So you blame debt on Obama but if he tries to save money by not launching a full invasion he's wrong? What do you want? Debt or World Police?
Don't forget about the Bush era tax cuts for the most wealthy. The top 1% pay a significantly lower percentage of their income on taxes than we do. That is a huge culprit in the increase in debt. There again, Obama said he would do away with it and never did.
If the rich paid the same percentage of their income as a poor person, the rich person would be losing a considerable amount of what they have worked for. I am not against increasing a the taxes for the wealthy, but they already have drawbacks like no benefits to say just one. The tax system should just stay where it is.
Printing money won't work. Has America not seen what happened to Germany or even Zimbabwe? Hyperinflation takes hold and the next thing you know, huge poverty will strike. Before, there was little terrorist threat. Now it has increased drastically. They also pay a lot more than a 'poor' person.
I'm not talking about someone that is drawing benefits, they don't pay taxes. I'm talking about the middle class. I paid 33% of my income in federal taxes for the year 2010. Mitt Romney, who had to report in 2010 because he was running for president, reported paying 14% of his 21.7 million in income in taxes. I don't receive any benefits. Warren Buffet complained about how the tax code was screwed up. He said his secretary paid a higher percent than he did and that was wrong. Do you know who he is? Are you sure it should stay where it is?
You can do that by cutting your military spending to a sensible level. You spend something, like, $200 billion (£12848639800.00, €18473446800.00) on it every 4 months. IMO, that's complete overkill, even for a country like the US who are constantly at war.
Do you want paved roads, EMS, Policemen and Firemen? You cannot just cut spending in half on everything. Do you want teachers to volunteer or something? As SoulPunisher said, try cutting some military expenses.
But only a small percent of the population can afford that! Even a 10k/yr fee would mean 20k/yr for two kids in school! Are you kidding?!? And taxes wouldn't go down since this a cut and they need to be used for something else.
A school system that consisted of mainly private schools would be a disaster. The benefit of a public system is that every student is taught the same thing. A private system would likely split itself into specialized schools, ie arts, math and science, religion, etc. No child should have their future determined by what their school specializes in. Plus, a country that has a relatively equally educated population can work better together. Our current private schools already do a good enough job at handing out poor educations.
The state can't give 5k vouchers because then it is just as expensive as educating them in public school! Private schools need to make money, whereas public ones don't. Therefor an education costing 10k/yr in private would cost less than 5k/yr in public, as all you are paying is cost. Also, what stops private schools from doubling prices just because they can?
