It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Solution for our debt,,All government employees including President take a 70% pay cut

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Title should say it all ,,and I do not mean a perminant one just temp,til our national debt is back to 0. This will give them an insentive to hurry up and get it under control.

Besides combining all CIA NSA FBI ICE and any others I might have missed into one group with less employees on the payroll,,and that would also help them all out in the long run,,Less communication issues.

Anyone else have a better solution?,,I would love to hear it.




posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 06:19 AM
link   
The president makes 450k per year on the books. Its the executives and CEOs that shoudl be taking a paycut. If there was no corporate greed, we could probably still get bags of potato chips for 10 cents



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   
I agree with raz. People elected into office don't make very much money to begin with. I would say that for many, their major income derives from other sources so cutting their pay would be little incentive to them.

There are two monetary black holes that I see in this country. Raz already named the CEO's and other corporate money grubbers. The other black hole is the military. I'm not against the military, but after serving in the Air Force I saw first hand the ridiculous amounts of money being spent. Just take 10% of that money and we could fund so many projects here in the States.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by rtcctr
 


No way. What about the little guy? I get my paycheck from the government. Why should I have to pay to bring the debt down but not you? There are many good people who work for the government that had no more fault than anyone else in our current debt crisis. We are just trying to get by, like everyone else.

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Solution for your debt take your mil bases out of Europe make us pay for our own defence and cut back your military spending by half, you'll still out spend all your likely enemies at that level and have a functioning first world standard of living.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by rtcctr
Solution for our debt,,All government employees including President take a 70% pay cut


Spoken like a true bureaucrat!


You do realize that across-the-board cost cutting and not the surgical elimination of expensive, non-performing programs is what got us here in the first place, don't you?

No, the answer requires vested bureaucrats to actually use their brains and to not play politics in reducing the budget through the total elimination of programs that are not absolutely necessary. For this reason, I don't hold out hope that we will ever get it under control.

Think of it like a cancer... You have to cut out all of the cancer cells totally. If you only cut portions of the cancer, the cancer grows again. You must keep the healthy cells intact and you must institute a lifestyle change in order to keep the healthy cells healthy.





[edit on 6/6/2010 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Ok I wasn't clear enough,

I meant higher-up government not the foot soldier, 450k is tooo much for anyone to make in a year I do not care who you are.Put a cap 300k for everyone in the US including exec,ceo's...to me that is still high...Oh thats right it would go against our rights..Like the government pays attention to them anymore.

Combining the alphabet forces into one, so we only need to arm and supply one specific force instead of who knows how many,they would all be one team, instead of the cia and fbi trying to do a raid on the same house, both for different reasons and neither knows the other is there.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   
I think you may be closing the barn door after the animals have exited the building.
All money issued, by definition, are debt instruments. It is quite impossible to have
zero debt utilizing our current monetary policy.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Yeah, let's fine the poor bastard who earns $11/hr handing out parking tickets and only pay him $4/hr from now on. You know how many people work for the government, and how many of those have NOTHING to do with the bailouts?? Even some people who earn a lot with the government had nothing to do with it. The head of transportation for example...I'm pretty sure he makes at least $200k/yr...but what does he have to do with the bailouts or the crisis?

Also, why would you wanna take money from those innocent people rather than get it from the real thieves, the bigshots on Wall Street?? THEY created the mess in the first place.

Yeah, the bailouts weren't a brilliant strategy, but if they hadn't paid up, a LOT more people would have lost their job. Fact is, the only thing that'll prevent such an incident in the future is TOUGHER REGULATION. Yes, MORE regulation in the financial sector. This isn't a matter of "OMGOMGOMG I don't like big government with all those regulations", it's a "clearly the financial institutions need to be more regulated or else they'll # us over again" case.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by MrXYZ]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Those high in the government are payed so much for a reason - so they will not be corrupt (at least in theory). We can argue if it is too much even then, but that money is just spare change for government anyway.

