- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
"The U.S. government spends money that it doesn't have and gives away almost 50% of its tax revenue through foreign aid and welfare"
LOL...the foreign aid budget of the USA is something around $30-50 Billion/year (or around 1% of the U.S. federal budget), and welfare was "reformed" back in the 1990s. It's not a significant portion of the USA federal budget anymore.
I personally think that the USA should spend less on foreign aid (see below), but one can't balance the budget just by slashing foreign aid alone.
"If taxes are raised, they should be raised on everyone. To balance the budget you would need a 88% tax on the highest earning bracket, and after the taxes, they would actually be making less than the lower class. Taxing one group more than another is unfair, biased and immoral"
...in your wild, Right-wing fantasy world that is...ugh... Progressive taxation is another completely non-controversial issue, except on the far Right-wing in the USA. Ending the GWB tax cuts (for mostly the rich ) & taxing millionaires at a slightly higher tax rate would yield another $3-4 Trillion in federal revenue over the next decade of so. Raising taxes on corporations, especially multi-national corporations, & hedge fund managers would yield another $100 Billion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so. Eliminating unnecessary tax breaks for extraction (like Big Oil) & toxic chemical industries would yield another $70 Billion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so. Limiting charitable giving and state & local tax deductions would yield another $1 Trillion or so in federal revenue over the next decade or so.
Keeping the estate tax at the estate level of $3.5+ Million (which will affect 0.5% of all estates) will fund around 27% of the projected, long-term Social Security (SS) shortfall. Bringing the SS payroll tax back to its historical level of taxation (around 90% of income) will fund around 40% (or around $550 Billion over the next decade or so alone) of the projected, long-term SS shortfall. Gradually raising the full SS retirement age over time to age 70 will fund around 35% (around $110 Billion over the next decade or so alone) of the projected, long-term SS shortfall. Extending SS coverage to more state & local govt. employees will fund around 10% of the projected, long-term SS shortfall.
Is there federal spending that can be cut as well? Sure, including around $110 Billion or so in unneeded "defense" spending, around $200 Billion in foreign aid, ending the failed No Child Left Behind nonsense (around $100 Billion) and reforming farm subsidies (around $10 Billion) all over the next decade or so.
Only through a balanced approach of spending cuts & increases in revenue can the federal budget be balanced over the long-term.
"Forced redistribution of wealth is extortion and theft"
LOL...again, spoken like a true member of the far Right-wing. The idea that taxation somehow equals "theft" is a wild assertion at best. Run along now...
You're talking about the exact same thing as what GWB did with taxes, period.
Paying taxes is a necessary responsibility of being a citizen, and we have unfortunately run up debts (which were things that were paid for with borrowed money...mostly under past GOP "leadership") which basically have to paid for with taxes at some point. There's no physical way to balance the U.S. federal budget & pay down at least some of the federal debt without raising some kind of tax on someone. Better taxes be raised on those that can better afford those higher taxes than on the middle or working classes IMHO.
The issue of govt. redistributing wealth via taxation literally goes back to the Roman Republic. It's only a "controversial" issue on the far Right-wing in the USA.
There's no reason for the USA to declare war on Iran. Iran has every right to develop nuclear energy as an alternative to petroleum, which is going to eventually run out anyways. Iran currently relies very heavily on others to refine the petroleum that they produce, and, while I don't support nuclear energy myself, Iran was given the go-ahead by the West under the Shah to develop nuclear energy. I personally think that a better solution for Iran's energy problems would better lie with wind, solar or geothermal energy, or other countries could provide Iran with enough nuclear fuel to power as many reactors as they want. In the very recent past, the USA has taken weapons-grade nuclear fuel from counties (like Mexico) that didn't want to have to safeguard it anymore...we could do the same thing with Iran if need be.
If I was Iranian & I saw what happened under the GWB Regime with the "Axis of Evil" countries (Iran, Iraq & North Korea), I'd want a nuclear weapon yesterday, not several years from now. Our potential adversaries unfortunately were shown under GWB that we'll leave you alone if you have even a crude nuclear weapon (North Korea) or we'll invade you & topple your regime (Iraq) if you don't have a nuclear weapon.
The USA doesn't need to strike Iran for Israel, since Israel is very capable of defending themselves (with nuclear weapons if need be). The mullahs that run Iran currently aren't going to attack Israel & risk their own destruction...they are cowards.
"You have no proof of that."
Of course I do...the falsehoods that you stated here again & again are right here in black & white for all to see.
BTW, don't like being laughed at eh?? Well, know that when others read your utter nonsense here that they'll be doing the same thing...lol...