Debt Payback Plan

An equitable and fair solution to the national debt issue.

Currently the National debt per citizen is equal to $56,634 and climbing, www.usdebtclock.org. This includes men, women, and children. Unfortunately is does not include illegal residents.  Every single living, breathing person in this country owes a whole lot of money that eventually must be paid back. But we keep on spending and borrowing to pay for our spending, this is a problem that will not go away. But I do see a solution on how to bring down the national debt.

The first step is, of course, to stop the profligate spending. We need a balanced budget, no more borrowing to pay for things we cannot afford. And I am not talking about cutting the "growth of spending" for the future and calling it a tax cut. We deserve a balanced budget, we demand a government that is responsible with the taxes we give them.  It is estimated that over $850B per year is channeled through the welfare system, this is larger than the GNP of some countries, and unsustainable.  So step #1 is a Balanced Budget, and make in an Amendment to the Constitution, so it will be harder to ignore.

The second step is to devise a fair way of paying off the debt we have already accrued, which stands at $18T, as of this writing.  The only fair way to do it is to make everyone, including non-citizens, pay back their portion of the debt, the $56,634 mentioned earlier.  I know that sounds harsh but here is how we do it.

1. We are not unfair misogynists, we do realize that there are some people who cannot work to pay off their portion, but there will be only a few exemptions. My list includes anyone under 18 (until they turn 18 and then they begin paying back), anyone who is not physically capable of meeting their own basic care needs, elderly, infirmed, those confined to wheel chairs, and the severely mentally handicapped.  I believe everyone else needs to provide some measure of work to pay back their debt.  The majority can do something, even if it is just a couple hours a day washing dishes or greeting people at the door. Even a paraplegic can use a grabber to pick up trash along the roadside or in parks.

All the taxes they pay into the system go to decreasing the debt. This will require many years of hard work and labor for most Americans, including the illegals.

2.  So the second step is to inform all residents, citizens, resident aliens and illegals that they will be required to take part in paying back the national debt. As a condition of living and working here in the United States, you and your family assume responsibility for the debt that has accrued.  I can almost guarantee a mass exodus of people from the country if this would be included in any Amnesty law.  All the Muslims that have found refugee status here will also not be exempt. If our money is good enough to pay for your daily expenses, then you will be required to invest in the future of the country.

3. The fair part comes in now, because everyone will have their previous contributions to the tax base considered as paying their share of the debt.  So the senior citizen that paid into the system their whole life, will have their taxes for their whole life deducted from the debt they owe. This will mean that most will have already paid their portion off, leaving them debt-free to live out the rest of their lives.  For decades the Social Security Trust Fund has been used as a slush fund for increased spending, and not set aside, as it was established, for the funding of the Social Security Program. This means that most of the people who have paid into the fund over the years will see nothing for their contribution to the Trust Fund. Unfair instance #1.

For decades the hard working American laborer has paid their taxes, and taken little, or nothing, in benefits out, and will still be straddled with the huge debt our citizens owe. Unfair Instance #2. And if you were to include as their contributions the taxes they have paid into the system, their debt would be paid off or almost paid off.

Let me lay this out with an example:  A family of 4 will have a debt of  $226,536 ( almost a quarter of a million dollars).  The children under 18 will not have their income included because their debt will be paid off after they turn 18 so $113,268 will be their current obligation.  With a household income at the median income $52,250 (www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us) and a tax rate of approximately 25% (www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/10/31/irs-announces-2014-tax-brackets-standard-deduction-amounts-and-more)  would pay $13,000 into the government per year. Meaning they would have their debt paid off in less than 10 years.

 This does however leave a rather sizable portion of the population that will owe a great deal of taxes and will need to find ways to pay that debt back. Those with a larger family will have more debt to pay back. Those who have not made any contributions to the system will have a larger burden to pay back. 

Before you think the rich are getting off, after all they have paid into the tax base for decades, in exceedingly larger amounts over the years, so their portion of the debt could already be considered to be paid back. But we will still have a government to run, the taxes the rich pay into the system will be used to contribute to the current running of the system. But remember we will have a Balance Budget and the only funding available for the running of the government will be the money the rich will be paying into the system going into the future.  That of course means the budget will be much lower than it is today, because the available tax base will be smaller as the majority will be paying into the system to pay back the national debt.

