patrick.net

GNL says

The $64,000 question. Seems like it will never matter. My belief is you'll see the results as a smaller middle class and a larger and larger poor class.

Which will continue to get more extreme. As long as you can keep the debt slaves full of junk food and entertained, nothing is ever going to change

Does anyone want the Federal Government to be profit driven???

I would rather have a government going further into debt each year than expanding its coffers every year... and you think taxes are high now.

Misc says

I would rather have a government going further into debt each year than expanding its coffers every year.

False choice. The government can limit spending to collections.

HeadSet says

Misc says

I would rather have a government going further into debt each year than expanding its coffers every year.

False choice. The government can limit spending to collections.

why would a politician want to limit spending when spending benefits him and being thrifty castigates him?

https://babylonbee.com/cleanArticle/senators-say-theyre-not-super-worried-about-running-up-national-debt-as-most-of-them-will-die-of-natural-causes-in-the-next-year-or-so

its all about cash flow ... not enough income to match expenses and the federal government does not have assets or savings to cover its expenses ...

however it does have "assets" as far as land and resources...it could try to increase income by leasing forest land such as for deadwood collection used for engineered wood

when i saw the congressional democrat's publishing their 2024 budget which was a 5.2% increase from the 2023 budget, then that was enough to show that we are seriously fucked.... the same democrats tout annual inflation (i.e, PCE) around 2.5% ...

the democrats want to increase spending at twice the rate of guvmint-reported inflation

why not just grow spending at 1 or 2% below the annual inflation rate ?

AD says

its all about cash flow ... not enough income to match expenses and the federal government does not have assets or savings to cover its expenses ...

Print it.

Why tax at all? Most of the budget is borrowed.

Patrick says

One simple solution is to defer the land value tax until the owner dies. That is, let it accumulate as a debt to the government, but with no obligation for the owner to sell until the owner dies.

Or the ability for some (seniors for example, perhaps inheritors) to spread out or delay the Georgist Taxes with the balance due on sale if they rise dramatically in a short period.

AmericanKulak says

D says

its all about cash flow ... not enough income to match expenses and the federal government does not have assets or savings to cover its expenses ...

Print it.

Why tax at all? Most of the budget is borrowed.

yep, so the "tax" on the working and middle class is guvmint-reported inflation

inflate out of a debt crisis seems like a perpetual feat
.

Tobin Tax would be great as well.

The arguments against it are retarded.

"I pay $7.95 to a broker for a trade, it would be a great injustice to pay 50 cents more in tax for a total of $8.45! I'll be bankrupt if I had to do that! Unfair!"

Seriously, there's a tax on buying pink lawn flamingoes from Ace Hardware but you can trade thousands of shares without paying sales tax?

AmericanKulak says

"I pay $7.95 to a broker for a trade, it would be a great injustice to pay 50 cents more in tax for a total of $8.45! I'll be bankrupt if I had to do that! Unfair!"

Seriously, there's a tax on buying pink lawn flamingoes from Ace Hardware but you can trade thousands of shares without paying sales tax?

That sounds like you want to have a tax on the broker fee and not a sales tax on the shares sold. To keep that pink flamingo analogy, one would pay a tax on the actual shares purchased. That is, buy $100 worth of stock, even without a broker fee like at Schwab, pay a $4 (at 4%) sales tax.

UkraineIsFucked says

There's no constutional amendment involving the Fed.

16th's passage the same year the current central bank was chartered is pure coincidence...

Everyone does realize that anyone alive and including unborn great grand kids will never pay the debt. It will never be repaid. That's the point. That's why we fight wars. Why in the flying fuck would you admit to wars and proxy wars that it was because you don't want to pay people back? It's nasty, but I'm glad to be a citizen of the most powerful one that can get away with it. Enjoy it. You got one life.

NuttBoxer says

16th's passage the same year the current central bank was chartered is pure coincidence...

No. But Fed's charter has nothing to do with amending the Constitution. In fact, the Fed is the third national bank chartered by Congress.

What doesn't anybody understand about 'Babylonian Debt Slavery' and 'fiat printing press money'? Our taxes are collected by the Vatican, and whatever they deem fit is deposited in the IMF or BIS and then lent back to us at an interest rate (low, but still interest) and the debt is meant to enslave, and keep the government operating at a deficit beholden to the various Euro banksters and mafias.

If you or I had a printing press in the basement and it made money, would we be in debt?

Someone_else says

If you or I had a printing press in the basement and it made money, would we be in debt?

Yes, if you are married.

Someone_else says

If you or I had a printing press in the basement and it made money, would we be in debt?

All that does is reward people with free money.

So there is essentially more demand but at best the same amount of supply.

If you are going to give out money, make sure there is enough innovation and productivity to provide adequate supply.

WookieMan says

. That's why we fight wars. Why in the flying fuck would you admit to wars and proxy wars that it was because you don't want to pay people back?

Well said. The debt is paid in blood. We the people are collateral, and the elites will trade our lives and labor like bargaining chips on the global market.

UkraineIsFucked says

NuttBoxer says

16th's passage the same year the current central bank was chartered is pure coincidence...

No. But Fed's charter has nothing to do with amending the Constitution...

Your statements seem to be at odds.

Patrick says

Cloward–Piven strategy?

Does Cloward Pivan believe that you can inflate your way out of anything?

.

8% of 2022 federal budget was for net interest

https://www.federalbudgetinpictures.com/where-does-all-the-money-go/

I wonder what it is for 2024.

They should hold outlays (or the federal budget) as constant for at least 3 years to reduce the growth of deficits:
.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#Overview

.
At least outlays from 2023 to 2024 only increase by about 1% thanks to the leadership of House of Representatives Speaker Johnson.

.

GNL says

Cloward–Piven strategy?

Partially. I mean the hofare wasn't enough. Now they have to import 9M and give them more than hofare does, like pre-paid charge cards and hotel rooms. Even Shaniqua didn't get months at a Manhattan or SF hotel at $200/day.

HeadSet says

That sounds like you want to have a tax on the broker fee and not a sales tax on the shares sold. To keep that pink flamingo analogy, one would pay a tax on the actual shares purchased. That is, buy $100 worth of stock, even without a broker fee like at Schwab, pay a $4 (at 4%) sales tax.

A transaction tax on Shares, like a sales tax, sure.

We definitely don't have a turnover or liquidity problem. Restoring a dividend-centric stock market might be better.

Paying taxes on money making money seems fairer than taxing productive income. I'd rather tax a surgeon's stock trades than tax his earned income.

Stop funding all welfare programs and the budget will be balanced.

zzyzzx says

Stop funding all welfare programs and the budget will be balanced.

Stop funding warfare programs as well. It’s one thing to have a well equipped military. It’s quite another to play policeman for the world.