Political Science week 6 Discussion

profileMO-MO
Topic-Week6Discussion-USBudget.pdf

!

This is a graded discussion: 25 points possible due Oct 12 at 1:59am

Week 6 Discussion: US Budget 63 63

Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Initial Post Instructions You are an advisor to the President tasked with cutting at least $300 billion from the budget. The president wants your recommendations to cut lines, not large categories. Submit your recommendations and your reasoning for such recommendations using these guidelines:

- Use evidence (cite sources) to support your recommendations from assigned readings or online lessons, and at least one outside scholarly source.

- Use the format provided below to present your numbers and totals followed by an explanation below the chart.

- Please note that these are not true US budget numbers, but are reasonable hypothetical numbers to help us consider the budget processes complexities.

Textbook: Chapter 10 Lesson Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)

DOMESTIC PROGRAMS AND FOREIGN AID

Cut some foreign aid to African countries $17 billion

Eliminate farm subsidies $14 billion

Cut pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent $14 billion

Reduce the overall federal workforce by 10% $12 billion

Cut aid to states by 5% $29 billion

MILITARY Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program

$19 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe

$25 billion

Cancel or delay some weapons programs $19 billion

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 1 of 61

Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification. Are the budget changes offered by your peers' sound? Why or why not? Minimum of 1 scholarly source, which can include your textbook or assigned readings or may be from your additional scholarly research.

Writing Requirements

Grading

This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:

Cancel or delay some weapons programs $19 billion

HEALTHCARE Enact medical malpractice reform by reducing the chances of large malpractice verdicts

$ 8 billion

Increase the Medicare eligibility age to 68 $ 8 billion

Raise the Social Security retirement age to 68. $ 13 billion

EXISTING TAXES Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed.

$ 50 billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year $ 54 billion

End tax cuts for income below $250,000 a year $ 172 billion

Payroll tax increase for people making over $106,000 annually contributing more to Social Security and Medicare.

$ 50 billion

NEW TAXES Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million $ 50 billion

Add a national 5% sales tax $ 41 billion

Add a tax on carbon emissions $ 40 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take. $ 73 billion

Total gap covered by your budget plan

$_______ ________ __

Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up) Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside scholarly source) APA format for in-text citations and list of references

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 2 of 61

Search entries or author

" Reply

This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:

Course Outcomes (CO): 5

Due Date for Initial Post: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday Due Date for Follow-Up Posts: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday

Link (webpage): Discussion Guidelines

Unread # $ % Subscribe

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Aug 19, 2020

" Reply

!

ENVIRONMENTAL TAXES Class,

One option given above is a carbon tax. A carbon tax is an environmental tax (ecotax/ green tax/pollution tax). What are some other examples of environmental taxes?

It might be asserted that a carbon tax, along with other environmental taxes, would serve to both protect the environment and make cuts that would endanger the environment and more unnecessary. One underlying assumption may be that raising revenue is preferable to cutting taxes when it comes to bringing the budget into line. Another might be that government action is necessary to protect the environment. Would this be a modern liberal approach? (Whitman Cobb, 18) A socialist approach? (Whitman Cobb, 19) A classical liberal approach? Something else? Would you agree with this approach?

Do environmental taxes work? Have they worked in other places (https://meta.eeb.org/2017/11/23/the-5-most- successful-environmental-taxes-in-europe/) ? Why or why not?

Sam

PS It is perfectly OK to focus in on a specific issue like environmental taxes rather than putting together a whole budget proposal. If you want to post on environmental taxes, please do post right here.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/117098)

Stacey Ryle (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/117098) Monday

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 3 of 61

!

Professor and Class

My tax revisions would ensure that we keep all domestic and foreign aide programs as well as money for healthcare. This is extremely important to the health and well being of each U.S. Citizen as well as foreign countries.

Military-

Cut the number of nuclear war heads-----------------------------$19 Billion

Reduce the military to pre-Iraq War size -------------------------$25 Billion

Healthcare

Enact medical malpractice reform---------------------------------$ 8 Billion

Existing taxes

Return the state to Clinto era levels------------------------------$50 Billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000/year------------------$54 Billion

New Taxes

Institute a millionaire tax--------------------------------------------$50 Billion

Add Carbon emission tax--------------------------------------------$40 Billion

Tax banks based on sizes and risks---------------------------------$73 Billion

Total Cut

$319 Billion

"Last year's 738 Billion National Defense Authorization Act was the largest on record coming at the expense of healthcare education, infrastructure spending, and public health research" (Lydon, 2020). This country has been facing a health pandemic that is not going away any time soon. Healthcare and public health research are the last items that should be cut. We are spending billions of dollars on our military, war and guns unnecessarily while families in the U.S. are unable to pay bills, get prescriptions and even eat. Cutting our military the pre-Iraq war size as well reducing the number of nuclear war heads would save a significant amount of money. We could then prioritze healthcare and education for our countries citizens.

A person making over $250,00 dollar per year should not be eligible for tax cuts. These cuts should be limited to middle class and lower income families who are struggling to make ends meet and are in need of the assistance. I also feel that returning the income tax to those passing on more than $1 million to their heirs as well as instituting a millionaire tax is also beneficial. Currently the estate tax is only paid if you pass on an estate greater thatn $5.3 million. The wealthy should pay their fair amount of taxes based off the money they are making or the amount they are passing on to their family members. If this fails to happen then, "the richest Americans are amassing huge fortunes, pasing them to their heirs, and creating a new aristocracy" ("Fact Sheet", 2020). The rest of the American population is eithe living paycheck to paycheck or in poverty. This doesn't seem fair.

Carbon tax is a tax set forth "that emitters must pay for each ton of greenhouse gas emissions they emit" ("Carbon Tax Basics", 2017). By instituting a tax such as this one, consumers will be forced to look for alternate

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 4 of 61

" Reply

("Carbon Tax Basics", 2017). By instituting a tax such as this one, consumers will be forced to look for alternate sources of fuel in order to avoid paying the tax which will in turn, help reduce pollution.

There are other taxes that can be instituted as shown above. We, as a country need to invest in healthcare, education and programs that keep are country and its citizens safe, healthy and financially stable.

Thank you

Stacey Ryle

References

N.a. (2017). Carbon tax basics. Retrieved from https://www.c2es.org (https://www.c2es.org)

N.a.(2020). Fact sheet: The estate (inheritance) tax. Retrieved from: https://www.ameicansfortaxfairness.org. (https://www.ameicansfor)

Lydon, E. (2020). After years of wasted spending, congresswoman Lee calls to cut Pentagon budget, reprioritize programs that keep us safe. Retrieved from https:/www.commondreams .org

WhittmanCobb, W.N. (2020). Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, D.C.: Sage CQ Press

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Tuesday

" Reply

!

ENVIRONMENTAL TAXES Emily, Stacey, and Class,

An environmental tax (ecotax/ green tax/pollution tax) is a tax on actions that are believed to be harmful to the environment. It raises money that can be used to protect the environment, but also serves to change behavior by shifting the costs of environmental degradation to the corporations and people who are causing it. What are some examples of specific environmental taxes in addition to carbon taxes?

Carbon taxes have been implemented ... where? What are other real life examples of environmental taxes? Have they worked?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/180986)

Miranda Duellman (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/180986) Tuesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 5 of 61

" Reply

This seems like a real win-win situation. Increasing environmental taxes helps our environment and our economy. "If set high enough, it becomes a powerful monetary disincentive that motivates switches to clean energy across the economy, simply by making it more economically rewarding to move to non- carbon fuels and energy efficiency" (carbontax.org, 2020). This is probably my favorite thing that I have researched while doing this assignment because it truly is a great idea and a great way to stimulate the US. I hope that we can continue with this and come up with more ideas similar to this to help people, the environment, and everything in between.

Carbontax.org. (2020). Home. Retrieved October 06, 2020, from https://www.carbontax.org/whats-a- carbon-tax/

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/117098)

Stacey Ryle (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/117098) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Miranda

I agree this seems to be a win-win situation. There are numerous types of environmental taxes such as taxes on plastic pollution, air quality pollution, climate change and green taxes. These benefits the earth as well as the people that live on it. It "can enable the governments to reduce taxes on other areas , in particular labor that weigh heavily on the shoulders of all citizens" (Anastasio, 2017). There was a landfill tax introduced in the United Kingdom. By doing this, the amount of waste in the landfill reduced from 50 milion tons in 2001 to 12 million in 2012. That is a significant decrease. Environmental taxes help increase the use of renewable resources and protect the ozone layer. These times of taxes are are important and necessary to the economy and the environment.

Thanks

Stacey Ryle

Reference

Anatasio, M. (2017). The five most sucessful environmental taxes in europe. https://www (https://www) .meta.eeb.org

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 6 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 8 at 10:55am

" Reply

ENVIRONMENTAL TAXES Emily, Stacey, Miranda, Bre, Kimberly, Nikki, and Class,

What are some examples of specific environmental taxes and where have they been implemented?

Landfill taxes in the UK significantly reduced the amount of waste going to landfills. Carbon taxes have led to significant reductions in carbon emissions in Sweden while its economy has been quite robust. What about other taxes ... how have they worked out?

These taxes have not been used very extensively used in the USA, particularly at a federal level. Why not? Do we need to implement more of these sorts of taxes?

Sam

Carbon taxes: implemented in Sweden and ... ? Plastic bad taxes: implemented ... ? Landfill taxes: implemented in the UK, and ... ? What else?

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Tuesday

" Reply

!

ENVIRONMENTAL TAXES - IDEOLOGY Emily, Stacey, and Class,

Environmental taxes theoretically both protect the environment and make cuts that might endanger the environment unnecessary. One underlying assumption may be that raising revenue is preferable to cutting spending when it comes to bringing the budget into line. Another might be that government action is necessary to protect the environment. These assumptions are most consistent with what ideology? Modern liberalism? (Whitman Cobb, 18) Socialism? (Whitman Cobb, 19) Classical liberalism? Something else?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/148024)

Emily Fox (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/148024)

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 7 of 61

Wednesday

" Reply

!

Stacey and class,

I completely agree with you. I wholeheartedly believe that healthcare is a right, not a privilege and a persons illness should never cause them to go bankrupt. There are so many funds that are already being collected in our taxes that could be allocated towards healthcare. However, you're right, new taxes should be implemented and other cuts should be made to ensure every person in our country has the care they need.

As a veteran I utilize socialized medicine and have for many years. I have had no trouble, which I know is not always the case. But it's hardly the "broken system" that many people claim it to be.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/152086)

Jessica Medwick (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/152086) Yesterday

!

Professor Angus and Class,

My proposal for the US budget would be as followed:

DOMESTIC PROGRAMS AND FOREIGN AID

Eliminate farm subsidies

$10 billion

Cut pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent

$10 billion

Reduce the overall federal workforce by 10%

$8 billion

Cut aid to states by 5%

$25 billion

MILITARY

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 8 of 61

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program

$12 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe

$20 billion

Cancel or delay some weapons programs

$15 billion

HEALTHCARE

Enact medical malpractice reform by reducing the chances of large malpractice verdicts

$ 8 billion

Increase the Medicare eligibility age to 68

$ 5 billion

Raise the Social Security retirement age to 68.