I know this will mean that the poor will have to find a job and start paying taxes. This is not heartless, as some may contend, this is what is right and fair for the whole population, we have subsidized the poor for decades and the problem has not gotten any better, in fact, we have grown the population that contribute nothing and receive assistance from the government. The time to pay back is upon us, we can no longer afford to borrow against our future.

Does government aid increase bigotry?

Many people believe that because we claim to live in a Christian nation, then the government should be responsible for tending to the poor.  Is this really what Jesus meant when he said we need to "care for the least of these?"

Lets start by defining the least of these. Who could we classify at the least among us? For many the poor would be considered, and indeed Jesus did speak about the poor much (see Luke 11:41; Mark 14:7; Luke 6:20) but were there others that could be considered "least" among us? (Matthew 11:11; 1 Cor 15:9; Luke 9:48) It would seem to mean anyone who does not have a leadership role, for many that would include more than just the poor, the in-firmed, the down-trodden. Our American definition includes anyone who cannot take care of themselves, the disabled, the mentally handicapped, fatherless, widows, elderly and unemployed.

But is sending these people to a government agency really "caring" for them?  Or did Jesus mean something else when He commanded us to "care" for them?  Caring, by definition includes, "to watch over; be responsible for" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/caring?s=t. This means that we are to be personally involved in caring for them. We have instead set up a system of cold, sterile, and unfeeling agencies that the "least" among us must traverse; usually without assistance by the people who make a big deal about caring for them. But does sending them to the government release us from our personal responsibility to care for them?

For many people, raising taxes to set up government agencies to assist the poor is the only responsibility they feel to them. "I pay taxes that go to the poor, so I don't have to do anything else," has become an unfortunate reality in our world.  We feel good about ourselves because the fatherless are not hungry, the disabled get health care, the elderly are not left alone, and the unemployed are not starving. But is this really caring for them? Or is this simply removing them from our hearts? Do we feel personally responsible, or do we just want to get rid of them?

Are we telling them, "Here is your money, now get out of my sight." Instead of feeding them from our own table, we send them to the nearest food pantry or shelter. Instead of offering to see to the upbringing of the fatherless children we send them to daycare and let the gangs raise them. Instead of bringing them into our homes, we send them to the overcrowded shelters. Instead of giving them a job, we give them some money and send them out to find something themselves. Removing the personal responsibility of caring for the "least of these" and instead pushing them away into a cold unfeeling government maze only increases our own bigotry.

We feel that because we pay our taxes we have done our good deed for them. But instead the process that has been put in place actually makes them feel unattached from society, entitled to what they did not earn, and ungrateful. And who can blame them for being ungrateful when those who claim to "care" about them are so unempathetic towards them? The unfortunate side effect of our so called "Christian" government aid system is less compassion and actually more bigotry.

Martial Law is already in America

Voices without a vote

This is who will win or lose by our actions, they have a right to be heard.

We need American jobs

If only more people in DC would think like this, maybe we can begin cleaning up the mess the previous scoundrels made for us.

This is not about right or left, this is not about Democrat or Republican, this is about America. The TEA Party is about America!

Don't you find it ridiculous that it takes so many pages to define what a authorized borrower is? And that is only the tip of the iceberg. There are so many layers of regulation placed on our job creators, its no wonder they move over seas. In fact our jobs czar, Jeffrey Immelt has decided to move GE out of Wisconsin, and move to China.  And Obama accuses Romney of outsourcing.

Watch the speech again. That is what true bi-partisanship looks like.

Post Recall Thoughts

A few things to consider now that the will of the people has prevailed.

I know the lefties think they are speaking for the people, but the voters have now had their say, and have given the state a mandate. Despite your desperate screams, it is still OUR HOUSE! And this is exactly what Democracy looks like, the majority rules!  You basically got your wish, so please learn some restraint, it just so happens the majority believes differently than you.

