Paying off the national debt with rich people's money

[Gozie51]

The rich people won't clear the country's debt because some government won't allow that for certain reasons. They will feel that their government will be subject or under those rich who paid the debt.

However, there is a way that they should pay or support the country and that is by taxing. The proportional tax according to their earnings is what is appropriate but unfortunately, it is still the rich that evade tax payment. So how would they have the mindset to clear up national debts.

[Btcdeybodi]

I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved.

Funny, everyone is so self centered and cares only about their personal well-being and don't care about how the rest of the people in the society survives. One thing about most rich people is that they always want to feel that wealthy life vibes and they think that doing something for the betterment of a government is like wasting their money. I wonder how a country or a state which run into series of debts when there are wealthy men around that can jointly solve some of these economic problems and save their country from debts. All they only know is how to compete on who will be the wealthiest and nothing more to show for.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

According to what theory?

Progressive tax rates discourage effort and economic progress, while a tax flat incentivises the opposite.

Diminishing marginal utility of the dollar.
Taxing 30% a 20,000 income has a way bigger effect of taxing 30% a 100,000 income.

When I asked you about the theory, it was to point out that there is no single theory.

A flat tax usually includes a minimum exemption, let's see Estonia for example:

The tax-free minimum applies only to Estonian tax residents. Beginning from 1 January 2023 the overall tax-free minimum amount of up to 7848 euros per year or up to 654 euros per month will be applied to all types of income.

With the flat tax, the minimum exemption is applied, which is what is considered the minimum necessary to live on, and from that point onwards the same percentage is charged, regardless of the income and this exempt minimum has a much greater impact on those who earn 20,000 than on those who earn 100,000.

I turned down extra work because it meant paying 50% of what I was going to get in taxes as I would have exceeded the €60,000 per year threshold and for the effort and responsibility it was not worth it. With a flat tax of 20% I would have done it without hesitation.

If you want to keep the tax revenue constant, you should lower the tax rate for lower income, and raise it for higher income.

Constant? What I want is to be rewarded if I make more effort, not to be discouraged.

The rich people won't clear the country's debt because some government won't allow that for certain reasons.

More because the maths doesn't work, which you would have realised if you had read some of what I have written.

[avp2306]

According to what theory?

Progressive tax rates discourage effort and economic progress, while a tax flat incentivises the opposite.

Diminishing marginal utility of the dollar.
Taxing 30% a 20,000 income has a way bigger effect of taxing 30% a 100,000 income.
If you want to keep the tax revenue constant, you should lower the tax rate for lower income, and raise it for higher income.

but even if you have a 37% for rich and 10% for poor.. current tax law ignores the 37% because of the loopholes and infact becomes a 12% poor 2% rich

the 37% is not actually a number enforced so why even have it

This is a correlated but separate problem.
Taxes are a complicated system by design. Without intricate regulations, the State couldn't tax you even more because you made your Tax declaration wrong!
Ironically, tax systems are designed for the parasite that thrives in that system, not for the end user.

Unfortunately everything goes favor with rich people since they are the one who can manipulate the system. They will just pay good accountant to lower down the their taxes and some of them is willing to pay their intended obligation that's why this crazy things happening. There are greedy rich people doesn't want to lose a lot of money that's why they try to trick the system.

To bad for regular people because they always oblige to pay because they don't have any choice but to do it.

If someone says system is unfair, then you are right since most of the time it always favor to those rich people knows how to exploit this matter.

[Smartprofit]

The rising US national debt has been a subject of controversy over the past years. Recently, Trump proposed to raise the debt ceiling in a bid to avert a US government shutdown. This is surprising, considering that Trump's Republican Party is conservative. Elon Musk's D.O.G.E. has been in-charge of the government budget, slashing costs whenever possible. I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts?  

The answer to this question is quite simple. The US national debt is not a problem for the US. That is why rich people do not need to direct their capital to pay off this debt.

The US dollar is the world reserve currency. The US national debt is denominated in US dollars. It follows that the US government can pay off its national debt in whole or in part at any time. However, the US government does not do this because it does not consider the national debt a problem. Why pay off the national debt if the excess emission of US dollars will lead to hyperinflation?