$ 8 billion

EXISTING TAXES

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year

$20 billion

Payroll tax increase for people making over $106,000 annually contributing more to Social Security and Medicare.

$ 30 billion

NEW TAXES

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 9 of 61

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million

$ 30billion

Add a tax on carbon emissions

$30 billion

Total Cut:

$301 Billion

The big tax cuts for me would be for the workers, health, and military taxes. The farm subsidies are known as agricultural subsidies. They are paid and other kinds of support extended by the United States government to certain farmers and agribusinesses. The original purpose of the U.S. farm subsidies was to provide economic stability to farmers during the Great Depression and to ensure a steady domestic food supply for Americans. The U.S. government pays around $25 billion to farmers and owners of the farmland. (White, 2020).

I feel like taxes for the working people should be cut. People work hard for their money and the more hours and time they put in it seems that more gets taken out to the government. “People should work for what they receive and be able to reap the benefits of working hard, and you may discourage people from working and bettering themselves if they know they will receive government assistance in any case” (Whitman Cobb, 2020). In the article, One Bad and Eight Good Reasons to Cut Taxes by David Boaz, states that if the taxes are not cut then Congress would spend the money anyway. The best way to help the people would be to let taxpayers keep the money. (Boaz, 2001).

Military spending is the second-largest item in the federal budget after social security. The estimate of the United States Military spending is 934 billion dollars. The military’s budget covers the DoD, overseas contingency operations, the VA, Homeland Security, the state department, and many others that involve national security. To reduce military costs, the DoD must reduce its civilian pay and benefits of soldiers, and its military bases around the world. Congress is reluctant to allow DoD to cut other costs like military health benefits and growth of military pay. Congress feels cuts will jeopardize national security. They are concerned about the cutback of troops, closure of domestic military bases, and termination of the weapons system. U.S. military is greater of the largest government expenditures combined. It allows other allies to cut back on their defense and spending and raises the U.S. budget deficit. (Brock, 2020).

The U.S. spends close to 20% for its national income on health. Taxes are mandatory and need to be paid. Cheap health care does not exist, and everyone needs health care. Private premiums morphed into regular taxes based on the ability to pay. Taxes for the wealthy may be higher than the middle- and low-income families due to the ability to pay. In contrast, cutting taxes on health care would create more take-home pay for workers. (Saez & Zucman, 2019).

Carbon tax is a fee that the government makes on any company that bums fossil fuels. The purpose of a carbon tax is to reflect on the true cost of burning carbon. To implement a carbon tax, the government must determine the external cost for each ton of greenhouse gas emission which is difficult because scientists and economists must agree on which assumptions to use. (Amadeo, 2020).

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 10 of 61

" Reply

economists must agree on which assumptions to use. (Amadeo, 2020).

Carbon tax is also known as environmental taxes. Denmark has some undesirable consequences in distributional effects with environmental taxes and are shown to be regressive along with Briannuland and Nordstrom. Some of the most frequently known environmental taxes are ERTS, that puts taxes on fossil fuels like gasoline and diesel. The number of ERTs varies from country to country. (Miller & Vela, 2013).

Jessica Medwick

References:

D.Boaz. One Bad and Eight Good Reasons to Cut Taxes. Cato Institute. Retrieved: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/one-bad-eight-good-reasons-cut-taxes (https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/one-bad-eight-good-reasons-cut-taxes)

E.Saez & G. Zucman. 2019. Make No Mistake: Medicare for All Would Cut Takes for Most Americans. Retrieved: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/25/medicare-for-all-taxes-saez-zucman

(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/25/medicare-for-all-taxes-saez-zucman)

K.Amadeo. 2020. Carbon Tax, Its Purpose, and How it Works. Retrieved: https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-tax-definition-how-it-works-4158043 (https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-tax-definition-how-it-works-4158043)

S.Miller & M. Vela. 2013. Are Environmental Related Taxes Effective? IDB. Retrieved: https://www.cbd.int/financial/mainstream/idb-tax.pdf (https://www.cbd.int/financial/mainstream/idb-tax.pdf)

T.Brock. 2020. US Military Budget, Its Components, Challenges, and Growth. Retrieved: https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-growth-3306320 (https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-growth-3306320)

WhitmanCobb, W.N. 2020. Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, D.C.: Sage CQ Press

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/148024)

Emily Fox (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/148024) Sunday

!

Professor and Class,

My revisions to the budget would focus on taxes and reducing military. I would:

Cut the number of nuclear war heads -----$19 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size ------$25 billion

Return the estate tax to Clinton -era levels -----$50 billion

End tax cuts for incomes above $250,000/year ------$54 billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 11 of 61

" Reply

Institute a millionaire's tax on income above 1 million ------$50 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes ------- $73 billion

Add tax on carbon emissions --------$40 billion

$311 billion total

The military budget is currently $740 billion dollars. We are spending more on the military now than every before. By cutting the military budget by a lot it would leave more room in the budget for jobs, affordable housing, healthcare and childcare for those who need it most. This would also go for taxing the wealthy. Sharing the wealth to the citizens in this country by the way of tax cuts for the middle and lower class would make living in this country easier. This would make the top earners pay taxes just as the lower earners in the United States.

The carbon tax would help tackle climate change. There should be some sort of price on carbon emissions so that we can work on mitigating global warming. By taxing carbon emissions it would hopefully reduce the usage. I think most of these budget cuts proposed take on a modern liberal approach. "Modern liberal ideology espouses the belief that government can and should be used to enforce the equality and liberty of all people, including racial and gender equality" (Whitman Cobb, 19).

Sanders, B. (2020, June 30). A 10% cut to the US military budget would help support struggling Americans | Bernie Sanders. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2020/jun/30/a-10-budget-cut-to- the-us-military-budget-by-10-to-help-save-lives-in-this-pandemic (https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2020/jun/30/a-10-budget-cut-to-the-us-military-budget-by-10-to-help- save-lives-in-this-pandemic)

Democrats Want to Tax the Rich. Here’s How Those Plans Would Work (or Not). (2019, September 24). The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/09/24/business/economy/wealth-tax-rich.html

(https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2020/jun/30/a-10-budget-cut-to-the-us-military-budget-by-10-to- help-save-lives-in-this-pandemic)

These Countries Have Prices on Carbon. Are They Working? (2019, April 2). The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/02/climate/pricing-carbon-emissions.html

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today. Washington, Dc Sage, CQ Press.

(https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2020/jun/30/a-10-budget-cut-to-the-us-military-budget-by-10-to- help-save-lives-in-this-pandemic)

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/141474)

Siddony Blue (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/141474)

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 12 of 61

Monday

" Reply

!

Emily,

The tax cuts and military reductions are a very smart move. I think we are spending more on money with the military budget in an unnecessary manner. We are the strongest power in the world, but do not need to show it with military forces in different parts of the world. The budget should be cut to support the underfunded schools, and the failing healthcare system that are leaving Americans behind and to fend for themselves.

The more money that is contributed from those within the higher tax brackets could help fund those underfunded areas, such as education, without having to call on lawmakers to get education reform in place.

Siddony

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Monday

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 5 at 9:17am

" Reply

!

DEFENSE SPENDING Emily, Siddony, and Class,

Exactly how much do we spend currently on defense? 740 billion dollars? Is this every penny we spend on defense? How does our current defense spending compare with what other countries spend as well as what we spent 5, 10, or 20 years ago?

Who supports/advocates for/wants this spending and how come?

Is the current level of spending acceptable? Should we be spending less so that we can spend more on other priorities, and if so what cuts need to be made? Or should we actually be spending more?

Sam

PS The ongoing conversation on the environment can be found at the top of the discussion assignment (I started it myself).

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Tuesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 13 of 61

" Reply

DEFENSE SPENDING Stacey, Brandi, Lindsay, and Class,

Exactly how much do we spend currently on defense? 740 billion dollars? Is this every penny we spend on defense? How does our current defense spending compare with what other countries spend as well as what we spent 5, 10, or 20 years ago?

Who supports/advocates for/wants this spending and how come?

Is the current level of spending acceptable? Should we be spending less so that we can spend more on other priorities like education and healthcare , and if so what cuts need to be made? Or should we actually be spending more?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 7 at 9:21am

" Reply

!

DEFENSE SPENDING Miranda, Angela, Traci, Siddony, and Class,

Exactly how much do we spend currently on defense? 740 billion dollars? 826 billion dollars? 930 million dollars? Whichever figure you go with, does it include every penny we spend on defense? Does it include all the costs associated with wars? Does it include all foreign military assistance? And, how does our current defense spending compare with what other countries spend as well as what we spent 5, 10, or 20 years ago?

Who supports/advocates for/wants this spending and how come?

Is the current level of spending acceptable? Should we be spending less so that we can spend more on other priorities like education and healthcare, and if so what cuts need to be made? Do we need to reduce spending to pre-Iraq war levels? Should we bring troops home from Asia and Europe? Or should we actually be spending more?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214)

Kylie King (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214) Wednesday

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 14 of 61

!

Professor and Class,

My proposal for the US Budget would be as follows:

Eliminate farm subsidies $14 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe

$25 billion

Cancel or delay some weapons programs $19 billion

Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed.

$ 50 billio n

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year $ 54 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take. $ 73 billion

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million $ 50 billion

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program

$19 billion

Total: 304 billion dollars

I sat here and thought about this for days. I found it difficult to do, and I really am not sure as to why. I did, however, conclude a budget, which is shown above. In total, the budget I proposed would save in total of 304 billion dollars. I want to explain first that all of the budgets have some sort of effect on the economy. With that being said, the economy, according to Cobb, is “A system of exchange of goods” (Cobb, p 232, 2019). There is a constant exchange of goods and taxes are a major asset to that. I want to start with the reason for eliminating farm subsidies, which has multiple factors. One I found to be most interesting is, “Farm subsidies damage the economy. In most industries, market prices balance supply and demand and encourage efficient production. But Congress short–circuits market mechanisms in agriculture. Farm programs cause overproduction, the overuse of marginal farmland, land price inflation, and excess borrowing by farm businesses” (Edwards, para 5, 2007). Damage to the economy is due to money. Eliminating farm subsidies equals a boost in the economy. The next area I would budget is the military. From my understanding, the US is one of the biggest powerhouses. Americans are spending a hefty amount on the military, even more so than in

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 15 of 61

the past. General David Goldfein discussed increasing military force squadron (O'Hanlon, para 6, 2020)., but has looked at the numbers and decided the money would be better spent elsewhere. In fact, he “is now ready to make some of those 312 squadrons smaller” (O’Hanlon, para 6, 2020). The overall idea of military budgets can be summarized by both Goldfein and General Joseph Lengyel. They have both agreed that “The Guard and Reserve components of the various services do not save the United States any money when they are activated and deployed. So, shifting more force structure to the reserve components only makes sense if the overall military is somewhat less busy than before. However, with the surges in Iraq and Afghanistan long since over, that is indeed the case now, and figures to be the case in the future, too” (O’ Hanlon, para 9, 2020). With that being said, we can then say it's safe to assume that if we don’t have the same personnel, then we don’t need the weaponry to equip them and can see a reduction in that as well. There can also be a budget on taxes. Taxes is a consistent topic among Americans. Specifically, taxes during the Clinton- era. According to Americans For Tax Fairness, “the Clinton-era level, which would tax the value of estates over $2 million per couple ($1 million per individual) at a 55 percent rate” (Lester, para 2, 2020). This means that there would be a tax payment on estates where before, there nearly wasn’t. This leads us to the next area of the budget, taxing those who make more than 250,000k a year. According to Americans For Tax Fairness, “The richest 1% pay an effective federal income tax rate of 24.7%. (http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2014/04/who_pays_taxes_in_america_in_2014.php#.U84UG7EYdOg) That is a little more than the 19.3% rate paid by someone making an average of $75,000. And 1 out of 5 millionaires (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/Buffett_Rule_Report_Final.pdf) pays a lower rate than someone making $50,000 to $100,000” (Fact Sheet, para 22, 2014). Where is the equal representation here? Many Americans are paying more in taxes than those who are the wealthiest in the world. We would benefit financially if each class was taxed by taking into consideration, the salary amount in a household. Lastly, taxing the wealthy like that would mean we could institute a Millionaire tax on the individuals making over 1 million. Again, this idea correlates with how much millionaires pay in taxes versus the working class and below. All in all, this plan reaches the Presidential budget of 300 billion.