1. Leftists love to demonize their opponent, calling them every name in the book. We are NOT demonic, we are just like you, trying to not run out of money before running out of month. We have taxes to pay, car payments, mortgage payments/rent,  and utilities payment. We are the middle class, and we are not dumb hicks or yokels, many of us have more education than the elite. For you to pretend that we are somehow too unsophisticated to understand how you think things should work is not making you look all that good anymore.
2.  We do NOT want "dirty air and dirty water", we are just as much concerned with the environment as you. We are more concerned with not allowing thousands of people to starve to death than about whether a moose might have to change his mating habits. We have different priorities, saving the world means taking care of our people, not worrying about whether the atmosphere will get heated up by 1 billionth of a degree by my light bulb.
3.  You do NOT care about the poor and down trodden any more than we do. Just do some research on who (conservative or progressive) gives more charitable donations before you try to brow beat us with your compassion (or something). I also do NOT understand why it is acceptable to allow violence in the inner city neighborhoods and think that somehow you are being non-judgmental by giving them stuff like free cell phones? Let's not deal with the violence issue, lets just give them more stuff.  How is giving a fish a day more compassionate than getting them jobs and teaching them how to fish to sustain themselves?
4.  We have NOT been lied to by big corporations, we have not been bought by the Koch brothers. We think for ourselves and know that spending money we don't have is not fiscally responsible. No we did not balance the budget on the backs of the middle class, the Doyle budget was already destroying the middle class. We want responsible spending, not austerity measures (which will happen if spending isn't gotten under control).
5.  We are NOT terrorists for not allowing the President to raise the debt ceiling, we are not Nazis for taking control over corrupt unions,  and we are not fascists for cleaning up the fraud, waste and abuse in government.
6.  Death threats are illegal, and we are NOT afraid to stand up to bullies (Mitt Romney is NOT a bully, nor is Scott Walker). Scott Walker stood up to the union thugs and we had his back. Recall that!
7.  Voter ID is NOT suppression, and the investigation into Eric Holder is not a witch hunt because he is trying to stop Voter ID. The election process is a sacred trust, and by not allowing the people to ensure its purity is nothing short of criminal.  There is no concerted effort to disenfranchise anyone (except the dead), in fact, voter ID will have the opposite effect by making sure that everyone is allowed only one vote.
8.  There is NO conservative "war on women". Where in the world did you get this ludicrous idea? Birth control/abortion is not a right (I will change my mind if you can find those words in the Constitution). We are not anti-abortion...we are pro-life.  We have been accused of caring only for the baby, but guess what, again, you are completely wrong; we care about both parties, mother and baby, we just don't think taking the life of either is acceptable.
9.  If you have voluntarily become a dependent on government, don't complain when they change what they decide to give you. It is NOT your money to begin with, it is not owed to you for any reason, and taxpayers like a little thanks from time to time. Just because you want free health care, doesn't mean it is free. Somebody has to pay for it, and if it is not you......then who?
10. Justice ceases to be justice when it is NOT applied blindly and equally. Forcing every newly passed piece of legislation through the courts is not justice. And refusing to acknowledge the wrong doing of one party and blindly hate the other party for doing the same things is not just. Either stop pointing fingers or start holding your own party to the same standard.
11. Wall Street is NOT the problem, overreaching government is the problem. We do not need more government, even if that government seems to be compassionate. Prohibition didn't work with alcohol, what makes you think it will work with soda?  We will keep our laws off your body if you keep your laws off my Smith and Wesson.
12.  If you believe that companies need to be forced to provide benefits to their employees, and that employees need to unionize to get respect from their managers, you are most likely a Walker hater. But if you think that business owners are also humans and that they already respect their employees; if you think employers bargain for a fair wage through negotiations with each employee, and if you think the free market is the answer to today's economy , then you probably stand with Walker . The free market does work, it just needs to be unhindered by all the government regulations that are supposedly for the benefit of society.

On a more personal note, I understand that the poor tend to live in run down neighborhoods, and can't afford to fix up their homes, but do you have to do further damage? Do you think that by vandalizing and destroying your own stuff will make us want to give you more? I do not get it, you demand we take care of you and give you everything you want and then you trash what was given to you, do you really think we want to keep giving you more? Oh and statistically, the poor in America are the richest poor in the world, in some countries you would be on par with their middle class.  Maybe be a little appreciative from time to time.

Epiphany

I have just realized that I have a VERY big heart. I heard a woman on the radio saying she has gone through some horrible things in her life and it has softened her heart, and she has a soft spot for the poor, and the underprivileged. She claims that she has more concern and feels worse than anyone else for these poor people. I disagree with her. I don't think she cares more for people than I do.