Military spending, bureaucracy and bailouts are where the wasting of money is.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   
How did CEO's get thrown into this mix?

My tax dollars do not go to pay their salary. I don't care how much they make, it does not effect my wallet.

I would start with a 25% reduction in government spending in EVERY department....education, military, welfare etc....if it gets government funding, it gets cut 25%. The money saved by this needed action would allow a small 1% increase every 2 years. (needed to adjust for the growing population)

Leave the private sector alone. YOU DO NOT contribute to their wealth. THEY EARN IT.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
I served in the military for 20 years and I also saw lots of waste. What needs to happen is end the wars and bring the troops home. Once that is done restrict all military travel and training to single base only. No travel. Then freeze spending and new projects. Do this for a year then resume for three years then do another year etc... After just a few cycles we could pay off our debt clear up social security and medicare problems.

The military would continue to enjoy a huge technological advantage and the reduced training and travel would not effect our ability to fight wars if done for only a year.

If you want to clean up the mess faster do a year on and year off cycle and also do as mentioned above and close 80% of our overseas bases.

Another possible option would be to have every other week be a down week where the military shuts down one week and back up the next. I am sure the troops could use the rest. Can you imagine how much money we would save if the military halfed its training flights and use of large military equipment like tanks, large trucks etc...?

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Xeven]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
How did CEO's get thrown into this mix?

My tax dollars do not go to pay their salary. I don't care how much they make, it does not effect my wallet.

I would start with a 25% reduction in government spending in EVERY department....education, military, welfare etc....if it gets government funding, it gets cut 25%. The money saved by this needed action would allow a small 1% increase every 2 years. (needed to adjust for the growing population)

Leave the private sector alone. YOU DO NOT contribute to their wealth. THEY EARN IT.



Yeah, and they earn it by getting 0% interest loans from the government like Goldman Sachs. And who gave the government that money...yeah, YOU DID. The companies are making money with YOUR money and are paying bonuses again with YOUR money.

At least with the government you get some return, may it be welfare, healthcare, "safety" from invasion, roads, etc...Goldman doesn't give you anything.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Bailouts are not created by private companies, they are created by big government trying to add to their already massive power. Big government loves control and will use any means necessary to obtain more of it.

If a private company cannot compete....the need to FAIL! PERIOD.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


Nope sorry It was created by a private corporation.

You can't take a public corporation that is broke and borrow more money, it does not work that way.

The money was created through bonds, just like the money before the bailouts was created.

They took the money gave it out under TARP and other programs. It has been borrowed against, and some of the loans paid back.

The treasury made like 36 Billion in 2009, the most since 1913.

www.foxnews.com...

There is a link to an article, I thought the numbers were bigger, I'll see if I can find the news article I originally saw.




[edit on 6-6-2010 by Quickfix]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Look, while I appreciate the sentiment and agree most government employees should be forced to take a pay cut, you obviously have no clue how far in debt we are.

They could cut every federal government employee's salary to ZERO and it would not come close to paying the yearly INTEREST on our yearly debt let alone begin to reduce it.

And even if we did eliminate all fed government workers - that spending cut would not be all net gain. All those unemployed workers need some kind of income, and would get welfare, commit crime, receive charity, drive down wages through increased competition - in some way they would be a drain on the economy.

Medicare and Social security is what has to be and will end up being eliminated - you better prepare for it.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


Bailouts are not created by private companies, they are created by big government trying to add to their already massive power. Big government loves control and will use any means necessary to obtain more of it.

If a private company cannot compete....the need to FAIL! PERIOD.


I agree, that if they aren't profitable, we need to let them fail. However, I think a lot of people who are against the bailouts don't realize what would have happened without those bailouts. Major banks and financial institutions would have failed, as they deserved to, but as a consequence, they would have dragged thousands of companies and millions more jobs down with them. It would have been the RIGHT way to let that happen and rebuild anew instead of fixing the issue only temporarily through bailouts...but a lot of people would have lost their job. The same people who are now complaining about the bailouts!