Kylie King

References

Cobb, W. W. (2019). VitalSource Bookshelf Online. Retrieved September 06, 2020, from https://online.vitalsource.com/ (https://online.vitalsource.com/)

Edwards, C. (2020, April 3). Ten Reasons to Cut Farm Subsidies. https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/ten-reasons-cut-farm- subsidies (https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/ten-reasons-cut-farm-subsidies) .

Fact Sheet: Taxing Wealthy Americans. Americans For Tax Fairness. (2014). https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet- taxing-wealthy-americans/ (https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing- booklet/fact-sheet-taxing-wealthy-americans/) .

Patrick, L. (2019). The Estate Tax. Americans For Tax

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 16 of 61

SHOW MORE 1 1

" Reply

Patrick, L. (2019). The Estate Tax. Americans For Tax Fairness. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/the-estate-tax/ (https://americansfortaxfairness.org/the-estate-tax/) .

O'Hanlon, M. E. (2020, July 9). How to cut (and not cut) the defense budget. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/07/09/how-to-cut- and-not-cut-the-defense-budget/ (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from- chaos/2020/07/09/how-to-cut-and-not-cut-the-defense-budget/) .

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214)

Kylie King (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Professor,

From what I have read on the matter, the military spends roughly 740 billion dollars. I cannot say for certain that it is only spent on defense, however, I can say that it has been stated that the US spends an increasingly alarming amount of money compared to what was spent in the past. In my discussion, I noted that there were generals speaking up for spending. Meaning, military ranked members are speaking on behalf of the budget for the military. I think there is a fine line between acceptable and unacceptable. There shouldn't be a price for being too cautious, however, there are other ways to spend this money. I think we could spend less and it can be done by not having as many soldiers active in areas we do not need, as well as, providing weapons for inactive soldiers being an unnecessary expenditure.

Kylie King

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/180986)

Miranda Duellman (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/180986) Tuesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 17 of 61

" Reply

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program.... $19 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe...... $25 billion

Cancel or delay some weapons programs........ $19 billion

Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed....... $50 billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year.... $54 billion

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million..... $50 billion

Add a tax on carbon emissions.... $40 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes .... $73 billion

Total cuts: $330 billion

The US is projected to spend about $933.8 billion in the year 2021 on the military. That is more than double the budget from just 15 years ago (Amadeo, 2020). Why do we need to spend this much money on the military now, when we didn't have to before? This budget does not even cover the cost of wars. Wars fall under the Overseas Contingency Operations, so what exactly are we spending all this money on?

Chapter 10 in our book states "In the United States, the federal income tax is a progressive tax, meaning that the more money you make, the more money you are supposed to pay." The key word in the sentence being "supposed". Why is that word included in that sentence? "The richest 1% pay an effective federal income tax rate of 24.7%. (http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2014/04/who_pays_taxes_in_america_in_2014.php#.U84UG7EYdOg) That is a little more than the 19.3% rate paid by someone making an average of $75,000. And 1 out of 5 millionaires (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/Buffett_Rule_Report_Final.pdf) pays a lower rate than someone making $50,000 to $100,000." (americansfortaxfairness.com, 2019). To be fair, just because someone is making more money than you doesn't mean we should increase the percentage they pay in taxes. According to that same website, almost 1500 households reporting making more than one million dollars, but did not pay ANY federal taxes. On this assignment, I chose to institute a millionaires tax on incomes over $1 million and to end tax cuts for incomes of more than $250,000. That money could contribute to so many programs that desperately need it such as education and healthcare- two programs that benefit almost everybody in the US.

Amadeo, K. (2020, September 03). Why Military Spending Is More Than You Think It Is. Retrieved October 06, 2020, from https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-growth-3306320 (https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-growth-3306320)

Fact Sheet: Taxing Wealthy Americans. (2019). Retrieved October 06, 2020, from https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-taxing-wealthy-americans/

(https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-taxing-wealthy-americans/)

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today. Washington, Dc Sage, CQ Press.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 18 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818)

Veronica Smith McCormick (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818) Tuesday

" Reply

!

Hello Miranda. After looking at your budget proposal, I noticed one item that was very interesting. The item of interest was the nuclear weapons and the space program. I think that your suggested cuts were in this area are very important, but there are sometimes that we will need to depend on these programs. I really enjoyed reading your discussion post.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214)

Kylie King (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169214) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Miranda,

I found it interesting to discover that wars do not fall under the military budget. That fact alone shocked me. I think that knowing that fact raises more questions, but I agree, what are we really spending money on then if war isn't in the military budget? I also agree that millionaires tax would benefit the US and allow spending to go to places much more beneficial. Can you imagine a world where this is all figured out and everyone benefits from it?

Kylie King

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/171555)

Brandi Crane (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/171555) Monday

!

I would make the following recommendations to the president regarding the budget cut of 300 billion.

1. Reduce military to pre-Iraq war size and reduce troops in Asia, and Europe: 25b 2. Cancel or delay some weapons programs: 19b

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 19 of 61

" Reply

Total: 316 billion.

The pentagon takes up most of the federal government’s discretionary budget of about 738 billion this year and they were unable to pass an audit in 2019. I believe a strong military is important but the financial discrepancies that have been shown at the pentagon certainly shows they cannot explain spending billions of dollars and this is unacceptable. Also cutting some weapons programs to possibly be replaced with more cost-effective options. (Weissman, et al., 2020).

Reducing the federal workforce can improve the budget. The federal government is currently the largest employer in the United States with 9.1 million workers. These employees also enjoy better pay and benefits than workers in the private sector. On average a federal employee makes 17% more while working 12% less than those in the private sector. (Tate, 2019).

Taxing banks would help repay taxpayers for the bailouts and possibly stop banks from excessive borrowing and increase capital making another financial crisis less likely.

Raising taxes on the wealthy to prevent middle class burden with the over 250k, millionaire tax and estate tax. And the government would need to keep tax expenditures to offset some of this increase. The government uses tax expenditures or tax breaks to influence economic behavior, an example is a homeowner being able to deduct their home mortgage interest and it can also be used to stimulate investments. (Whitman Cobb, W.,2020).

References:

Whitman Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage Publications.

Tate, K. (2019). The sheer size of our government workforce is an alarming

Problem. The Hill.

Weissman, R. (2020). Should U.S. military spending be reduced? Chattanooga

Times.

2. Cancel or delay some weapons programs: 19b 3. Reduce federal workforce by 10%: 12b 4. Cut pay to civilian federal workers by 5%: 14b 5. Tax banks based on their sizes and amount of risk taken: 73b 6. End tax cuts for income over 250k: 54b 7. Institute a millionaire tax on income above 1 million: 50b 8. Cut number of nuclear warheads and end Star Wars: 19b 9. Return estate tax to Clinton-era levels: 50b

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 20 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Tuesday

" Reply

!

TAXING THE WEALTHY Brandi, Stacey, Lindsay, Class,

One option we have here is to tax the wealthy. Should taxes be raised on the wealthy and corporations? If yes, how come? Because some things, like infrastructure, need to be paid for? Because it is only fair? For other reasons? If no, why not?

If taxes on the wealthy should be raised, what are our options and what is the best way to raise taxes on the wealthy? Should tax cuts for folks with high incomes be repealed? Do we need a millionaire tax? Do we need an estate tax hike? Do we need a carbon tax, that shifts costs for environmental damage to the wealthy folks who run corporations? Do we need a bank tax to get the wealthy folks who run banks to take into account the riskiness of their actions? Do we need something else?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169532)

Angela Walker (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169532) Tuesday

!

To cut at least $300 billion from the budget, I would recommend the following:

DOMESTIC PROGRAMS AND FOREIGN AID

Cut some foreign aid to African countries ----------- $17 billion

Reduce the overall federal workforce by 10% ------- $12 billion

MILITARY

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense --------$19 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe -- $25 billion

EXISTING TAXES

Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed -------------------------------------- $ 50 billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year ---------------------------------------------$ 54 billion

NEW TAXES

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million -----------------------------------$ 50 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take ------------------------- $ 73 billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 21 of 61

" Reply

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take ------------------------- $ 73 billion

Total cut

$ 300 billion

I noticed that nobody thus far has included a cut in foreign aid. We have donated over US$2.3 trillion over the past five years (Easterly, 2020). Despite that, these countries have not improved. Children are still dying of malaria because, as one study showed, forty percent of the people did not use the free bed nets they were given (Easterly, 2020). That US 2.3 trillion dollars could be used instead to help Americans living on the streets or given to veterans who suffer from physical and mental illnesses.

Though I agree that we need a strong military with advances in warfare, I do not believe that America's job is to keep the piece in other countries. Americans should not have to carry the majority of this responsibility. The other NATO countries should help to maintain peace in different countries. Yes, the military budget for 2020 was $750 billion, but that does not include diplomacy, foreign assistance, the Department of Homeland Security operations, or the Department of Veterans Affairs (O'Hanlon, 2019). Instead, it had the Department of Defense, the intelligence community, and the Department of Energy's nuclear-weapons-related activities (O'Hanlon, 2019). I feel more money should be devoted to the Department of Homeland Security operations or the Department of Veterans Affairs.

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year was questionable to me at first. However, the rich seem to get richer while the poor remain poor. If we ended the tax cuts for those with incomes above $250,000, this money could be redistributed. Redistribution policies help to provide aid to the poor (Cobb, 2020). That redistribution should be used for basic needs, education, and job opportunities for more impoverished communities.

Reference

Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Easterly, W. (2020). Time for a grand re-think of grand aid plans. SciDev.Net Sub-Saharan Africa. Retrieved 6 October 2020, from https://www.scidev.net/sub-saharan-africa/mdgs/opinion/time-for-a-grand- rethink-of-grand-aid-plans-ssa.html (https://www.scidev.net/sub-saharan-africa/mdgs/opinion/time-for-a- grand-rethink-of-grand-aid-plans-ssa.html) .