For example:

I feel horrible for the Amish farmer in Wisconsin who had his farm raided by the FDA and may lose his farm and his livelihood because some government agency decided that the product he sells is not approved. http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/wisconsin-judge-rules-against-raw-milk-farmers/ And the organic farmers whose meal was destroyed by health inspectors. http://www.adistinctiveworld.net/?p=6091

I feel horrible for the elderly on Medicare whose benefits will be cut to pay for Obamacare. http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/04/hhs-secretary-sebelius-admits-to-double-counting-in-obamacare-budget/

I feel horrible for the veterans whose Tri-care benefits will be cut. http://www.cnjonline.com/articles/tricare-45618-prime-john.html

I feel horrible for the senior citizen who was made to remove her Depends to get through airport security. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tsa_checks_grandma_depends_oDXrPMOaC4ZAiXKGEtKXsJ

I feel horrible for the young mother whose daughter was told her children's lunch didn't meet the government standards. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2101354/Food-police-reject-preschoolers-homemade-lunch--favour-chicken-nuggets.html

I feel horrible for patients who are told by their government insurer that a medication that could save their lives will not be covered. http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/medicare-coverage-for-breast-cancer-drug-ends-in-some-states/

I feel horrible for the Marine who was arrested because he wanted to know where to store his gun when he was in the Empire State Building. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/marines-rallying-around-former-pfc-arrested-for-trying-to-check-gun-at-empire-state-building/

And then had his named dragged through the mud by the liberal media. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/nyregion/ex-marine-facing-gun-charge-had-bad-record-manhattan-prosecutor-says.html

I feel horrible for the teachers who win awards for excellence and then are laid off because the unions have to protect the tenured teachers. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2009/10/honored_in_february_sacked_in.html

I feel horrible for the parents who are told their school district cannot fire a teacher for surfing porn on the web while at the school, on school computers because he is in the union. http://m.host.madison.com/mobile/article_a47a943e-6309-11e1-be00-001871e3ce6c.html

I feel horrible for the people of WI who saw the State Capitol building ransacked and broken into. http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_260247e0-4ac4-11e0-bfa9-001cc4c03286.html

I feel horrible for the teachers who took a political stand for reform and then was threatened by the unions. http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/134517958.html

I feel horrible for the young girls and boys who try to sell lemonade outside their homes only to be told they need to spend hundreds of dollars to get a permit before they can continue. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/08/02/iowa-police-shut-down-4-year-olds-lemonade-stand/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/08/03/the-inexplicable-war-on-lemonade-stands/

I feel horrible for the property owners who are badgered to give up their properties for pennies on the dollar to make room for development. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20060108/NEWS01/601080395/Eminent-domain-case-goes-court

Or just told they cannot live on their properties period. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw3RiMdS7sE

I feel horrible for the women who take an unpopular stand on issues and have all kinds of unspeakable labels attached to them. http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/05/the-lefts-respect-for-women-a-look-back/

I have a VERY big heart. I cannot stand to see the citizens of this country treated like criminals in the airports, like interlopers on their own property, like morons who cannot take care of their own kids, like greedy back-water hicks who don't pay enough taxes, like ignorant rednecks because they attend church and carry a gun. The responsible citizens are called bitches and sluts because those good citizens have values.

I have enormous amounts of compassion for all the regular folks who just want to go to work, raise their kids, sell their goods, live on their land, want to pay for their health care, who deserve respect for serving this country, and who do a good job. I hate to see them being defamed and denigrated for being the kind of Americans they have always been. I feel for the rugged individualist, I feel for the proud mom, I feel for the military veteran, I feel for the cancer patient, I feel for the farmers, I feel for the down-trodden, I feel for the abused, I feel for the neglected.

I don't believe the progressives when they call me a racist, bigoted, homo-phobe who wants to throw old people off a cliff, who wants dirty air and dirty water, who wants fat kids, who hates immigrants, who wants women to be bare-foot and pregnant. Because I have a big heart. I have way more compassion for the little people who are being trampled by government intrusion, than you. So don't tell me I don't care, it is you who really doesn't care.

Righteous Anger, not Guilt

A New York Time article has come out with the assumption that critics of the safety net feel guilty about using government assistance but are helpless to live without it. "Many people say they are angry because the government is wasting money and giving money to people who do not deserve it. But more than that, they say they want to reduce the role of government in their own lives. They are frustrated that they need help, feel guilty for taking it and resent the government for providing it. They say they want less help for themselves; less help in caring for relatives; less assistance when they reach old age." NY times, Even Critics of Safety Net Increasingly Depend on it, 02/11/2012.