No external creditor can collect the national debt from the US because the world economy is designed in such a way that any problems with the US dollar do not hit the US itself, but other peripheral countries.

Any economic crisis leads to the fact that the economy of these other peripheral countries collapses, while the US itself does not have any particular problems. This was the case in 1998 and in 2008.  The world economy is structured in such a way that no one is interested in having any problems with the US dollar or the US economy.

[fillippone]

If you want to keep the tax revenue constant, you should lower the tax rate for lower income, and raise it for higher income.

Constant? What I want is to be rewarded if I make more effort, not to be discouraged.
 

As you proposed, you are getting the same result with a tax levy. The average tax rate grows as the income grows: it’s zero if you earn within the tax exemption, and then the average tax rate grows as your income grows.
This means the tax rate is not flat.
This was also proposed in Italy, where the progressive nature of taxation is stated at the Constitutional level.

[Renampun]

The rising US national debt has been a subject of controversy over the past years. Recently, Trump proposed to raise the debt ceiling in a bid to avert a US government shutdown. This is surprising, considering that Trump's Republican Party is conservative. Elon Musk's D.O.G.E. has been in-charge of the government budget, slashing costs whenever possible. I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts? 

If we look at the ranking of the richest people in the world, Elon Musk is indeed the richest, but is it possible for him and other rich people to help the US pay off its national debt? It is truly impossible. The US national debt is very large and I once read in an article that the US debt was intentionally always there (but I don't know what it's for)

I will try to return your question to you, if you were a rich person, would you be willing if a few percent of the wealth you have collected was simply given to the government! Of course I am sure you would not be willing because you have no obligation to pay off the country's debt, you are not its hero, let all the debts be paid off together by the citizens.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

As you proposed, you are getting the same result with a tax levy. The average tax rate grows as the income grows: it’s zero if you earn within the tax exemption, and then the average tax rate grows as your income grows.

Not really. When you say it is growing, you mean the total. In other words, to simplify, if I have a country with a minimum exemption of $10,000 and a flat tax of 10% from then on, the person who earns $10,000 pays 0, the person who earns $20,000 pays 5% (on the total), and so on.

But compare that with the Spanish system:

Exempt, €5,500.
Incomes below above 5,500 and below 12,450 euros pay 19%.
Income above 12,450 euros and below 20,199 euros, pay 24%.
Those with an income of more than 20,200 euros and less than 35,199 euros pay 30%.
Persons with an income of more than 35,200 euros and less than 59,999 euros pay 37%.
Taxpayers with an income of more than 60,000 euros and less than 299,999 euros pay 45%.
Persons with an income of more than 300,000 euros pay 47%.

Now that seems progressive to me. Not having just a minimum and then the same rate no matter the income.

This means the tax rate is not flat.

It's almost flat. The more you earn the flatter it is.

This was also proposed in Italy, where the progressive nature of taxation is stated at the Constitutional level.

In Spain it is also in the Constitution but not in the essential part, so it could be changed without too much complication.

[fillippone]

In Spain it is also in the Constitution but not in the essential part, so it could be changed without too much complication.

I guess we agree on the main point though: our governments are not willing to lower taxes to stimulate economic activity, rather they want to raise them to pay for health, defence, stimulus. Those are the reason to raise the taxes.
The reality is that public expenditure goes to very inefficient ways of spending, and the point is always raising taxes, not curbing expenses.

[franky1]

As you proposed, you are getting the same result with a tax levy. The average tax rate grows as the income grows: it’s zero if you earn within the tax exemption, and then the average tax rate grows as your income grows.