O'Hanlon, M. (2019). Is US defense spending too high, too low, or just right?. Brookings. Retrieved 6 October 2020, from https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defense-spending-too- high-too-low-or-just-right/ (https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/is-us-defense-spending-too- high-too-low-or-just-right/) .

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 22 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 7 at 9:17am

" Reply

TAXING THE WEALTHY Angela, Anne, Veronica, Siddony, Alexander. and Class,

Should taxes be raised on the wealthy and corporations because:

If these taxes shouldn't be raised, it would be because

If taxes on the wealthy should be raised, what are our options and what is the best way to raise taxes on the wealthy? Should tax cuts for folks with high incomes be repealed? Do we need a millionaire tax? Do we need an estate tax hike? Do we need a carbon tax, that shifts costs for environmental damage to the wealthy folks who run corporations? Do we need a bank tax to get the wealthy folks who run banks to take into account the riskiness of their actions? Do we need to close the loopholes that the wealthy and corporations take advantage of? Do we need something else?

Sam

some things, like infrastructure, need to be paid for; it is only fair; the effective tax rate for the wealthiest folks is far less than the actual tax rate, and in many cases less that teh tax rate faced by folks in the middle and lower classes; many folks, and corporations, are paying no taxes at all and/or why else?

why?

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169532)

Angela Walker (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169532) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 23 of 61

" Reply

Professor,

I remain on the fence with the taxing of the wealthy and corporations. Both sides of the fence have valid points in my eyes. I do not believe that 250,000 should be considered wealthy. To me, this number represents most small business owners and middle-class Americans.

Redistribution policies help to provide aid to the poor (Cobb, 2020). I don't know if I honestly believe that statement. How is improving infrastructure helping the poor? I doubt the truly poor care about the conditions of our roads or new buildings going up. A better solution is to offer them a job as a means to improve their condition.

The wealthy have earned that money by working long hours and making good investments. Only 45% of their total income is indeed reported and taxed because their investments are not taxed or are taxed at a lower rate ("Pros and Cons of a Wealth Tax. Explained in 6 Research-backed Reasons. — The Thread", 2020). As compensation, the wealthy could be required to invest in soup kitchens, mental health facilities, housing, education, etc.

If you want to better your situation, you need help to do so, but you also need to want to improve your conditions. I think more people need to invest in people. However, I also believe people need to earn their keep.

Reference

Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Pros and Cons of a Wealth Tax. Explained in 6 Research-backed Reasons. — The Thread. The Thread. (2020). Retrieved 7 October 2020, from https://www.thethreadweekly.com/news/wealth-tax (https://www.thethreadweekly.com/news/wealth-tax) .

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

" Reply

!

HARD WORK Angela and Class,

Is hard work to the key to success in America? Is it all that it takes? Does everyone have the same opportunity to succeed in America? Should folks only have to surrender their money if they choose to? How would a modern conservative answer these questions? A libertarian? A modern liberal?

Sam

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 24 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/147653)

Amelia Macchie!o (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/147653) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 25 of 61

" Reply

Professor Angus and Class,

This week I am choosing to focus on the wealth tax. In this class, our scenario is to add a tax on all wealth over 1 million to raise a total of 50 billion dollars. This tax would seem like a radical idea, and it is. In fact, this would be a much more radical idea than the proposed wealth tax by Sen Elizabeth Warren. Warren introduced this wealth tax proposal during her campaign for President. Along with Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren is known as one of the most far-left democratic socialists. And yet, in perspective with the wealth tax scenario we have proposed here, hers would impact a much smaller population of the country. Warren's proposed wealth tax is a 2% tax on all wealth above $50 million dollars, with the tax increasing to 6% for any combined household wealth above 1 billion dollars (Warren, 2020). Warren has calculated that tax to yield 3.75 trillion dollars in taxes in the first 10 years alone. I think this is an incredible idea. Her proposed tax plan would only affect 75,000 U.S. households, and this does not mean we are offering up all of their money for the taking. One example Warren (2020) provides on her website is a person who theoretically could make 450 million dollars annually. This person would pay a wealth tax on the $400 million above the $50 million threshold, for a total wealth tax cost of $9 million annually (Warren, 2020). I am not a millionaire or a politician, but these numbers seem incredibly reasonable to me.

Ideas like a wealth tax do not exist in true capitalism, but they exist in a social democracy. Social democracy is the idea of balancing the markets created by capitalism in an effort to provide the most good for the country by eliminating the inequalities created by true capitalism (Whitman Cobb, 2020). Warren's proposed tax fits perfectly within the ideologies of social democracy. According to Whitman Cobb (2020), in social democracy, taxes on the wealthy are increased in an effort to provide greater services to the masses and provide equal opportunities for citizens. With this being said, social democracy still supports a capitalist-style market. I believe that the U.S. could transition into a social democracy with relative ease. We would be able to provide more social services, cut down on the monopolies created when all of the wealth is combined to 0.1% of the population, while still maintaining the types of markets this country is used to.

So much wealth in this country is inherited. After that, there is an abundance of loopholes in our tax code that allow the wealthy to get wealthier by not paying their fair share. I do not blame the wealthy for this, and if we are being honest, I cannot say that IU would not do the same given the opportunity and the resources. The problem is within the system, not the people. I think a wealth tax would be a tremendous place to start in conversations about budgets.

Thanks for reading,

Mia

References

Warren, E. (2020). Ultra-millionaire tax. Warren Democrats. https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax (https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra- millionaire-tax)

Whitman Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage Publications.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 26 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/112704)

Tenzin Tsephel (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/112704) Wednesday

!

Hello Professor and Class,

The budget-making process in the United States begins when the president submits the budget request to Congress. From this point, the House and the Senate must quickly pass a budget resolution in a short period of time (Cobb, 2019).

In order to achieve the goal of a 300 billion dollar budget cut, I would do the following:

DOMESTIC PROGRAM AND FOREIGN

Cut some foreign aid to African countries: $17 billion

Cut the pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent: $14 billion

MILITARY Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe: $25 billion Cancel or delay some weapons programs: $19 billion

HEALTHCARE Enact medical malpractice reform by reducing the chances of large malpractice verdicts: $ 8 billion

EXISTING TAXES Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed: $ 50 billion

Payroll tax increase for people making over $106,000 annually contributing more to Social Security and Medicare: $ 50 billion

NEW TAXES Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million $ 50 billion Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take: $ 73 billion

Total Cut $ 306 billion.

The task of deciding which programs got cut was not an easy one. One of the challenges in making this budget decision was due to the immense size and diversity of government programs in

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 27 of 61

" Reply

making this budget decision was due to the immense size and diversity of government programs in the United States. Compared to Europe, the United States has much fewer programs and offers up less money to these programs than European countries (Chamberlain University, 2020). In the end, I was able to cut $83 billion from the categories of Domestic and Foreign Aid Programs, Military, and Healthcare. In addition to this, I was also able to increase taxes in existing areas, like the estate tax as well as implement some new ones. The reduction of some budgets, increase in some existing taxes, and proposal of new taxes would increase revenue by $223 billion. These two sums together create a cut of $306 billion.

The programs that I did not want to reduce were cutting farm subsidies, eliminating the federal workforce, and ending missile programs. Related to healthcare, I also was not willing to increase the age of eligibility to Medicare and Social Security because I understand from my professional experience as a nurse how important healthcare is and how much federal support is needed to take care of people in communities. They are essential in this country.

Although it was not easy, I think it is possible to achieve a $300 billion dollar tax cut. The easiest way to make up for this is by increasing taxes on the wealthy. It specifically taxes people who make over $106,000 annually and introduces a “millionaires’ tax” on people who make more than $1 million a year. The idea behind taxing billionaires is that the money from these individuals can help the other 99% of Americans afford healthcare, college tuition, food, and basic living expenses (Ross, 2011). By doing this, the U.S. can save more money and spend on needed areas to improve.

Ross, Gerard. (2011). Taxing wealthy is a patriotic duty. The Journal News. November 21, 2011.

Chamberlain University. (2020). Political Science, Week 6 Lesson- Political Economy.

Cobb, W.N. W. (2019). Political Science Today. [VitalSource Bookshelf]. Retrieved from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781544358314/ (https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781544358314/)

Thank you,

Tenzin

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

!

TAXING THE WEALTHY

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 28 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 8 at 11:03am

" Reply

Kylie, Traci E., Brandi, Tenzin, Angela, Mia. Bre, Kimberly, Heather, Geoffrey, Nikki, Eritrea, and Class,

Should taxes be raised on the wealthy and corporations because:

If these taxes shouldn't be raised, it would be because

If taxes on the wealthy should be raised, what are our options and what is the best way to raise taxes on the wealthy? Should tax cuts for folks with high incomes be repealed? Do we need a millionaire tax or a wealth tax? Do we need an estate tax hike? Do we need a carbon tax, that shifts costs for environmental damage to the wealthy folks who run corporations? Do we need a bank tax to get the wealthy folks who run banks to take into account the riskiness of their actions? Do we need to close the loopholes that the wealthy and corporations take advantage of? Do we need to raise payroll taxes? Do we need something else?

Should the US adopt a form of democratic socialism?

Sam

some things, like infrastructure, need to be paid for (and infrastructure improvements do help the poor ... certainly the poor benefit from roads, public transit options, and more that allow them to get to their jobs and inadequate infrastructure is a huge issue in the poorest areas in this country and abroad); it is only fair; the effective tax rate for the wealthiest folks is far less than the actual tax rate, and in many cases less that the tax rate faced by folks in the middle and lower classes; many folks, and corporations, are paying no taxes at all; much of the wealth we are talking about is not earned, but rather is inherited; they can afford it; inequality is increasing and extreme; the rich benefit the most from teh economy the way it is, and should do more to support it; we all benefit when all folks have an equal opportunity to succeed (which means equal access to education, healthcare, shelter, etc.); the effective tax rate for the wealthy is lower than it has been in the past; and/or why else?

We are considering too many folks as being 'wealthy' (people who make only $250,000 shouldn't be seen as wealthy); things done with these taxes, like infrastructure improvement, either aren't necessary, don't benefit the poor, or would be done anyway through the private sector; the wealthy have earned their money through hard work; and/or why else?

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 29 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/153410)

Traci East (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/153410) Wednesday

!

Professor and Class,

US Budget

My $300 billion budget cuts as follows:

Cut some foreign aid to African countries - $17 billion.

Cancel or delay some weapons programs - $19 billion.

Enact medical malpractice reform by reducing the chances of large malpractice verdicts - $8 billion.

Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more that $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed - $50 billion.

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year - $54 billion.

Institute a Millionaire’s tax on income above $1 million - $50 billion.

Add tax on carbon emissions - $40 billion.

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take - $73 billion.

Total: $311 billion

My interest to cut foreign aid is that in the U.S. is requested to give 32.7 billion in U.S. aid for 2021 though it is necessary to give foreign aid for countries in crisis and for national security and is morally, economically and strategically imperative but we need to reduce this cost and use it for healthcare or social security benefits for U.S. Citizens. We would not cut total aid to Africa but limit this. The U.S. currently helps over 100 different countries.

