Off Topic: Debt Reform
Assumption 1:
One of the problems cited with our national debt is that so much of it is foreign owned. The fear is that foreign governments could use this to ‘force’ the US Gov. to do something against our best interests.
Fact:
Billions are spent each election cycle in an effort to influence government, albeit in a backward, roundabout way by getting sympathetic candidates elected. $4 Billion in 2010, by some estimates
Assumption 2:
At least half of those billions come from corporations and the wealthiest individuals, not from small donations by individual donors (“voters”)
Premise: If ownership of the debt is equated with influence, why not require those seeking influence to buy some of the national debt? If foreign ownership of debt is “bad”, then why are there no large drives to get US Citizens and Corporations to buy that debt instead? During WWII, stars and celebrities encouraged all of us to buy war bonds — and correct me if I’m wrong, but the current line is that we’re at ‘war’ with ‘terror’ — where is the push to get anyone, especially those who profess to be in favor of massive military spending, to actually pay for it?
##
So, is there an opportunity to generate $1-2 Billion every two years? What if instead of donating money to get candidates elected in an effort to curry influence, those who wished to purchase influence were allowed (or forced) to purchase government bonds to do so? But it doesn’t have to be a bond; after all, if you have the money there’s nothing stopping you from buying T-Bills —maybe we could do something more direct, and effective.
Proposal: Make it a law that any political donation over $1000 has to be matched by an equal payment directly to pay down the national debt. Take the upper cap off, allow folks to donate thousands and millions directly to candidates, or to buy whole hours of advertising, or whatever; corporate, individual—hell, if the Sultan of Brunei wants in on this, let ‘im— no limits on campaign funding so long as any political donation is matched dollar for dollar with a payment on the national debt.
Might only amount a billion dollars every two years or so. Only a billion. The whole process is corrupt; I’m not going to argue that or try to fix it. But, so long as influence and politics and the machinery of government are for sale, we might as well put a price tag on it, and do something good for the country while we’re at it.
“Might only amount a billion dollars every two years or so. Only a billion.”
The current US national debt is $13.56 trillion. At a pay-down rate of 0.5 billion per year, that’s 27 <b>thousand</b> years of your little plan. Not a big help. Point: we have <i>staggering</i> amounts of national debt, roughly equivalent to the annual GDP. A big chunk of that is the Social Security Trust Fund, which may or may not be a good thing depending on your POV. Another big component to the debt is interest owed on the debt, which is more of an issue. But political spending is tiny compared to what we owe.
Comment by JRB — 4 December 2010, 16:57 #
@JRB
“political spending is tiny compared to what we owe…”
But the current system seems to support (and actively encourage) crass & empty spending to elect sycophants and propagate the current bullshit—from all parties: dems, republican, tea-flavored, or whichever you’d care to start today—that only support talking points and debate [and gridlock, and the status quo] but do nothing to address larger issues.
Now, I’m a socialist (not a democrat, but an actual freakin’ socialist) who’d like to see increased taxes on the rich (and admittedly, on much of the middle class) to pay for universal health care and universal education though college and beyond – with large subsidies for pure scientific research, and yes, arts & poetry & crap that may not have specific definable societal gains — Yet.
But that has nothing to do with the modest proposal above. Sure it’s symbolic. It doesn’t actually pay down the debt — but it does more than the current system, and it’ll force folks to put at least a little money where their mouth is.
Comment by Matt Blind — 4 December 2010, 17:21 #
The bulk of the overseas accumulation of US Treasury bills are the neo-mercentalists like China, the ASEAN nations, India, etc. keeping their currency cheap. The “threat” that they will stop doing this is a threat that they will make US products far more competitive with their own.
Kind of like the threat used by the new Sheriff in Blazing Saddles to rescue himself from a lynching.
(Though, a genuine threat to the North American industries localizing Japanese media, since the Yen would go up even further against the Dollar if the Chinese “pulled the trigger”.)
Comment by BruceMcF — 6 December 2010, 16:55 #