Author Topic: A Budget Simulation  (Read 1181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mythbuster43

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
  • Gender: Male
    • Northwest View
A Budget Simulation
« on: October 02, 2013, 02:57:41 am »
http://crfb.org/stabilizethedebt/

I found this interesting website via Ed Brayton's blog at Freethoughtblogs. They explain what is obvious to anyone who is paying attention, that we need to do something about our debt. The goal of the simulation is to get the debt down to 60% of GDP by 2021. I was able to get it down to 50% by 2020.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: A Budget Simulation
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2013, 08:21:35 am »
The US definitely does need to do something about public debt. The US needs to increase it, substantially. Use the proceeds to pay it off over the medium run.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline mythbuster43

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 467
  • Gender: Male
    • Northwest View
Re: A Budget Simulation
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2013, 09:19:44 am »
I was willing to make a few cuts in some Food Stamp spending, not hugely like the Republicans, but some. I agreed with increasing the retirement age to 68. I selected that we take several cuts from our military budget. I advocated tax increases on the wealthy income brackets, including taxing of "fringe benefits." I also supported cap-and-trade, and a 5.6% Surtax on those with income exceeding one million. I suggested reforming federal retiree benefits, reforming Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac, and reducing farm subsidies. That's how I got it down to 50% GDP by 2020.

I'm going to ignore the suggestion that public debt needs to increase substantially, because frankly, that's almost as loony as anything the Tea Party advocates.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: A Budget Simulation
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2013, 09:30:33 am »
I'm going to ignore the suggestion that public debt needs to increase substantially, because frankly, that's almost as loony as anything the Tea Party advocates.

It's the position held by almost all serious economists.

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/i-dont-think-this-is-the-best-way-to-put-it.html

Edit: I actually wanted this, as a representative readable example

http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/why-multiplier-doesnt-matter.html

Also:

http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/01/is-debt-burden-on-future-generations.html
« Last Edit: October 02, 2013, 09:35:20 am by Lt. Fred »
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: A Budget Simulation
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2013, 06:00:19 pm »
I got it down to 53% by 2020.

Fred's article leads to an important point about government owned capital; infrastructure. Without upgraded and properly maintained infrastructure, economies stagnate and wither. In the real estate trade, it's known as the "broken window effect", where deteriorating properties lower the over-all market value in a given area. In the huge scale, shitty roads, falling bridges, crumbling ports, inefficient electrical grids, and also, lately, the lack of reliable, affordable broadband internet slows and impedes production and distribution of goods and services, dampens consumer spending, lowers sales, increases unemployment, increases crime, shrinks the tax base, etc. in a downward spiral.


It's also important to remember that conservatives are dead wrong that taxation is money wasted. No. Tax money gets recirculated back into the private sector just like private money, and is an important energy source in driving economies. Only when autocrats hoard the money are taxes wasted. The US federal governments' purchases and contracts are worth a huge chunk of the GDP, as is the case for nearly all national governments around the world.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Art Vandelay

  • Guest
Re: A Budget Simulation
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2013, 01:14:24 am »
I'm going to ignore the suggestion that public debt needs to increase substantially, because frankly, that's almost as loony as anything the Tea Party advocates.
Not really. Running a surplus during a recession is one of the worst things the government can do. It costs far more overall due to artificially lengthening the recovery time of the entire economy.