Along with cutting Foreign Aid tax I would also end tax cuts on American making more than $250,00 a year, returning the estates tax on estates more that $1 million their heirs and institute a millionaire’s tax on income more than $1 million. Currently in New Jersey implemented a millionaire’s tax for anyone earning $1 million to $5 million will pay 10.75% from 8.97%. With this tax hike it will increase New Jerseys revenue to $390 million. This tax will help the middle class by giving them $500 each for two parent family with one child and income below $150,000.

Golding, B. (2020, September 17). New Jersey to impose 'millionaires tax' on residents earning $1M and up. https://nypost.com/2020/09/17/nj-to-impose-millionaires-tax-on-residents-earning-1m-and-up/.

ForeignAssistance.gov. (0AD). https://www.foreignassistance.gov/.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 30 of 61

" Reply

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/171555)

Brandi Crane (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/171555) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Professor and Class,

The United States currently has a progressive tax system with the burden on high-income earners and the government also uses tax expenditures and tax penalties to influence the economy and discourage particular behavior. (Whitman Cobb, 2020). However, it can be said its only mildly progressive as the richest pay only a bit more than everyone else. Currently the top 1% of Americans own more wealth than the bottom 90%. (Linden, 2019). The top 1% will take in another $22tn, after taxes over the next 10 years and currently pay about 30% of their income in taxes. By increasing their average tax rate by 10%, it would generate about $3tn in revenue over 10 years while still leaving them with a post-tax annual income of more than $1.4m. (Linden, 2019). I think this certainly means the rich would still “be rich” even with tax increases. This is a tremendous amount of revenue that could be invested into schools, healthcare, education, etc. to help the poor and middle class. However, I feel like the middle class currently still has too high of a tax burden with the average of 22%. I think there needs to be an overhaul on taxing social security and its benefits as well as the high earned income rates of 401K’s. A strong middle class is good for the economy as they usually spend more income than the rich, so more money is circulating.

References

Whitman Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage Publications.

Linden, M. (2019). What could the US afford if it raised billionaire’s taxes? We do the math. The Guardian. https://ww.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/13 (https://ww.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/13)

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818)

Veronica Smith McCormick (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818) Tuesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 31 of 61

" Reply

Hello Brandi. I looked over all of your suggested budget cuts. Every item on there is very needed sometimes, but sometimes they are not so much. I really do no think that we should cut the military too much because we need to make sure that we are ready n case of an attack.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Veronica, Brandi, and Class,

Look up above for the ongoing conversation focusing on defense spending.

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701)

Anne St Jean (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701) Tuesday

" Reply

!

Hello Brandi, i really like proposed budget cuts and especially agree with the cutting of tax breaks for people making over 250k a year. I totally understand that they also have bills and their income may be coming and due to spending on different bills they may not have much left for themselves but that is where money management comes into place. The wealthy should not pay extra i do not believe but they certainly should not get a tax break because they are making enough so that should satisfy they amount that they owe a year. Thank you for your post!

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/150366)

Lindsay Holton (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/150366) Monday

!

Professor Angus and class,

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the “Star Wars” missile defense program - $19 bil

Reduce military to pre-Iraq and reduce troops in Asia and Europe - $25 bil

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 32 of 61

Cancel or delay some weapons programs - $19 bil

Increase the Medicare eligibility to 68 - $8 bil

Raise the Social Security retirement to 68 - $13 bil

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year - $54 bil

Institute Millionaires tax - $50 bil

Add a tax on carbon emissions - $40 bil

Tax banks based on size and risk - $73 bil

Total - $301 billion

Military spending has been on the rise since 2014, but the American people want to the known as the most powerful military in the world, which in 2019 the U.S. spent $718.69 billion on its military (Duffin, 2020). We have come a long way with our military but cutting back on nuclear warheads and the Star Wars defense, along with bringing home some troops might be beneficial. I do not personally believe we need to keep putting all this money in, when we already have such a strong military force and a lot of other areas are struggling, like healthcare, education, and people in poverty.

The average life expectancy in 1975 was 72.15 years, and now its 78.93 with the trend expected to go higher as the years progress (MacroTrends, 2020). With the elevating of our life expectancy, I think we could push back the Medicare and social security to 68 years old. Medicare would probably be easier to cut back on then retirement, who really wants to work longer than they want to but it is still a possibility. The problem with cutting Medicare age would likely cause an increase in people without health insurance to 80 million (Telegram & Gazette, 1995). This would cause a massive amount of other hardships specifically to the people.

Taxes are government’s revenue which people tend to be against taxes and do not like paying them, yet they are use on basic infrastructures like roads, bridges, and ports, schools, military and police protection, and other public goods (Whitman, 2020, p. 240). I don’t like to see my money removed from my paycheck but I also don’t like paying for car repairs due to bad Michigan potholes. I think ending the tax cuts for incomes above $250,000 a year will help and maybe providing assistance to those below $250,000. Instituting a Millionaires tax only seems fair; everyone should pay their part in taxes. Adding a carbon tax pushes people to become cleaner, as we have seen a change throughout the years with climate.

There are tons of different variations to the budget, and doing this discussion I am glad I am not a part of the decision as the there are so many positives and negatives to adding and removing each.

References

Duffin, E. (2020, June 2). U.S. military spending from 2000 to 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spending-from-2000-to- 2012/#:~:text=In%202019%20the%20United%20States,when%20adjusted%20to%202018%20dollars (https://www.statista.com/statistics/272473/us-military-spending-from-2000-to- 2012/#:~:text=In%202019%20the%20United%20States,when%20adjusted%20to%202018%20dollars) ).

MacroTrends. (2020). U.S. Life Expectancy 1950-2020. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united- states/life-expectancy (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy)

Telegram & Gazette. (1995, September). GOP wants Medicare age level hike. https://search-proquest- com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/docview/268573559/fulltext/5B176A02D48844A7PQ/1?

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 33 of 61

" Reply

com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/docview/268573559/fulltext/5B176A02D48844A7PQ/1? accountid=147674 (https://search-proquest- com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/docview/268573559/fulltext/5B176A02D48844A7PQ/1?accountid=147674)

Whitman, W.N.C. (2020). Political Science Today (1 ed). Washington, DC: Sage. CQ Press.st

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Tuesday

" Reply

!

RAISING THE AGE Lindsay and Class,

Should the age at which folks are eligible for Medicare and Social Security be raised? If so, how come? Because we are living longer? For other reasons? If not, why not? Because it would lead to more people without health insurance? For other reasons?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701)

Anne St Jean (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701) Tuesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 34 of 61

" Reply

Hello Class, I did some research on Medicare and Social Security for the state that I reside which is Maryland. What i found out is in order to be eligible for these benefits "... You must have 10 years of work; have paid into social security; and be fully insured under the social security system. The amount you receive depends on how much you earned when you were working (Van Hollen, Second Paragraph). I personally believe that the age of eligibility should not be raised because there are aready requirements in place and so raising the eligibility would not benefit some. After completing ten years of work and be at a certain age a lot of older people do not want to work because of health issues and other concerns and so they should be able to receive pay for all their years of hard work. Some people are living longer but thats not the case for everyone and it should be fair that after a certain time someone should receive help without having to do labor. For example, i have older family members who are close to 70 and are receiving Medicare and Social Security and the social security is not that much but the Medicare is good because they get help paying for medicines and doctor visits which is essential. Raising the age requirement would not benefit them because they rely on these services to continue on with their lives. I do also think that portion should not be cut off budget because these are services that a lot of people rely on and benefits them.

Chris Van Hollen. US Senator For Maryland. (n.d). Social Security and Medicare. https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/social-security-and-medicare (https://www.vanhollen.senate.gov/social-security-and-medicare) .

Wendy N. Whitman Cobb. (2020). Political Science Today. CQ Press Sage Publication.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/150366)

Lindsay Holton (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/150366) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 35 of 61

" Reply

Professor Angus,

Life expectancy should be taken into consideration when changing age ranges for anything. Since our age has increased to 78 years of age with the expectation to trend higher, I believe it’s an option to age change Medicare and Social Security (MacroTrends, 2020). But with that being said, I don’t think that option is the best for the American people, but with this hypothetical scenario of budget cutting on the government side, the federal government would be the only benefitting party. When considering any budget, pros and cons should be weighed. Looking at the government standpoint, increasing the age of Medicare would allow the federal government to save an estimated $113 billion over a 10 year period, yet this is a major negative to individuals as it would increase health care costs and have people searching for private insurance companies (NCPSSM, 2019). The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare opposes all ideas surrounding age increases, and likely will not change (NCPSSM, 2019). I know a lot of the patients I treat have Medicare so without that option I do not know what would be affordable for them.

References

MacroTrends. (2020). U.S. Life Expectancy 1950-2020. https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy (https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy)

NCPSSM. (2019, May 15). Raising Medicare’s Eligibility Age: A Costly Benefit Cut for Seniors. https://www.ncpssm.org/documents/medicare-policy-papers/raising-medicares-eligibility-age-a- costly-benefit-cut-for-seniors/ (https://www.ncpssm.org/documents/medicare-policy-papers/raising- medicares-eligibility-age-a-costly-benefit-cut-for-seniors/)

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 36 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 8 at 10:44am

" Reply

RAISING THE AGE Anne, Lindsay, Heather, Geoffrey, and Class,

Should the age at which folks are eligible for Medicare and Social Security be raised because:

Should the age of eligibility be left where it is because:

Sam

folks are living longer; it would save a lot of money; and/or why else?

it would result in more people not having health insurance; just because people are living longer, doesn't mean they are healthy and able to work during those extra years; people have worked all of their lives and deserve to be able to enjoy this time; folks paid into the system and they are entitled to drawing out of it ... this isn't welfare but earned benefits that folks have worked hard for and are entitled to; and/or something else?

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719)

Breanna Majzel (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719) Yesterday

" Reply

!

Dear Profess,

When making my budget cuts, it didn't even cross my mind that the life expectancy is now higher. If I would have recalled that while making my budget cuts, I probably would have made cuts to Medicare and Social Security. It is an issue now that people are living longer. People are receiving Medicare and Social Security at the age of 68, but people are living longer lives now, so way more money is being spent in this department. If we were to move the age up to around 75 years, we would be saving an enormous amount. I definitely think that this is something the government should look more into. I understand that people pay into this and are maybe unable to work or are not healthy, but we do not have all of that extra money to spend with people living much longer now.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 37 of 61

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/163574)

Alexander Bravo (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/163574) Tuesday

!

Professor and fellow classmates,

Any time a budget must be cut, certain areas are always affected. In this scenario, with a need to fix a deficit, several areas would be involved. According to the Federal Budget 101 (2013), deficit is defined as “when spending exceeds revenues in a given year”. When this occurs, new taxes or cuts in existing funds is always necessary.

