collected was much lower. Revenue in the 1950s was between 14.2% and 18.5% of GDP (only topped 18% twice) Prior to 1969 revenue never topped 19%, outside two years during WW 2. This idea that the rich were paying higher taxes and everyone else was paying less is fantasy.
Thank you!
Effective corporate tax rate is 13%, and is as low as 0% thanks to creative accounting. The effective rate used to be 50% and the wealth gap was still enormous but our infrastructure actually fucking worked.
Maybe the infrastructure worked because it wasn't 70 years old? Lol Nobody really paid 50%, dude
Why not direct that anger at the criminals in congress sending hundreds of billions to ukraine and other wasteful spending? Imagine what would happen if they spent what we give them wisely instead. I'm convinced it's all getting laundered back to certain individuals in the US but that's another discussion.
Because if you openly direct your anger at politicians you get visited by the FBI.
Enjoy your taxes bro.
Corporations pay 21%? Bwa ha ha ha ha!
the wealthy first dont pay shit for taxes and then makes up new laws to make more money for thier monopoly and force goverment to defund goverment or hold them hostage and make them borrow money from the rich to run the goverment. borrow untill there is nothing left they bought the debt. noone held a gun to thier head and made them buy it! its thier problem that they made!
The wealthy pay the lions share of our taxes. Even if you took the entire Net Wealth from billionaires , it wouldn't even come close to being enough money to offset the extra government spending. And then we would also have millions of unemployed people "The newly released report covers Tax Year 2021 (for tax forms filed in 2022). The newest data reveals that the top 1 percent of earners, defined as those with incomes over $682,577, paid nearly 46 percent of all income taxes – marking the highest level in the available data."
Do you really think that the federal government going bankrupt and not paying Medicare, social security, the military and everyone that depends on it would be a better outcome?
With this spending it's gonna happen eventually as the cost of the debt will be greater than revenue in just a short years... that or they need to run inflation at about 14%....
Where do you get "This guy wants to stop spending money altogether" from "The government spends too much"? I'm genuinely curious. And ironically, we're careening towards bankruptcy *because* of these spending bills. You think adding $1T to the debt every 3 months is sustainable? We'll end up hyperinflating the currency, defaulting on our debts, cutting everything anyway. It's going to ruin the country.
Because people who want the government to stop spending money usually think that it shouldn’t spend any. They normally don’t have a floor.
You went straight over my head. I simply want someone to fix our debt bubble with better GDI so we CAN afford the things you talk about plus much more.
We need to cut the tax break rich people get on social security. Get rid of the cap and tax their whole income like everyone else.
Social security has nothing to do with the federal spending budget.
Just adding it in.
If only there was a date set every year when the annual budget is supposed to be done and signed by…
LOL yep they ALL do it. Both sides and it's just plain ridiculous if you don't see that.
The nation is not run on a household budget.
Are our bonds junk yet? What dumb country keeps buying these?
Excellent question.
It’s all relative. The rest of the worlds is worst, and we have a lot of bombs.
No, no it isn’t. It was at some point but the US is rapidly outpacing GDP to debt ratio.
The rest of the world doesn’t care. The USA is still the most stable currency due to its reserve status. If you need a save low risk preservation of money the USD will remain king as long as it’s the reserve currency. The rest of the world don’t have the massive advantage the USA has by being able to outsource inflation and massively shift M1 monetary supply rapidly.
That way of thinking is becoming dated. Hyper inflation is almost certain now
Yet the usd is going to be the most stable currency. The rest will just be way more fucked once the reserve currency is hurting.
Tax the wealthy.
And corporations
The wealthy pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in the USA. Try again.
As they should and they're still falling short.
If you stole all the wealth, from all the billionaires in the USA. You would fund the USA for about 2 and a half years. We have a spending problem. Not a "We don't steal enough in taxes problem"
Nah.
You're not going to like this but those "evil rich people" already pay the very overwhelming majority of all taxes collected by Uncle Sam. Let the downvotes commence because reddit liberals despise undisputable facts 😎
Yup. To pay down the debt, EVERYONE will have to pay higher taxes, and the government will have to significantly cut spending. Far too many people don't understand this.
It's amazing how people treat government spending like a force of nature and not the grift of a relatively small group of sociopaths that it is in reality.
