How to pay off the national debt: Raise taxes or spend less? Which do you prefer and why?

Answer 1

let government officials live the way we do. paycheck to paycheck, co pays, health insurance, fill up the car, buy groceries. cut the private jets, and fly coach, or at least first class. drive more economical cars. the list goes on.

once they got either reminded of the old days, or get a taste of what we go thru, maybe they will wake up and realize "there is a PROBLEM"

Answer 2

Lowering taxes to stimulate the economy is a fun idea and a seemingly easy way out of a fiscal problem, but as the recent Bush tax cuts have amply demonstrated, this isn't always entirely true.

There are many factors which influence the success of a given economy and level of taxation is only one of them. It's important to remember that government policy towards the economy acts more as a sledgehammer than a scalpel, so it can be quite difficult and complex to arrive at a winning formula for restoring an economy back on its feet.

That being said, the United States spends an inordinate amount of its budget on defense. Some clear-eyed rationalists might argue for a slight paring of this behemoth as it consumes ever more of Federal budget. Additionally, recent appropriations bills have been more harmful than helpful (transportation super bill, the recent energy omnibus with the wasteful and counter productive ethanol subsidies).

On the other side of the coin, some intelligent tax increases could have the benefit of both affecting social good and raising government revenues. Specifically, a carbon tax and increasing fuel taxes would both help lower greenhouse gas emissions and generate significant revenue. Additionally, as a lot of Southern and Western cities began to suffer under extended droughts, having residents pay the true price of water might alleviate municipal coffers (admittedly, this isn't a policy that the Federal government could impose).

As with most things in life, the truth lies somewhere between. Cutting of wasteful or bloated spending coupled with intelligently targeted tax cuts could do wonders for the economy as the government would stop tying up so much private investment that is redirected from private enterprise into their deficit spending.

But if I had to pick one, I'd love to see a carbon tax.

Answer 3

It will have to be both and it has to happen soon. It cannot be either / or. That will just delay the inevitable crash.

From the Government Accountabilty Office reasons for starting a "Fiscal Wake-Up tour":

Q: What’s the bottom line of your message?

A: The worst-case scenario is that, if the United States doesn’t come to our senses and get our act together, we could eventually suffer the same fate as Argentina . That nation defaulted on its debt, which had a significant adverse effect on the country’s economy and the living standards of most of its citizens. We must not allow this to happen here, and with committed, candid, and capable leadership, it won’t. My view is that we will wake up and start making tough choices, I’m just trying to make sure that we do it sooner rather than later.

Q: What’s the best-case scenario?

A: We will ultimately make some tough choices in reforming entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, restructuring and constraining other spending, and raising more revenues. This will require some pain and shared sacrifice. However, the sooner we start, the less we will have to do—and the more time people will have to adjust to the needed changes. The simple fact is, it’s better to treat our fiscal cancer sooner rather than later in order to avoid much more painful and undesirable outcomes.

Q: Who’s to blame for the current state of affairs?

A: As recently as 2001, the federal government had “projected surpluses.” But then policymakers started spending those “surpluses” on tax cuts and spending increases. The budget controls that helped restore fiscal discipline in the 1990s expired in 2002. Since then, additional tax cuts and spending increases have occurred. The lack of discipline is reflected in the skyrocketing number of Congressional earmarks in appropriations bills. The additional costs associated with Iraq and Katrina don’t help, but they are only a fraction of our problem. Arguably the most fiscally irresponsible act of recent times was passage of the Medicare prescription drug bill in late 2003. That program has a price tag of over $8 trillion, digging both our Medicare and overall fiscal holes much deeper.

With regard to blame, I’m not in the finger-pointing business. I focus on stating the facts, speaking the truth, and helping others to see the way forward. I make it a point not to blame any particular person or party. In my view, for me to do so would be inappropriate and counterproductive. I often say this is a nonpartisan problem that cries out for a bipartisan solution.

Answer 4

It's a complex question and requires a complex solution.

Spend less is the first thing we need to do. There needs to be an overhaul of our entitlement programs. There is too much of people crossing the borders illegally, having a baby, and then expecting the government to provide for them for the rest of their and their kids lives. There are a lot of people, both legals and illegals that probably shouldn't be receiving entitlement programs. The system only works if everybody works, contributes to the GDP and puts money away, and then uses the entitlement programs when they are older and it's necessary.

After wasteful spending is cut, if tax increases where necessary, I think an across the board tax makes most sense.

Answer 5

Legalize drugs and spend less. The first thing will create such a boom in taxes that we won't need to any taxes and spending less will leave more of that money to go towards paying off national debt.

Answer 6

Combination of both,, We need to control gov, spending,
Its criminal how they waste money entrusted to there care,

If this happened just once in the past 50 years or 100 years
One could say oppps, But everyday everyear, this is just
flagrant abuse of the tax payer, No accountability, thats are
number one problem, tax increase in the area of auto liscense and auto tag with a certain amt going to the feds
would help a lot,, We have to many taxes as is,, dont really
want to see the wage earner lose bigger chunks out of payroll
deduction,

Answer 7

I don't think prefer is the right word for this question. We need to cut out unnecessary spending like the wars. $15 billion a month. We cannot afford it. It's a terrible investment for security. We are no better off. We need to spend on the things that will make a difference in the future such as education, etc. We need more jobs back in the U.S.
Vote for Dennis Kucinich. He will get people working. Jobs are scarce.

Answer 8

I am always in support of the government spending less and becoming less involved with our day to day lives. I don't see any benefit to giving more money to an extremely inefficient organization so they can waste that money too. I believe government should provide basic societal needs of protecting our lives, liberties and property and do so in an effective and responsible manner. This is rather simplistic but in a few short lines it gives you an idea of how I feel about things.

Answer 9

"Spend less" is of course the preferred option. This is a given.

Alas, I think our debt is so bad, we'll have to do more than that in the short term. Anyone who tries to preach otherwise is lying or trying to deny the severity of the situation. If you want to save the American economy from dangerous collapse, you have to address the debt now, and with more than just spending cuts.

I advocate a "autocracy" tax, where companies are forced to pay a tax whenever they import goods from countries that are not democratic, in particular goods from China and the Arab monarchies. On the flip side, massive tax credits to companies who sell domestic goods both here and abroad.

In short, companies that hurt our trade deficit, need to pay more, and companies that help our trade deficit need to pay less.

We also need a price cut on the wages of senators and congressmen, and we need a MASSIVE reduction of benefits, such as travel, office and staff expensive of our senators and congressmen. The greed, waste and spending in this area is disgusting. No more private free-flights for Nancy Pelosi! No more parachute jobs, for former Republican senators who shoe-horn in a bill for a German pharmaceudical company, and then is promptly handed a two-million dollar job for doing so.

We need stiff penalties for graft, pork and earmarks, especially when influenced by foreign lobbyists. The selling of tax-dollars to foreign governments has got to stop.

Everyone hates tax, but if we can trim the bureaucy, and build a tax structure that punishes foreign governments that abuse human rights, in order to profit on the American economy, we can turn this thing around.

That is, if we also stifle the pork-barrel politicians, and punish severely the power of foreign lobbyists, that influence the spending of our own tax dollars.

Answer 10

Spend less. One way or another, we, the people and our government have to work together to spend less. In fact, both the people and the government must learn to live within our means. We Americans borrow too much and credit comes to easily to us. Our credit troubles has already been eating us dangerously poor and, if we don't stop our cravings for instant gratification, we will be heading downhill fast.

Raise taxes, on the other hand, will slow down and has consistently shown to slow down any economy.