If I were a presidential advisor, my recommendations to combat the $300 Billion deficit would span across all areas. I would institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million ($50 Billion) and return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed ($50 Billion). My justification would be that with a gross income of greater than $1 million, the taxpayers should be able to afford it. Tax loopholes have allowed the super-rich to avoid paying millions of dollars in income taxes every year (Magstadt, 2017, p. 405). I would also recommend to tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take ($73 Billion), reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe ($25 Billion), and cut some foreign aid to African countries ($17 Billion). Finally, I would recommend ending tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year ($54 Billion), enact medical malpractice reform by reducing the chances of large malpractice verdicts ($8 Billion), and cut aid to states by 5% ($29 Billion).

My recommendations would bring about $306 Billion in savings. Although some of the areas involve very important causes, it would only cut some of their funding and not completely stop everything. With the deficit being so large, all areas were impacted.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 38 of 61

" Reply

References

Federal 101 Budget. (2013). Capitol Ideas, 56(1), 26. Retrieved from https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=f5h&AN=85027675&site=eds-live&scope=site

Magstadt, T. M. (2017). Understanding Politics: Ideas, institutions, and issues (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

" Reply

!

BANK TAX Alexander and Class,

Should banks be taxed based on their size and the amount of risk they take? Why or why not?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 39 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 8 at 10:31am

" Reply

BANK TAX Bre, Kimberly, and Class,

Some folks have advocated for a bank tax. Should banks be taxed based on their size and the amount of risk they take? Will it mean that banks take fewer risks? Is this a good thing? What else can folks share about the pros and cons of a bank tax?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/141474)

Siddony Blue (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/141474) Tuesday

!

Hi Professor and Class,

For budget cuts, I would do the following to help better balance the budget.

First – any emergency fund for other countries that are not currently in need – I would bring for $17 B budget cut for Africa’s aid.

$8 B cut for healthcare so more physicians work to help improve the healthcare field.

$13 B cut – for Social security, there needs to be changes made to the age limits to better accommodate needs.

$50 B – for individuals that can afford to be taxed and those funds would go towards ss.

$50 B 0 increase tax impositions for earners over 1 Mil.

Farm subsidies – I would not make any cuts because of their need and contribution to society and communities, they are essential workers and provide essential services.

I would cut the state aid, because they should be responsible for providing their own aid for those who need it, this would free up $29 B.

$40 B – focus on taxing carbon emission, to help reduce pollutions.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 40 of 61

$50 B – increase upper-socioeconomic taxes for those who are in the upper tax bracket.

For civilian federal employee – no cuts would be made as they are govt employees. They are considered essential to our country’s workforce and security as well.

I would not reduce workforce, due to the increased number of women and men that are currently in the workface and are working to keep their jobs, there are other important cuts that can be made.

$54B cuts for higher tax-bracketed individuals as they can not only afford it, but they need to pay their fair amount of taxes.

I would not increase sales tax, because of the unnecessary changes that would just implicate sales.

My budget would be $319 B.

With changes in the current economy and world, there have been a budgetary increase that has doubled the traditional budget amounts (Aaron, 2010).

Military would be the first cut I would make. They do not need the billions of dollars when we are not in war. The budget should not be a place where the most funding goes towards military actions.

Federal government employees would not pay more taxes due to the need for their roles. As the richer are paying less for their taxes, it is more difficult to fulfill deficits in other parts of the budget when they can easily make up the difference. It is unjust that the richer does not pay the right amount of taxes, while lower and middle class pay larger amounts of taxes.

It is reasonable to say, tax percentages must be adjusted to better fit peoples’ incomes (Whitman Cobb, 2020).

The U.S. needs money in the budget that better funds areas that are hurting the most such as social security and healthcare (Lipford, 2001). That is where most of these monies should be allocated and where I would allocate funds to.

Siddony

References

Aaron, H. J. (2010). How to think about the US Budget Challenge. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(4), 883-891.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 41 of 61

" Reply

Lipford, J. W. (2001). How transparent is the US Budget?. The Independent Review, 5(4), 575-591.

Whitman Cobb, W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage Publications.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 7 at 9:14am

" Reply

!

CUT AID TO STATES Siddony and Class,

When we talk about aid to states what exactly are we talking about? What consequences, positive and negative, would cutting aid to states be likely to have?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701)

Anne St Jean (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157701) Wednesday

" Reply

!

Hello class, for cutting aid to states if the state is within the United States and their poverty line is not much and people there do not need assistance from the Government then they should have a cut in what comes into their states. Some states have more poverty situations or homelessness that surpasses others and they need more aid and should use that aid to build shelters and housing for those who are in need. The negative would be to making sure that the aid that is given is fair and one does not abuse and take more money than they should. A positive would be that more money would be given to states that are in need for change for their residents.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/168028)

Traci Callari (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/168028) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 42 of 61

Professor and Class, I propose the recommended budget cuts as follows:

MILITARY: #1. Reduce foreign aide to African by half =$ 8.5 Billion #2. Nuclear War-Heads misses defense =$19.0 Billion

#3. Decrease funding weapons &programs = $10.0 Billion #4. Reduce military to pre-Iraq War & other areas of troops =

$25.0 Billion Total = $62.5 Billion

EXISTING TAXES: #6 Refund $1 million + to heirs estate tax to Clinton-era levels =

$ 50.0 Billion #7. Eliminate tax cuts for income >$250k yearly = $ 54.0 Billion

#8. Decrease tax cuts by 50% for income = or < $250k yearly= $ 84.0 Billion

Total = $ 188.0 Billion NEW TAXES:

#9. Instill a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million= $ 50.0 Billion

Total = $ 50.0 Billion

GRAND TOTAL= $300.5 Billion

The coronavirus pandemic has created devastating impacts not just in the United States but in the world. The economic fallout has created a reasonable opportunity to reconsider what truly constitutes national security, re- evaluate the needed aide for other countries and help us redirect our focus on the quality of life among us (Negin, 2020). Approximately 75% of annual U.S aid gets distributed to Africa addressing the health concerns primarily focusing on HIV/AIDS, malaria, nutrition, and child illnesses. Many policymakers have debated the value and effectiveness of U.S. assistance programs in Africa (Negin, 2020) Given the challenging times the U.S. is currently faced with an appropriate budget will be beneficial so things can be examined and perhaps create a new way of formulating the funding that is being provided for great good.

When it comes to decreasing our budget by $300 Billion, I believe the U.S. Department of Defense is a great place to dig in. Between 2000 and 2019 Taxpayers spent roughly $13.34 trillion on the U.S. military, that’s a yearly average of around $826 billion (Negin,2020). A budget was established in 2019 to meet the expectations to be a preeminent military power of the world. I believe we are pretty sound and need to again hold back and re-evaluate our status in today’s world.

The last area of major budget adjustments is found in the area of the Federal Government. Payroll taxes on wages

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 43 of 61

" Reply

along with self-employment income revenue is used to supply services such as Social Security and Medicare. In the fiscal year 2019, federal payroll taxes generated $1.24 trillion. Who is carrying the ultimate burdens? Evaluating and making such adjustments will help create improved opportunity and fairness. (Budget and Policy,2020).

This type of economic inequality can in turn lead to social inequality or even the inability of poor people to advance in a society (Cobb, p.236, 2020).

REFERRENCES:

Negin, Elliott. “It's Time to Rein in Inflated Military Budgets.” Scientific American, Scientific American, 14 Sept. 2020, www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-rein-in-inflated-military-budgets/.

U.S. Assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa: An Overview. crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46368.

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today. Washington, Dc Sage, CQ Press.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Wednesday

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 7 at 9:14am

" Reply

!

FOREIGN AID TO AFRICA (AND BEYOND) Angela, Traci, Siddony, Alexander, and Class,

Should we cut back on foreign aid? Why? Because it hasn't helped? Because poverty, malnutrition, and more are still global problems? Because aid doesn't get to the folks who need it? For other reasons? Why not? Because pandemics don't respect borders? Because while aid may need to be rethought it shouldn't be reduced? For other reasons?

What qualifies as "foreign aid?" How much does the USA spend on foreign aid each year? What agencies distribute this aid? Who receives this aid?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/105047)

Dorcas Todom (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/105047) Wednesday

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 44 of 61

" Reply

!

US BUDGET

The United States’ budget usually includes a host of redundant expenditures which if acted upon, may save the country a sizable amount of money; which may be redirected to other sectors that require more funding such as post-secondary attainment (Deming, 2017). Domestic programs and foreign aid, healthcare, as well as the military, are examples of sectors that if closely monitored and proper legislature passed, have the potential to raise the country more than a quarter trillion. Noting that funding for military assets consumes the highest amount of the US budget, if urgent need arose for monies elsewhere, such a sector would be the first to free up funds. One may also look into introduction of new forms of taxes such as a tax on carbon emissions, sales, as well as tax on incomes above $1 million. Banks may also need to be taxed with respect to their sizes and the amount of risks they take.

Other cuts on the budget may include cutting foreign aid to African countries and other states by a certain percentage, elimination of farm subsidies as well as cutting down on the overall federal workforce and the pay of those that remain. Congressional health care and pensions are also alarmingly high, considering one only needs a few years of service to get a lifetime of such benefits. It is imperative that legislations are put in place to ensure that one needs to work for a certain number of years to achieve these benefits, as well as ensuring that the benefits are only for a certain amount of years after which one is let go.

Diving deep into the US budget may reveal other sectors such as the Justice department, housing and urban development among others, which if closely monitored and reviewed may relieve the US taxpayers’ taxes north of half a trillion. Such budget changes are quite sound as in times of tough economic times, it is imperative that tough measures are taken to cushion each and every US citizen. As such, equity should prevail in every aspect of the economy (Cobb, 2020).

References

Cobb, W. N. W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage: CQ Press

Deming, D. J. (2017): “Increasing college completion with a federal higher education matching grant,”. The Hamilton Project, Policy Proposal 2017-03

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 45 of 61

Edited by Samuel Angus (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720) on Oct 8 at 10:40am

" Reply

FOREIGN AID TO AFRICA (AND BEYOND) Dorcas, Kimberly, Heather, and Class,

How much does teh USA spend on foreign aid? How does this compare with other countries?

What qualifies as "foreign aid?"

What agencies distribute this aid?

Who receives this aid? Who received the most aid?

Should we cut back on foreign aid because: it hasn't helped; poverty, malnutrition, and more are still global problems; aid doesn't get to the folks who need it; less aid will make for stronger governments; foreign aid should be handled by international organizations; and/or for other reasons?

Should we maintain or even increase foreign aid because: pandemics don't respect borders; while aid may need to be rethought it shouldn't be reduced; and/or why else?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157798)

Kimberly Stuck Thornton (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157798) Yesterday

!

Professor and Class,

In the fiscal year of 2019 the United States spent 39.2 billion dollars in foreign aid. This actually turns out to be less than 1% of the federal budget. The U,S provides more assistance than any other country. (Ingram, 2020) Foreign aid is anything that one country gives another country that will benefit that country. It could be many different goods and services.

The foreign assistance governmental website lists 22 agencies that supply different types of

Food aid and distribution Education Water Sanitation and Hygiene Initiatives. Infrastructure Assistance Agricultural Training climate resilience support peace building activities health care money. (Concern Worldwide U.S, 2020)

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 46 of 61

foreign aid.