Not really. When you say it is growing, you mean the total. In other words, to simplify, if I have a country with a minimum exemption of $10,000 and a flat tax of 10% from then on, the person who earns $10,000 pays 0, the person who earns $20,000 pays 5% (on the total), and so on.

there are other exemption things too.. like if you are on social security, or if your income is from a retirement IRA.

anyway by instead making everything a flat rate for all no exceptions no exemptions make things better and easier for all. and actually ensures the rich pay more then some silly nominal gesture amount to keep the IRS auditors away

for instance. its not actually going to cost low income people any more by removing any low end exemptions
 if someone works at a healthy 'living wage'(min wage) of $15/hr *40 *52 = 31200
of which 11600 is exempt. so ends up you pay 12% on 19600 = 2,352 which is 7.5% of 31200
most people then spend all their income which means they are later charged a 5% sales tax on pretty much everything they buy.
31200-2352=28,848spending money of which 5% would be $1,442.4 sales tax on the ~$28k
so thats 2352+1442 total tax on 31200 = 3,794.4 or 12.16%

so they are paying roughly 12% tax when everything balances out even on a rational minimum wage with exemptions.. so by just calling it a flat 12% just removes the complicated math crap the IRS tries to put people through

so simplify it.. everyone no matter what, pays 12% and thats it. no double dipping(income+sales) by treasury by charging separate taxes for different activity involving the same heap of money(same income of the same year) no other exceptions or exemptions which made calculating tax more difficult, which can lead to issues if people make mistakes.. so instead just a simple flat rate everyone pays with no if's or buts or hidden other taxes or loopholes

if you get $2400 a month living wage. simple 12% of = $288 owed that month.. no need to rush to calculate any exemptions or exceptions at year end
if you get $24,000 a month well paid wage. simple 12% of = $2880 owed that month.. no need to rush to calculate any exemptions or exceptions at year end

as the money comes in you know how much is for tax, no need to wait till end of year to work out how much you accumulated as a total to then break it up into thresholds.. and have to then file it quickly before deadlines.. you can instead work it out as you go through the year as it would be a flat rate for all, big or small

[kryptqnick]

Honestly, I don't believe that what Trump is doing falls well into US values, democracy, and either of its biggest parties.
But rich people contributing to pay the national debt is also surely not a Republican idea. That seems to presuppose applying some pressure or even adopting legislation to make the rich pay, and that is more left-leaning and socialism-leaning in particular, so no Republican can seriously go for it.
If it's about Elon and people like him just paying it off out of good will, it's not a win-win situation. It's a lot of money, and losing a lot of money likely means losing resources, losing power. Maybe gaining reputation, sure. But it's simply unnecessary for people like Musk, a risk there's no good reason to take.

[Josefjix]

Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts? 

Elon was asked about what makes him so rich, he response was that," people thought about his richness to be in his bank account but that's not true, he's richness is in the worth of the assets he has and not his bank account "

If you are expecting Elon to sell his assets to pay off the debt, then that wouldn't be that much easy, what would the society say if Elon sells his assets to pay off a debt that's not his. What's your thoughts?

[uneng]

Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts?  

It's all about measuring and calculating the cost-benefit involved here. If by paying most (if not all) of US debt guarantees Musk worthy benefits later, of course he would be willing to do that. The thing is, notice that he is only going to that if it's going to be rewarding for him later.

For some reason, it's not interesting to do that (at least yet), as he didn't propose it publicly. But who knows, maybe there is a strategy behind it. Maybe it's better to wait Trump's popularity to go down, so Musk can shine as the savior of America, and in counter part he is gifted with the keys of the most powerful potency in the world.

It's quite obvious Musk desires to control USA. But in order to do so, he has to make the average citizen to believe he is a benefactor who shares his fortune, technology and intelligence with the world, because he is a good guy.

[asriloni]

As Elon stated above, US was sending so much money to almost all of countries. It's strange when you're now asking why elites didn't help US to pay the debt.

In fact, elites also contributed a lot in paying tax, providing jobs, building manufacture, etc. It's all going to the country's income, which also being used to pay their debt. How can you force them to pay country's debt? It will only make congress to crazily spending more. 

[fillippone]

As Elon stated above, US was sending so much money to almost all of countries. It's strange when you're now asking why elites didn't help US to pay the debt.

In fact, elites also contributed a lot in paying tax, providing jobs, building manufacture, etc. It's all going to the country's income, which also being used to pay their debt. How can you force them to pay country's debt? It will only make congress to crazily spending more. 