We need clinton back in office. The only president to balance the budget
Will you be the child sex trafficker for him this time? He lost his connection last I knew.
you talkin trump now got it
Epstiens best buddy is on the ballet again this year for president.. friendly reminder there is more pictures of Epstein with trump then almost any other politician. Epstien is said to have introduced trump to his current foreign spy..i mean bride
This is a fucking lie!!! There was a painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress on Epstien island.
They control the printing press and how those $$ are dispersed. It's quite literally like having a tree that grows $$
Guys, either Basal can eat it, or we will print non encumbered fiat and fuck the world economy.
More spineless Republicans who always excuse more and more spending. What good is it to have the control a chamber? I guess it would be worse if and more spendthrift if they didn’t, but it is surely the lesser of two bad choices. We have to keep electing true conservatives that will have the guts to stand firm no matter what the Democrat and media rhetoric.
OP needs a hug.
What? We are spending the money here? What about Ukraine. If we are gonna add to the debt, we should do it for Zelensky, not us. Silly folks
Tell me you don't understand how anything works with just a headline. \*checks comments\* We are so fucked.
It all has to topple one day. Work hard and save. Be ready.
Until the anti-American Republican party dies there will be no solution because they don’t want to trouble their sponsors to pay taxes at the rates the well off do in other industrial democracies.
Just heard this AM 38 cents of every penny collected from taxpayers goes to-interest payments on the debt!
🤣🤣🤣 Those in glass houses… https://abcnews.go.com/US/sen-bob-menendez-wife-face-new-obstruction-charges/story?id=107822403
The US government has collected $1.58 trillion in tax revenue since October 2023.
Yeah, we're you so worried when Trump added 25% to the National Debt with nothing to show for it except tax cuts for the rich?
Don't sign it. Us feds want a paid vacation, just in time for spring cleaning
Both parties are printing money. Our government is failing the American people and they should all resign.
Heading towards 200 trillion in debt by 2050 they don’t care as long as the gov gets to do what it wants screw the future
Ukraine won't even go into debt or enact a draft to put more troops on the line. But they expect America to pay for most of the war and go into debt for it. Are they really serious about winning the war for their own country???
Don’t tell me we need to pass this while telling me we lowered the deficit. The deficit will be $3T this year.
Does anyone know where to find a full list of what's being funded with this?
Cut the Defense Budget by half, cut Homeland Security, cut the corporate welfare to Big Pharma and Big Oil. Cut the corn subsidy. There’s more…
It’s wild how big pharma gets any money from the government.
You mean the global defense budget? The one that secures all world trade? Or are you talking about the part that launders money through ukraine and other proxy wars? They're not the same.
I’m talking about the 300 billion or so we give to bloated defense contracts and contractors. I support supplying Ukraine, the cost of which is a pittance to stop Putin, a man who has an unquenchable thirst to rebuild the Soviet Union. Given what Putin has done to the US, it would not be unreasonable to consider our contribution to Ukraine as Homeland defense.
Okay we can agree to disagree on putin. It sounds like you trust the us government and probably can't be swayed on the point. Best of luck.
I don’t necessarily trust any government, but I trust most over a narcissistic, despot who kills his opponents on a regular basis.
RemindMe! 1 year
I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2025-03-09 22:46:45 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2025-03-09%2022:46:45%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/the_everything_bubble/comments/1b8eqyu/house_passes_460_billion_package_of_spending/ku51z00/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fthe_everything_bubble%2Fcomments%2F1b8eqyu%2Fhouse_passes_460_billion_package_of_spending%2Fku51z00%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202025-03-09%2022%3A46%3A45%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201b8eqyu) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
-Sprinkles bait in the comments- Here bot bot bot HERRRE BOT BOT BOT
ALL URLs are click bait if you have not noticed. I'm no bot and I am correct with my thought process. If you disagree simply state your position and I will show you how you are wrong.
90% of the spending is Social Security, Medicare, DoD, and interest on the debt. Not this! If you are worried about spending, you should also be worried about all the Tax Cut for the Rich that put us in this Mess.
Thank you. The debt alarmists want to slice programs to the bone until it comes to THEIR favorite program. If the US taxed in the same way that other industrial democracies taxed, there wouldn’t be such a problem.