More than 200 countries receive aid from the United States. In the year 2016 Iraq received the most aid at 5.3 billion. (Mcbride, 2018)

References

Concern Worldwide U.S. (2020). What is foreign aid? 5 things you should know. Concern Worldwide. https://www.concernusa.org/story/foreign-aid-explained/.

Foreign Assistance. (2020). ForeignAssistance.gov. Explore | View U.S. Foreign Assistance by Agency. https://www.foreignassistance.gov/agencies.

Ingram, G. (2020, October 1). What every American should know about US foreign aid. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/what-every-american-should-know-about-us- foreign-aid/.

Mcbride, J. (2018). How Does the U.S. Spend Its Foreign Aid? Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-does-us-spend-its-foreign-aid.

United States Trade and Development Agency. Export-Import Bank of the U.S. U.S Department of Treasury. U.S. Department of Transport. U.S. dept. of State. U.S. dept. of Labor. U.S. dept. of Justice. U.S. dept. of interior. U.S. dept. of Homeland Security. """ Health and Human Services """Energy """Defense """Commerce """Agriculture U.S. agency for International Development Peace Corpse Overseas Private Investment Corporation Millennium Challenge Corporation Inter-American Foundation Environmental Protection Agency Federal Trade Commission African Development foundation(Foreign Assistance, 2020)

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 47 of 61

" Reply

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719)

Breanna Majzel (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719) Yesterday

" Reply

!

Foreign aid is "money, technical assistanc,e and commodities" accroding to George Ingram (Ingram, 2019). We give foriegn countries the help that they need. Geroge Ingram also claims that there are three catergories the support goes under, "humanitarian assistance for life-saving relief from natural and manmade disatsters; development assistance that promotes the economic, social, and political development of countries and communities; and security assistance, which helps strengthen the military and security forces in countries allied with the United States" (Ingram, 2019). All of which help the countries with what they are in need of.

According to George Ingram, in 2019, the United States uses less than 1% of the federal budget (Ingram, 2019). Many Americans think foreign aid recieves far more than 1% of the federal budget, but the U.S. give less to ofrieng aid than most wealthy countries (Ingram, 2019).

The United States is not the only wealthy country to provide assistance to less fortunate countries. The international commitment decided that wealthy countries should be giving about 0.7% of their GNP for foreign aid (Ingram, 2019).

Forieng aid from wealthy countries has cut down the maternal and child death rates, increased life expectancy, conquered small pox, and have saved millions from HIV and AIDs. Forieng aid helps both the wealthy and poor countries globally and is something that needs to stay in the budget (Ingram, 2019).

Ingram, G. (2019). What every American should know about US foreign aid. https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/what-every-american-should-know-about-us- foreign-aid/

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169676)

Michalle Wolfe (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169676) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 48 of 61

" Reply

When presenting a budget I would also include deductions in major spending areas like military, while decreasing tax cuts for wealthy, and reforming many of the programs already in place. One area that I think needs to be reformed or done away with completely is the Low Income Housing Tax Credit. Created by the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the LIHTC program gives State and local LIHTC-allocating agencies (https://lihtc.huduser.gov/agency_list.htm) the equivalent of approximately $8 billion in annual budget authority to issue tax credits for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing targeted to lower-income households (2020). The problem is that this program has become riddled with corruption and has such strict conditions that it often leaves the cost of building up to 20% more than a medium quality project regular project.

The purpose of the LIHTC was to support housing construction, awarding construction companies credits to cover part of the project and in return developers would have to cap a certain portion of the rents to adhere to the conditions of the credit. Since its inception, the LIHTC investor base has evolved from one based primarily on individual investors to one that by 2003 was dominated almost solely by large financial service conglomerates (2009). The companies are the turning around to smaller companies, contracting out to do the work, just so they can reap the tax benefits. 95% of the LITHC credits were taken by major corporations (2020), while only 5% were taken my individual construction companies.

Another issue that goes hand in hand with the corruption is that once the tax credit is secured there is no incentive to complete work faster or reduce costs because they have already secured the funding appropriations. Although there is a great need for affordable housing, especially in my area in New Jersey, this program is not the answer as it includes a complex set of regulations, standards, and necessary steps. This program has deteriorated over the years and the $9 billion dollars a year could go towards a stronger, more focused, better regulated system.

Low-Income Housing Tax Credits: HUD USER. (2020, June 5). https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/lihtc.html.

Study Examines LIHTC Problems and Reform Proposals. National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2009, November 6). https://nlihc.org/resource/study-examines-lihtc-problems-and-reform-proposals.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/137899)

Eritrea Kiflu (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/137899) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 49 of 61

" Reply

Hello Professor and Class,

My proposed budget is as follows:

Military

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe: $25 billion

Existing Taxes

Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed: $50 billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year: $54 billion

Payroll tax increase for people making over $106,000 annually contributing more to Social Security and Medicare: $50 billion

New Taxes

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million: $50 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take: $73 billion

Total: $302 billion

My primary focus is increasing the tax burden on the wealthy. This is because over time, wealth inequality has been growing (Whitman Cobb, 2020). Currently, the tax burden is heavier on middle class and lower-income people. For example, a study showed that the effective tax rate (tax after deductions and other adjustments) is 23% for the 400 richest families in the country but over 24% for the poorest families (Kelly, 2019). The wealthy are in the best position to pay taxes and still have a comfortable life, and in fact in the past, the effective tax rate was much higher on the rich. For example, in 1960, when the United States was a very prosperous country, the effective tax rate on the wealthiest group was 56% (Kelly, 2019). This example shows that the economy will do well even if wealthy people pay a much higher tax burden than they do now, and so tax increases on that segment would be the most effective way to improve the budget without cutting essential spending programs.

References

Kelly, J. (2019, October 11). For the first time in history, U.S. billionaires paid a lower tax rate than the working class: What should we do about it? Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2019/10/11/for-the-first- time-in-history-us-billionaires-paid-a-lower-tax-rates-than-the-working-class-what-we-should-do-about- it/#26da87f81fce.

Whitman Cobb, W.N. (2020). Political science today. Sage CQ Press.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/125151)

Nikki Lagua (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/125151) Wednesday

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 50 of 61

!

Professor and Class,

I will be displaying my efforts to cut at least $300 billion from the budget. In my budget plan, I plan on focusing on improving equality in the country’s social class and cut out unnecessary use of money. To do so, I recommend the following cuts.

Domestic Programs and Foreign Aid:

Money for states aid can be cut and should increase the amount of revenue from its economy. ($29 Billion)

Military:

Cut the number of nuclear warheads and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program.

($19 Billion)

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further to reduce troops in Asia and Europe.

($25 Billion)

Cancel or delay some weapons program.

($19 Billion)

Healthcare:

Increasing the Social Security age would put pressure on the budget.

($13 Billion)

Existing Taxes:

Taxes from the riches can be collected if we returned to the Clinton era. ($50 Billion)

People who are earning more than $250,000 should be able to pay taxes, therefore tax cuts should be applied to those people. ($54 Billion)

New Taxes:

Institute a Millionaire’s tax on incomes above $1 million. ($50 Billion)

Carbon emission should be taxed. There are some benefits such as reducing pollution. ($40 Billion)

Tax banks based on their size and the amount of risk they take. ($73 Billion)

Total: $372 Billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 51 of 61

" Reply

According to the text (2019,) The rich tend to reap most of the country’s economic rewards. Having such inequality can put an effect on the people themselves. Higher rates in infant mortality, obesity, and lower life expectancy and just some of the issues inequality has on some economies. Utilizing Redistribution policies can provide adequate assistance for the for the lesser part of the economy by using tax revenue from the wealthier. Furthermore, cutting out military expenditure would not have an immediate effect or pose any risk. The U.S. is currently the greatest spender when it comes to its defenses and is already powerful enough (The Balance, n.d.). Carbon tax could also further push the country to find solutions for cleaner energy and promote growth for the economy. An example of a country that found success in carbon tax is Sweden. With carbon taxes, Sweden was able to reduce carbon emission by 26% in the past 27 years and its economy grew by 78%.

Reference

Busting 5 Myths About Government Discretionary Spending. (n.d.). The Balance. https://www.thebalance.com/current-us-discretionary-federal-budget-and-spending-3306308

Cobb, W. W. N. (2019). Political Science Today (1st ed.). CQ Press.

How a Carbon Tax Can Solve Climate Change. (n.d.). The Balance. https://www.thebalance.com/carbon-tax- definition-how-it-works-4158043

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818)

Veronica Smith McCormick (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/140818) Wednesday

!

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 52 of 61

" Reply

Hello instructor Angus and class.

There has been so much controversy over the past decades over budget cuts. According to (Rabinowitz & Uhrmacher, 2020), the Congress is divided over budget cuts because each side wants certain things to remain untouched or more money for. The Republicans want more money for Homeland Security, Defense, and lower corporate taxes. The Democrats want more money for Medicare, Medicaid, and social programs. The budget cuts that I am proposing does not cut any social programs because especially with the COVID 19 pandemic that we are facing, people need more help to manage their households. Here are the proposed budget cuts that total up to $300 billion.

Energy Department:

Cut Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Projects----------------$50 billion

Defense Department:

Cut the number of nuclear weapons------------------------------------$50 billion

Cut the space exploration------------------------------------------------$100 billon

Commerce Department

Cut the development & launching of new satellites-----------------$100 billion

According to (Rabinowitz, 2019), earlier this year, President Trump released his budget to Congress. These cuts were contested and debated heatedly. Congress rejected many of Trump’s previous requests. The budget is an important signal of the administration’s priorities and suggests a major funding fight. Looking at theses suggested cuts and the items that President Trump wanted to increase spending on, I came up with these budget proposals because I do think that defense spending needs to be cut. Also, renewable energy spending needs to be cut because it s very expensive. The citizens of this country needs social programs to help them and their while many are still out of work because of the COVID 19 pandemic.

References:

Rabinowitz, K. (2019). What Trump proposed in his 2020 budget. Retrieved 10/7/2020 from

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019)

Whittman Cobb, W.N. (2020). Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, D.C.: Sage CQ Press

Retrieved 10/7/2020.

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/79392)

Geoffrey Rovira

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 53 of 61

(h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/79392) Wednesday

!

My recommendations for budget cuts would include:

MILITARY Cut the number of nuclear warheads, and end the "Star Wars" missile defense program

$19 billion

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe

$25 billion

Cancel or delay some weapons programs

$19 billion

HEALTHCARE Increase the Medicare eligibility age to 68

$ 8 billion

Raise the Social Security retirement age to 68.

$ 13 billion

EXISTING TAXES

End tax cuts for income above $250,000 a year

$ 54 billion

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million

$ 50 billion

NEW TAXES Add a national 5% sales tax $ 41 billion

Tax banks based on their sizes and the amount of risk they take.