The US is actually profiting by sending their "money" abroad.
Until someone buys their debt (Tether included), they can keep printing a ridiculous amount of money out of thin air.
The problem arises when buyers don't want to own dollars anymore, maybe because they are starting to hoard gold or, maybe , bitcoin.

[Cryptohygenic]

I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

The rich are only regarded when they are amidst the poor and they are influential in the societies when there is no one to challenge them especially when they sees their worth being higher than the entire masses worths.
They enjoys to see the economy fall on inflation while the nation stumbles for survival having hope on one man for rescue.
People like Elon Musk has achieved everything wealthy on earth and I don't know what else he would be in need of again, yes no amount of money can not be enough for a man but that net worth of Elon Musk is Worth more than enough to sustain for a life that.
On that, I have also wondered why he can no just play that record breaking of clearing the national debt of the US. I am sure that particularly would set him upon a legendary in the history of the world. He has the possessions so I also wonder why he can't just set the nation a free debt.

[philipma1957]

The rising US national debt has been a subject of controversy over the past years. Recently, Trump proposed to raise the debt ceiling in a bid to avert a US government shutdown. This is surprising, considering that Trump's Republican Party is conservative. Elon Musk's D.O.G.E. has been in-charge of the government budget, slashing costs whenever possible. I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts? 

are you really that naive.

The USA is turning into 1890s robber barons.

They will make russian oligarchs look poor.

the musky trumpeter will be fully crushing out the middle class in the next year or so.

I went out and grabbed Trump coin as a hedge in case all of the above is really true.

[coupable]

I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts? 

The idea cannot be realistic, assuming the wealthy will simply pay off the country's debts without any compensation. No one is patriotic enough to give up their wealth to fix the damage done by corrupt policies, and this cannot be imposed on them, no matter how dire the situation.
The only practical proposal is for the country to borrow from the wealthy and ask them to contribute to resolving the crisis by extending the loan term as much as possible at favorable interest rates. In return, the state would provide them with tax breaks and business facilitations, as permitted by law, to prevent the process from turning into a bargain.

[Accardo]

but however if they sold out all the 1 million cards then there population will highly increased than the way it is, as such making them to limit or suspended issuance of residents for sometime till it gets balanced.

1 million people won't make much difference to a nation with a population of 346 million, considering the strict border control happening in the USA, lesser immigrants will come into the country.

However since is money they need can't they borrow money as most countries usually do to solve there problems?, because United States is a big nation that every country will be happy to give them loan.

The government is doing this to pay off the country's debts that sits at about $35.8trillion, as of January, so relying on borrowing money isn't a top priority

[philipma1957]

I've wondered why wouldn't rich people (wealthy/Elite class) make their contribution to pay off the debt? If they did, all of the US' economic problems would be solved. Don't you think? So what's holding them back? Elon Musk is already the richest man in the world. If he pays most (if not all) of the debt, wouldn't that make him a "hero"? A win-win for both the government and Elon himself, imo.

Thoughts?  

The idea cannot be realistic, assuming the wealthy will simply pay off the country's debts without any compensation. No one is patriotic enough to give up their wealth to fix the damage done by corrupt policies, and this cannot be imposed on them, no matter how dire the situation.
The only practical proposal is for the country to borrow from the wealthy and ask them to contribute to resolving the crisis by extending the loan term as much as possible at favorable interest rates. In return, the state would provide them with tax breaks and business facilitations, as permitted by law, to prevent the process from turning into a bargain.

You know the rich in the USA paid solid taxes until 1960s or 1970s

And since the rich stopped paying high taxes the debt mooned.

So trump needs to turn on the rich and tax them like they used to be taxe.

Problem solved.

https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1960

1960 91% tax on the rich



https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1965

1965 70% tax on the rich


https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1985

1980 50% tax on the rich


https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1990

1990 31% tax on the rich


And you wonder why usa is in debt


https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/2000

2000 39% tax on the rich and they balanced yearly budget

https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/2005

2005 35% tax we went back in the yearly hole again



USA needs 42% rate on the rich for a few years along with crushing illegal aliens.

We are at 37% so 5% more on all people over 400k income would lower debt