Regaining Control Of The National Deficit

[Independent thinker]

True, but my recommendation is to send Welfare to the states, saving about $1.16T a year off the Federal deficit.

Largest Welfare Increase in U.S. History Will Boost Government Support to $76,400 per Poor Family

www.heritage.org

Doing this would put the final nail in the coffin for states like California. The whole state would turn into a doomsday spiral.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Doing this would put the final nail in the coffin for states like California. The whole state would turn into a doomsday spiral.

It's already in one.

 

[Independent thinker]

Awesome. Do you have a plan for the ensuing depression your idea will cause?

Why would it cause a depression? All we would be doing is making the states pay for their own services instead of the federal government. All they have to do is raise their taxes to the same level as the taxes cut by the federal government. Some states would be free to spend more and states would also be free to spend less.

 

[Woodznutz]

The best way to reduce the debt is to address the causes of the debt, which is the hemorrhaging of money from the economy through the trade deficit, drug trafficking, and remittances. It has taken years to grow the debt and will take year to pay it down. Slow and steady as she goes.

 

[Foxfyre]

I had an idea that just popped into my head. The federal government owes about 37 trillion dollars which, of course means that we spent 37 trillion dollars more money than we had coming in. The federal government doesn't have a balanced budget amendment and the reality of it is we probably never will. And, even we did ever pass one, it would come with loopholes that if an emergency comes up then we can spend whatever is necessary, which I'm OK with in real emergencies.

Anyway, my idea is to transfer every single expenditure and department we can over to the state governments, most of whom DO HAVE balanced budget amendments and are forced by law to follow them. The fact is, states know more of what they need, where they need it, and how much money they need to spend for it better than the federal government does.

My idea is to basically transfer as much as we can from the federal government which does not have a balanced budget amendment to the state governments, most of whom do have balanced budget amendments and have to follow them. So, taxes would go up in the states while federal taxes would go down and the states would determine how much money they would need to spend and where to get the money from.

Interesting concept. But we will collapse the U.S. economy should we default on that $37 trillion dollar debt. The annual GDP of the USA is roughly $24 to $27 trillion depending on whose source you consult for that. Trump/Musk/DOGE are doing what they can legally do to bring down the level of spending while simultaneously boosting the economy to increase treasury revenues. But irresponsible, uncontrolled spending has put us in a hole that they can't dig us out of overnight and economic policies can't produce noticeable results for some months into the future or even into the next year or two.

So transfer of more and more responsibility to the states--something I strongly advocate--has to be done slowly, wisely, carefully, intelligently. But I trust this administration to do that more than any in recent memory.

 

[Independent thinker]

Interesting concept. But we will collapse the U.S. economy should we default on that $37 trillion dollar debt. The annual GDP of the USA is roughly $24 to $27 trillion depending on whose source you consult for that. Trump/Musk/DOGE are doing what they can legally do to bring down the level of spending while simultaneously boosting the economy to increase treasury revenues. But irresponsible, uncontrolled spending has put us in a hole that they can't dig us out of overnight and economic policies can't produce noticeable results for some months into the future or even into the next year or two.

So transfer of more and more responsibility to the states--something I strongly advocate--has to be done slowly, wisely, carefully, intelligently. But I trust this administration to do that more than any in recent memory.

I never said we would default on the national debt. We would, of course, continue paying the interest on that but with the new system, we wouldn't be continually adding on more debt to add to it.

 

[kyzr]

Doing this would put the final nail in the coffin for states like California. The whole state would turn into a doomsday spiral.

I don't mean in one year, transferring Welfare could be done in 4-years to phase it in.

 

[Independent thinker]

I don't mean in one year, transferring Welfare could be done in 4-years to phase it in.

Same with my idea. Unfortunately, you can't just flip a switch.

 

[berg80]

Why would it cause a depression? All we would be doing is making the states pay for their own services instead of the federal government. All they have to do is raise their taxes to the same level as the taxes cut by the federal government. Some states would be free to spend more and states would also be free to spend less.

States would be forced to make drastic cutbacks in services which will result in shrinking the economy. People living paycheck to paycheck and those on a fixed income can not afford the jump in state taxes.

BTW, specifically what programs are you talking about? Because to make a dent in the annual deficit you have to address SS, Medicare/Medicaid, and the defense budget.

