4 ms·

Hell, restore the exact tax code from the end of the Reagan presidency and call it the “Reagan was right bill”. It would still be a massive step towards a balan

Hell, restore the exact tax code from the end of the Reagan presidency and call it the “Reagan was right bill”. It would still be a massive step towards a balanced budget

dantheman 4y ago
Even better go the spending levels from back then.
- pibechorro 4y ago
  Ding ding.
- me_again 4y ago
  It's interesting to play out what it means in more detail. Try one of the many online 'balance the budget" games like https://us.abalancingact.com/2022-federal-budget https://us.abalancingact.com/2022-federal-budget . Total federal outlays in 1989 were $1,143,744M in today's dollars. That's less than is currently spent on Medicare and Medicaid, ignoring everything else in the budget. So you'll have to make some pretty substantial alterations.
  - tl 4y ago
    Your tool does not allow for classic federal tax rates. It caps in the high 30s claiming higher taxes "do not work" in spite of the fact tax rates were double that for decades.
    - me_again 4y ago
      Interesting, perhaps this isn't the best one. It's more the exercise of trying to tweak revenue and spending that I am recommending than this particular site. Otherwise people seem to imagine that the problem is much easier than it is.
- jeezfrk 4y ago
  what about his deficits?
mortehu 4y ago
A balanced budget also means freezing the amount of money held by the public. This is not a problem free situation.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  come on. Why is BNPL taking off? no-cost emi? why should regular folk be given free access to credit to buy groceries and shit? remember, the interest is charged, it just gets added to the cost so everything gets expensive. if only "essential" stuff like buying a home or a business got a loan, things would be much cheaper because overall there would be less interest to pay.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - mortehu 4y ago
    You are responding to a thread about federal budget balancing. This is not similar to balancing your own budget. If the federal government had no debt, the public would have no money.

Hell, restore the exact tax code from the end of the Reagan presidency and call it the “Reagan was right bill”. It would still be a massive step towards a balanced budget

dantheman 4y ago

Even better go the spending levels from back then.

pibechorro 4y ago
Ding ding.
me_again 4y ago
It's interesting to play out what it means in more detail. Try one of the many online 'balance the budget" games like https://us.abalancingact.com/2022-federal-budget https://us.abalancingact.com/2022-federal-budget . Total federal outlays in 1989 were $1,143,744M in today's dollars. That's less than is currently spent on Medicare and Medicaid, ignoring everything else in the budget. So you'll have to make some pretty substantial alterations.
- tl 4y ago
  Your tool does not allow for classic federal tax rates. It caps in the high 30s claiming higher taxes "do not work" in spite of the fact tax rates were double that for decades.
  - me_again 4y ago
    Interesting, perhaps this isn't the best one. It's more the exercise of trying to tweak revenue and spending that I am recommending than this particular site. Otherwise people seem to imagine that the problem is much easier than it is.
jeezfrk 4y ago
what about his deficits?

mortehu 4y ago

A balanced budget also means freezing the amount of money held by the public. This is not a problem free situation.

2Gkashmiri 4y ago
come on. Why is BNPL taking off? no-cost emi? why should regular folk be given free access to credit to buy groceries and shit? remember, the interest is charged, it just gets added to the cost so everything gets expensive. if only "essential" stuff like buying a home or a business got a loan, things would be much cheaper because overall there would be less interest to pay.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mortehu 4y ago
  You are responding to a thread about federal budget balancing. This is not similar to balancing your own budget. If the federal government had no debt, the public would have no money.