So the New York Times claims that people who accept government help are helpless to not accept government assistance, and when they find that it is not easy, they give up and feel guilty. Those guilty feelings lead to animosity to the government and anger over not being able to make it on their own without government assistance. That is their claim. May I submit a different conclusion.

The middle class has seen massive intrusions into their lives by government, and unsustainable drains placed on their incomes; their anger towards the government is not from feelings of guilt but actual anger that their means of survival have been abrogated by the same government. For, you see, the same government that promises to keep your way of life status-quo is the same government that is robbing you blind and making your ability to maintain the status-quo impossible on your own. I do not feel guilty that I cannot make it on my own, I feel anger that the government has intruded so far into my life that they have made it impossible to make it on my own.

I spent a very long and hard fought battle a couple of decades ago in getting off the welfare roles, it was the hardest thing I have ever had to do. But I do not accept a dime of government money now, I make do with what I have. Sure that means that I don't own my own home, I drive a car with almost 200,000 miles on it (without a lien), we don't eat at fancy restaurants, or take extravagant vacations.

BUT........ I am doing it all on my own. There is a sense of extreme pride in knowing that the American Dream can still be achieved. My oldest daughter has a college degree and is currently working on her masters. I also have the pride in knowing my daughter's life will be better than my own. With a good deal of will power and a little sacrifice, the American Dream is still possible, but it is getting harder and harder to attain, due to government intrusion, not from lack of determination or American Spirit (as the progressives would like to propose).

I don't need the New York Times to tell me that if I just accept the governments help, I could have the American Dream. They have no idea what the American Dream really is. It is not all the trappings that prosperity brings, it is self-determination and pride in doing for oneself. And we do not feel guilty because it is seemingly out-of-reach without governmental assistance. We are angry that the government takes it from us with empty promises of good things that they have no intention of ever delivering on. That is why we are angry.

"One of the oldest criticisms of democracy is that the people will inevitably drain the treasury by demanding more spending than taxes. The theory is that citizens who get more than they pay for will vote for politicians who promise to increase spending."

That is what Obama is banking on. He wants the middle class to feel obligated, not outraged. I am not falling for it, I have been there and I am not going back. I would rather starve than give the progressives the satisfaction of making me dependent again.

Producers vs Dependents

Breitbart.tv » Study: Distrust Of Government A Mental Disorder

After watching the video a thought came to me. The majority of the population would qualify for this classification and would need to be quarantined. Because we all know that, with the presidents approval numbers being so low and his disapproval number being so high, a majority of Americans do not approve of this government, the majority do not trust this government, and the majority are pretty vocal in their dissent. So adding up the numbers we would arrive at the conclusion that a large percentage of the population would qualify for quarantine.

"Houston, I think we have a problem".

Taking into account the fact that approximately 53% of the population is paying for the other 47%, a very large and disastrous problem. Now I know that not all the productive members of society would call themselves conservative, but in order to "infirm" the anti-government types, would mean taking out a huge percentage of the productive population. Remember we are needed right now to feed and clothe and take care of the 47% who cannot take care of themselves and who rely on the forcible re-distribution of wealth from producers to dependents.

Okay so now Big Brother has figured out a way of removing the thorn from his side by "committing" his enemies (Obama's term) to re-education facilities. But they will also be removing the productive members of society. Is this just short-sighted of them? A few questions for you Mr president:

Who will feed, clothe, shelter and take care of the needs of the dependent class after you remove the productive class and quarantine them for re-education?

Do you really think the OWS crowd will willingly take the jobs that have been left behind? They will be the jobs that they have previously turned their progressive noses up at because they were beneath them. So the country will have an even bigger problem than they have right now. I wonder if they have really thought this through.

Are you going to force people to work at menial jobs?

Are you going to treat them as you have treated us conservatives?

How long will the labor unions last when there is nobody to pay for their exorbitant demands? How long will the country last when there is nobody producing?

Can the government who has fawned all over the dependent class, and promised them everything at no cost, actually make them produce?

This is a nightmare waiting to be awaken from. WAKE UP! (not working)

Just food for thought!