In order to pay down the debt federal tax receipts will have to exceed expenditures. So federal taxes really wouldn't go down much or it's a wasted exercise. Meaning people would be paying a much higher percentage of their income in taxes. Which, again, means less disposable income, less spending, leading to a contraction of the economy.....equals a depression.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

States would be forced to make drastic cutbacks in services which will result in shrinking the economy. People living paycheck to paycheck and those on a fixed income can not afford the jump in state taxes.

BTW, specifically what programs are you talking about? Because to make a dent in the annual deficit you have to address SS, Medicare/Medicaid, and the defense budget.

In order to pay down the debt federal tax receipts will have to exceed expenditures. So federal taxes really wouldn't go down much or it's a wasted exercise. Meaning people would be paying a much higher percentage of their income in taxes. Which, again, means less disposable income, less spending, leading to a contraction of the economy.....equals a depression.

To make a dent in the deficit we must take away as much money from politicians we can. They are the problem. They are the irresponsible spenders.

 

[berg80]

To make a dent in the deficit we must take away as much money from politicians we can. They are the problem. They are the irresponsible spenders.

Who elects politicians?

 

[Foxfyre]

I never said we would default on the national debt. We would, of course, continue paying the interest on that but with the new system, we wouldn't be continually adding on more debt to add to it.

But that wasn't my point. The federal government cannot require the states to take over federal functions and it would be irresponsible to just dump those on the states without giving them time to do the necessary legislation to accommodate it should they even choose to do that.

And if we don't handle this professionally and intelligently, we can crash the economy to the point that we would default on the debt.

Currently we are paying roughly $1 TRILLION per year just in interest on the debt, more than the entire U.S. national debt was 25 years ago. Obviously this is not sustainable and seems impossible at face value. But Trump/DOGE/GOP believe they can get it under control. They deserve to have everybody at their back as they do what is necessary to accomplish that.

 

[Doc7505]

And red states would look exactly like poor African third world countries within 6 months.

~~~~~~
Strange you just described California, Minnesota, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan New Mexico, and other Blue Sanctuary Plantation States.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

True, but my recommendation is to send Welfare to the states, saving about $1.16T a year off the Federal deficit.

Largest Welfare Increase in U.S. History Will Boost Government Support to $76,400 per Poor Family

www.heritage.org

That's great. Now get the states to fund it. Won't happen without blue states going bankrupt like they already are!

 

[Independent thinker]

But that wasn't my point. The federal government cannot require the states to take over federal functions and it would be irresponsible to just dump those on the states without giving them time to do the necessary legislation to accommodate it should they even choose to do that.

And if we don't handle this professionally and intelligently, we can crash the economy to the point that we would default on the debt.

Currently we are paying roughly $1 TRILLION per year just in interest on the debt, more than the entire U.S. national debt was 25 years ago. Obviously this is not sustainable and seems impossible at face value. But Trump/DOGE/GOP believe they can get it under control. They deserve to have everybody at their back as they do what is necessary to accomplish that.

Agreed. But I would not implement it overnight. I would give the states time to set it all up.

 

[toobfreak]

Anyway, my idea is to transfer every single expenditure and department we can over to the state governments, most of whom DO HAVE balanced budget amendments

Yes but why would the states want to incur the burden of paying down the federal debt? That 37 trillion the Fed owes is enough money equal to the lifetime income of the average person about 12 million times over.

 

[candycorn]

Why would it cause a depression? All we would be doing is making the states pay for their own services instead of the federal government. All they have to do is raise their taxes to the same level as the taxes cut by the federal government. Some states would be free to spend more and states would also be free to spend less.

Which taxes would Texas raise to replace the $89B they get from the feds?

 

[22lcidw]

Which taxes would Texas raise to replace the $89B they get from the feds?

This again.

 

[kyzr]

That's great. Now get the states to fund it. Won't happen without blue states going bankrupt like they already are!

The Feds are broke. They need to cut spending drastically or the dollar crashes.

The states need to put the able-bodied to work, or no welfare check.

 

[kyzr]

Which taxes would Texas raise to replace the $89B they get from the feds?

I like the Remittance Tax on all money sent out of the US to pay for the wall.