National Debt. Republicans like to rail against it. Dems like to ignore it.
But guess what. It's not going away anytime soon. Sooner of later our Bills must be paid.
Unless we want to become a 'Deadbeat Nation'? (Gasp, the horrors. What will the neighbors think?)
One way to deal with the National Debt, is to deal with our nation's Tax Policy.
It's an arguably debatable topic, but using Taxes to pay for the stuff we buy, should not be one of those verboten topics -- never to be mentioned on as a viable solution, by the villagers of the land.
Rather, Tax Policy is the crux of it all. Without reliable income, there is no sustainable out-go.
Here's what a few random citizens, have to say about the topic, that we rarely openly discuss ...
Can the U.S. deficit and debt problems be solved without increasing taxes?
debate.org
50% Say Yes
Yes It can. They can fix this rather obscure debt if we hadn't been spending so much money on our unneeded military and army. We spend far to much according to this, we spend well over x10 then any nation around the world on our so called "army" but it's not even an army it's a massacre that is not needed at all.
The U.S. deficit and debt can be solved without increasing taxes. Increasing taxes is only a temporary way of addressing the problems, and one that will spiral down into worse problems, not permanently solving the debt or deficit issues. There are much better ways that actually work when it comes to solving the U.S. debt and deficit. The primary issue is the national growth. Economic growth needs to be stimulated, so that the nation no longer needs to borrow, and may eventually even reach a surplus.
[...]
50% Say No
Taxes must be raised to pay the debt. One of the points George Washington touched on in his final speech as president, was the payment of national debts. In so many words he said it's ok to take on debt for wars and lean economic times, but that it must be paid back through taxes in prosperous times. We are in a time of record low taxes, and we need to get our deficit down, and begin to make a dent at the debt.
Increase taxes for the rich. I don't get why people don't want the wealthy to pay more and the middle/lower class pay less. Isn't that something the right wing should support? The several very wealthy who's businesses have been saved my bailouts, i.e. the nation's wealthy, i.e. middle and lower class tax payers. Taxes are at a low since the 1950's, and any way of decreasing the deficit should and will have to include a tax increase. A tax increase on the wealthy. Most people who are posting on this website are most likely apart of the 95% of hardworking Americans who may work multiple jobs, and long hours. We coddle the ultra wealthy expecting them to bring prosperity to the rest of us. No. Never will happen.
[...]
Using Taxes to pay for the stuff we buy, should not be one of the 'verboten topics' --
But rather, Tax Policy is the crux of it all. (It is the solution proposed in our Constitution.)
Apparently paying for the stuff we buy, is something responsible people are supposed to do.
And "paying for" things -- is almost always the painful part of the economic equation. But there is another half of the equation -- one that somewhat negates the pain ...
There IS a second side to this economic dilemma, often rallied around with singular focus, known as our National Debt.
It's called economic growth. Increase the growth, and you increase the opportunity for more income-earners;
And when you do that -- you increase the Tax Revenues the government can take in, to actually pay down the National Debt.
Sounds simple enough. Grow the entire Economic Pie, and you grow the slices of the Pie -- even the Tax-man's slice.
I'm hesitant to cite Larry Summers here, since he's about as old-school and stodgy as economists get -- but he made some news recently by calling for a more "pro-growth" agenda on CNBC, no less ...
And even old-school Summers, is now talking about "income inequality" -- and Gasp! he's no longer even on the Treasury's dime.
Pigs must be flying somewhere ...
We completely avoided a depression: Summers -- at Davos, CNBC -- 23 Jan 2014
Making the rich poorer isn't the American Dream: Summers
by Matthew J. Belvedere, Producer, CNBC's "Squawk Box" -- 23 Jan 2014
[...]
"America succeeds by raising everybody up. It doesn't succeed by tearing anybody down," the former Obama economic adviser and Clinton Treasury secretary [Larry Summers] told CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Thursday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. "The rhetoric of envy and the rhetoric of tearing down, I don't think, is the right rhetoric for America's leaders."
"I think it's important to do something about [income] inequality," Summers said, but he argued that it's much easier to allocate a larger pie to those who are left behind than a "stagnant pie."
[...]
"If the economy grows fast, the long-term budget will be fine," Summers said. "If the economy does not grow fast, we can do one measure or another, [but] we're still going to have rapid debt accumulation."
"The most important determinant of opportunity for my children and your children is how rapidly we grow this economy. I hope we move to a focus on more rapid growth," he said.
[...]
Well if snoozey old Larry Summers can see the rationality of pro-growth, income equality, opportunity for all, policies -- well maybe there is hope that others --
those who only have Austerity Cuts in their toolkit -- maybe they can be made to see the pro-growth light, too?
And if that happens the primary question left "to be solved" then would be:
What are the Growth Sectors going to be, looking ahead to this next Century -- that is still just waiting to be built?
Any Suggestions? What form should our pro-growth opportunities take, going forward, into that no-so-brave world, that awaits us ... to arrive.