Posted on 04/03/2016 2:28:33 PM PDT by drewh
fuggitaboutit, I understood you perfectly as would any other serious, well-intended person.
Not on the headline topic of selling assets, but I hate the way they drop in these “expert opinions:
[The article noted that most economists would consider Trump’s proposal impossible, as it could require slashing the annual federal budget by more than half.
Glenn Kessler, who writes the Post’s Fact Checker column, deemed the plan “nonsensical” and gave it “Four Pinocchios.” Kessler assessed that even if Trump were to eliminate every government function and shut down every Cabinet agency, he would still be short $16 trillion.
“We regret we have only Four Pinocchios to give for this whopper,” Kessler said. “Trump is insulting the intelligence of Americans for making such a claim in the first place.” ]
This seems to say that eliminating “every government function” for EIGHT YEARS would only save $3T, or less than $400B/yr. I guess simple math is not a skill owned by this “fact checker”. He is only off by a factor of TEN, after all, since eliminating ALL government functions would be be $32T over 8 years.
Two TOTALLY different issues and Trump has repeatedly attacked wasteful, unnecessary spending.
And being a developer he is an EXPERT on such.
Politicians have on one response to a problem and that is to throw more of YOUR money at it.
Pretending that CURRENT spending and the CURRENT debt are related is either ignorant or deceptive, your choice.
I am not really a Trump basher. I treat just about all politicians with the same contempt.
We the people own the property. It is up to we the people to consent.
A little thing called the Constitution might get in the way.
With Reid selling Nevada to China, I guess I just get skeptical.
I remember when I was a youngster, this argument made an impression on me when the libertarian candidate said it. I heard him on a radio show.
It seemed like a good idea.
Its silly, though, as an answer to the deficit.
Wow.That’s idiotic
The Federal Reserve is actually owned by the largest banks. The idea I had was “free ride over, bud”. The government bonds owned by the banks are immediately transferred to our countries social security recipients and the banks get to amortize that transfer of capital over the course of 10-20 years. The people getting social security get the PV of their monthly payments in bonds and can either sell a percentage of them every year or live off the interest or a combination. That takes a huge chunk out of the national debt right there.
I thought he was opposed to giving it back to the states.
Maybe we could sell California.
Not true - purchasers well understand the laws of any country are paramount and not to be evaded.
You are not very perceptive if you haven’t understand that regulations are another of Donald’s major targets
This is an excellent time to implement such an idea because we are watching Europe destroy itself and anyone with any sense is going to flee the invasion. They will bring their money with them and would be welcome.
His comment in one of the last debates that he wanted to get rid of the EPA was surprisingly ignored. He won’t be able to do that but can circumscribe its power in many ways AND HE WILL.
But the comment CLEARLY obviates your concern.
I agree with you on this point.
I am not sure which interview you are referring to, but the one I posted to someone else, CLEARLY had trump saying he feared the states would sell them to private enterprise, and he at that time ( four weeks ago) disagreed with that notion, and supported the federal government being a better steward of the land than private enterprise.
And that was why I was so glad he switched positions and is now supporting this cause that cruz and several republicans have proposed years before.
Actually it is a brilliant idea as for the deficit. Especially if linked to debt swap.
I outlined the dynamics of this earlier:
Let’s pretend that one method of doing this is to trade land for bonds. What would be the impact?
1- a scramble for bonds to swap;
2 - an increase in the value of those bonds producing;
3- a decline in the interest rate producing;
4 - more economic activity producing;
5- more taxes from that activity and
6- more JOBS from the projects undertaken on that land.
Now lets watch as Cruz stumbles around looking for any dumbassed way of attacking this great idea.
Sell what assets? The contents of the Smithsonian Museums and the National Art Gallery? Real estate? Sell national parks to who? China? Saudi Arabia?
Getting a divorce from the Feral Reserve and cutting spending is my preference.
That would be a good start.
Even better, use this idea to reduce government staff.
In the interests of decentralizing government personnel so they will be a dispersed target for any terrorist attacks, as well as saving money on facilities, severely downsize the DC offices and those in all the big cities. Offer employees minimal “relocation” packages because they are being transferred to thousands of new offices in small towns across the country where each office will only have a handful of staff. Small towns far away from the culture, nightlife, power, and cocktail parties they crave. Also offer them early retirement as an option if they are over 55. When 70% of them refuse to relocate, do not hire anyone to fill their positions.
In order to live off the interest of the bonds a socsec recipient would need a million dollars in bonds to have 30,000 to live off of.
I like trying new ideas though. We need them.
Now there is a plan!
Read “The Creature from Jekyll Island” A second look at the Federal Reserve. It explains it all.
We pay the cost of printing then borrow it into circulation.
money (fed reserve notes) represent debt.
This is just one of many articles of Cruz proposing legislation to SELL federal land assets in the west to pay off the Federal debt. I don't know why people keep saying he proposed giving it to the states.
“Its silly, though, as an answer to the deficit.”
Sorry I didn’t respond to this.
We are not talking about the DEFICIT but the DEBT.
One thing at a time. Different weapons for different targets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.