From an economic sense, letting them fail would have been the sane way to do it, and I 100% agree with that. But I'm also lucky enough to be able to live a couple of years without having to work...those who NEED income would have been screwed a lot more in the short/medium term than they are now.

It's a 2-edged sword. One one hand, if the government uses bailouts, people will complain that they spend this money for companies...on the other hand, if they don't bail those companies out, millions more will lose their jobs, and guess what, those people will blame the government for not having helped.

No matter what Washington would have done, people would still complain



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
if you think that this 70% pay cut will solve the countries debt problems you have a limited understanding of economics in the world,

if you wanna know the real debt of the country follow this simple formula:

R x K(H-4) - S + F = total debt of country


R=2
K=13
H=6
S= total number of US states
F= total money printed by the federal reserve

[edit on 6-6-2010 by tankthinker]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
It's pretty hard to get out of debt when you have a debt based currency. Each and every dollar that is issued, has interest attached to it. This means that the money we use to pay off our debt, only puts us into more debt. Really, the only winner here is our central banking system known as the Federal Reserve which is quasi-owned by the banks who do business with it. I will refer to the Federal Reserve System as the 'Bank' from here on out in this post.

It's just like borrowing money to make the minimum payments on your credit card, you only go into more debt and even if you borrowed enough to pay off the entire credit card, you would still be in debt from the new money loaned and this does not even take into account your living expenses.

If your living expenses exceed you income, then you need to borrow money to live. The US government is no different. For instance, we export far less than we import, creating a trade deficit. That trade deficit is paid for by borrowed money. So, not only do we need to borrow money in order to make minimum payments on our credit card, but we also need to borrow money to pay for our living expenses.

One source of income that the US government does have is tax revenue, however this revenue doesn't even begin to pay for the interest that is tacked onto each and every dollar that trickles down through the system that winds up being the money taxed.

In fact, the income tax was established in 1913 by the 16th Amendment of the US Constitution for the sole purpose of paying off the debt incurred by the issuance of currency through the Federal Reserve System. Basically what had happened, is that the Bank meandered our government into letting them turn Americans into wage-slaves by establishing a debt-based currency and forcing Americans to shoulder the burden for their profit.

What this all boils down to, is that we are in a pickle that we are not going to easily overcome. We no longer have our manufacturing base and while we technically have transitioned into a service-based economy, the reality is the we have a debt-based economy. We spend far more than we make and then on top of it all, we are going into debt by the mere process of issuing more money for basic necessities. Even if we capped our unnecessary spending, such as our empirical policies, we still do not produce enough to get our debt under control.

The bankers and elites are profiting from all of this while the average lay-person is shouldering the burden. We have nowhere to go but down and it will eventually crash, absolutely no doubt about it. This economy can not be sustained in any way, shape or form. It will crash but by then, the elites will have robbed us blind, plundering everything that we might have been worth, so it is no sweat off of their back. They are going to ride this ship to the end, before getting off and leaving us with the wreckage.

It really is that simple. We could cap all of the spending that we want but that will hardly do any good in the long run. This debt based monetary system is designed to profit the banks at the people's expense and the only way to sustain such a system, is to have a very good manufacturing base or at the very least, to produce more than we consume. Even if we produced more than we consume, it would be the people's labor that is used to pay off the interest attached to the debt based monetary system.

This should be outrageous to the people because such a system is only designed to profit the bankers. There is absolutely no need for a debt based monetary system. Article I, Section 8, Clause 5, of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall have the power "to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures". This is not what is happening. This task is being performed by an institution that is quasi-owned by a group of "for-profit" banks.

Just my 2 cents.

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by rtcctr
 


Why dont they make what the average median income is for whatever area they work in the amount they get paid? That makes way more sense.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by onequestion]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join