$ 73 billion

Total gap covered by your budget plan

$ 302 billion

With these proposed cuts, there would be $302 billion saved for the fiscal year. According to Whitman Cobb (2020), the main budgetary concerns each year “center around healthcare, entitlement funding, military spending, and other domestic priorities” (p. 158). Military spending is a large portion of the federal budget, and I believe that the amount allocated for it is appallingly excessive. Walter (2020) supports my belief by writing that many believe that the defense budget is “bloated and inefficient.” The military does obviously require money to ensure national safety, but not $649 billion, which was the budget in 2018 (Walter, 2020). That is why most of the budget cuts I propose would involve decreasing military spending.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 54 of 61

" Reply

In regard to the other categories for proposed budget cuts, I believe that Medicare and Social Security age should remain the same. I suppose the reasoning for increasing the age is because people are living longer, however, there are other criteria for some professions and for eligibility. Instituting a Millionaire’s tax on income above $1 million would allow greater resources for social services and balance out inequality (Whitman Cobb, 2020). However, taxes should be percentages of income, and most millionaires avoid paying these taxes using loopholes such as “millionaire migration” (Young, Varner, Lurie, and Prisinzano, 2016). This involves millionaires, who are supposed to pay the largest amount of taxes, find a lower tax state. There is no need to institute a millionaire’s tax, just a remodeling of the current tax system.

References:

Walter, A. (2020). Defense spending: Overview. Points of View: Defense Spending. Retrieved from https://eds-b- ebscohost-com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=6d5fbe98-9f71-4c64-a6ad- c88b885ac7af%40sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=67542040 &db=pwh

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Sage, CQ Press.

Young, C., Varner, C., Lurie, I. Z., & Prisinzano, R. (2016). Millionaire migration and taxation of the elite: Evidence from administrative data. American Sociological Review, 81(3), 421-446. Retrieved from https://eds-b-ebscohost- com.chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=8ea79702-3a4e-46c3-9201- 2ea32ec94992%40pdc-v-sessmgr01

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/50995)

Heather VanDewark (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/50995) Wednesday

!

Currently, as the country is attempting to manage a pandemic and the damage it has created, there are things that need to be re-evaluated due to the current times as our needs change. For my proposed budget cuts, I found it very difficult to take away from citizens as many are experiencing the financial effects of COVID so I tried to take other approaches that I feel would help our country to persevere.

Domestic Programs, Foreign Aid

Military

Cut some foreign aid to African countries $17 billion Cut aid to states by 5% $29 billion

Cut the number of nuclear warheads, end "Star Wars" $19 billion Reduce military $25 billion Cancel or delay some weapons programs $19 billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 55 of 61

Healthcare

Taxes

Total Cut $307 billion

Looking at these proposed tax cuts, we see areas that would not have a huge impact on the citizens. Cutting foreign aid from Africa will provide more money for the U.S., I feel that foreign aid and support is a global problem that should be handled by International Organizations and not a primary responsibility of our country. Lee feels that, assuming that the capacity of government expenditures is limited, the public will be more likely to prioritize expanding domestic social programs over granting foreign aid to less developed parts of the world (2019).

Although growth and military advancements are imperative for our country's safety, at the current time there are programs that are not necessarily a priority during these times. Such as the "Star Wars" missile defense program, that has been active since the 1980's.

I do not feel that cutting healthcare and tax breaks for lower income families, although they would greatly help to improve the budget, would result in a positive long term outcome for our country. Whitman states tax breaks are another way in which the government can influence economic behavior (2020). Raising the Social Security age and increasing payroll taxes for those with annual incomes equal to and exceeding $106,000, allocating that money to Medicare and Social Security, would help provide relief to a larger number of people eligible.

Overall, there is no right answer to what is the best choice. One improvement can cause another affect, that will require assistance or another revision of the budget cuts or new proposals to assist the economy. According to Whitman, societies cannot long survive, or survive easily, without economic success or opportunity (2020).

References

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Sage, CQ Press.

Lee, H. (2019). Inequality and U.S. public opinion on foreign aid. World Affairs, 182(3), pg. 273. Retrieved from https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.598564320&site=eds-live&scope=site (https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.598564320&site=eds-live&scope=site)

(https://chamberlainuniversity.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&db=edsgea&AN=edsgcl.598564320&site=eds-live&scope=site)

Raise the Social Security age to 68 $13 billion

End tax cuts for income above $250,000/yr $54 billion Tax increase for income $106,000/yr, reallocate to SS and Medicare $50 billion Add a national 5% sales tax $41 billion Add tax on carbon emissions $40 billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 56 of 61

" Reply

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157798)

Kimberly Stuck Thornton (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/157798) Wednesday

!

Week 6 Discussion: US Budget

Professor and Class

Domestic programs and foreign aid: Cut some foreign aid to African Countries. $17 billion

I chose to cut the aid to the African countries because it will not only help countries budget, but it will also help to increase the strength in African countries. Africa has been under aid from the United States since they became independent. This aid has not encouraged them to strengthen their communities with jobs and education. The idea is that if the aide is cut then the African government can build toward a democracy. We can still trade with Africa and create a partnership instead of a paternalist relationship. (Kwemo, 2017)

Military: Cut the number of nuclear warheads and end the “Star Wars” missile defense program. $19 billion

I have chosen to cut the number of nuclear warheads and end the “Star Wars” missile defense program because it has never worked not since Reagan produced the idea. Also, how are they going to test it out without causing a war. (Atomic Heritage Foundation, 2018) This is a dream.

Existing Taxes: Return the estate tax to Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1million to their heirs would have portions of those estates taxed. $50 billion

End tax cuts for income above 250,000 a year. $54 billion

I chose these two taxes, because let us face it, if your making this kind of money, you can afford to pay your taxes. “The richest Americans are accruing large fortunes, passing them to their heirs and creating a new aristocracy.” (Americans For Tax Fairness, 2019) Everyone else is barely surviving. “We need a strong estate tax to help restore the promise of America to everyone.” (Americans For Tax Fairness, 2019)

New Taxes: Institute a millionaire's tax on income above $1million. $50 billion

Again, if you make this much money then you can pay taxes like everyone else in the country.

Add a tax on carbon emissions. $40 billion

I chose the carbon emissions tax because A carbon tax would increase the price of burning fossil fuels and of course any of the services provided.” Raising energy prices would raise costs for industry and households, resulting

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 57 of 61

" Reply

course any of the services provided.” Raising energy prices would raise costs for industry and households, resulting in lower profits, wages, and consumption." (Tax Policy Center, 2020) At the same time, it would reduce the carbon consumption, it would also decrease the costs of climate change and air pollution. (Tax Policy Center, 2020)

Tax banks on their sizes and the amount of risk they take. $73 billion

Taxing the banks on the risk they take and trying to manage the bailouts the government will have to administer, can be difficult. If this is done, then is may even decrease the amount of risks the banks will take.

Total= 303 billion

References

Americans For Tax Fairness. (2019). Fact Sheet: The Estate (Inheritance) Tax. Americans For Tax Fairness. https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-the-estate-inheritance- tax/ (https://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-the-estate-inheritance-tax/) .

Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2018, July 18). Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Atomic Heritage Foundation. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/strategic-defense-initiative-sdi (https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/strategic-defense-initiative-sdi) .

Kwemo, A. B. (2017, April 27). Making Africa Great Again: Reducing aid dependency. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-in-focus/2017/04/20/making-africa-great-again-reducing- aid-dependency/ (https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-in-focus/2017/04/20/making-africa-great-again-reducing-aid- dependency/) .

Tax Policy Center. (2020). What is a carbon tax? Tax Policy Center. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing- book/what-carbon-tax (https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-carbon-tax) .

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719)

Breanna Majzel (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719) Wednesday

!

Dear Professor and Class,

In order to cut down budgets by at least 300 billion dollars, I would make the following cuts:

Domestic Programs and Foreign Aid

Eliminate farm subsidies---------------------------------------------------------------------------$14 billion

Military

Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe---$25 billion

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 58 of 61

Healthcare

Existing Taxes

End tax cuts for incomes above $250,000 a year--------------------------------------------- $54 billion

Return the estate tax to the Clinton-era levels, passing on an estate worth more than $1 million to their heirs and have a portion of those estates taxed--------------------------------------------------------$50 billion

New Taxes

Add a tax on carbon emission---------------------------------------------------------------------$40 billion

Tax banks based on their size and the amount of risk they take-----------------------------$73 billion

Institute a Millionaire's tax on income above $1 million------------------------------------------$50 billion

____________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________

Total: $306 billion

Some of the cuts were easier decisions to make over others, but overall this is my reasoning backing up my budget cuts. According to the article, Farmers Got Billions From Taxpayers In 2019, And Hardly Anyone Objected, farms are getting "overcompensated" for all the losses of the crop season by getting far more money than needed, or loss (Charles, 2019). Do not get me wrong, farmers work long hours and fight hard, but the money they are receiving is far too much. Then, by reducing the number of troops we have overseas in Asia and Europe and going back to pre- Iraq size can save billions and billions. This was a tough cut though, I believe having a strong military is one of the best things a country can have. Knowing we have such a strong front keeping us safe is something to be proud of, but I believe there need to be some cuts made to that department at the same time. Next, people who have an income greater than $250,000 should not be granted tax cuts. Those people fortunte enough to make that knd of money do not need the type of tax cut that the average American needs to survive. Also, by returning the estate taxes to the Clinton-era, the government can collect more taxes on those who have passed with an estate tax of more than $1 million. This is also known as the death tax.

Carbon emission is terrible for our enviorment, and Earth all together, so it was easy to add on taxes for carbon emissions. Banks should be taxed according to the size of the company and how risky the bank is, they should be taxed more to compensate. Finally, those who make over $1 million should be taxed higher than those in the middle and lower class. People making above a million have the money to spare, although to them it might not be fair but they might think differntly in middle or lower classes' shoes. What are your guys' thoughts on my budget cut decisions? Do you think the money could have been more effectively cut somewhere else? Did I make appropriate cuts?

Charles, D. (2019). Farmers Got Billions From Taxpayers In 2019, And Hardly Anyone Objected. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2019/12/31/790261705/farmers-got-billions-from-taxpayers-in-2019-and- hardly-anyone-objected

Cobb, W.N.W. (2020). Political Science Today. Sage: CQ Press

Friedman, B. (2017). A Plan to Cut Military Spending. https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/defense/plan-cut- military-spending

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 59 of 61

" Reply

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/72720)Samuel Angus (Instructor) Yesterday

" Reply

!

FARM SUBSIDIES Bre, Kylie, and Class,

Should farm subsidies be reduced or eliminated? If so, how come? Because they short circuit market mechanisms? Because they can lead to overproduction, overuse of marginal farmland, land price inflation, and excess borrowing? For other reasons? Why do we have farm subsidies in the first place?

Sam

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169676)

Michalle Wolfe (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/169676) Yesterday

!

Originally used to stabilize markets, help low-income farmers, and aid in rural development, things have changed and corruption lines this subsidy just like many others. Although many subsidies are used to promote growth, many farm subsidies are used to control the growth by limiting production. The farm security and rural investment act of 2002, or the Farm Bill, directs $16.5 billion in government funding toward agricultural subsidies every year(2019). I do not necessarily think they should be eliminated but I do believe that the terms need to be re-written and things need to change. One of the main problems with the subsidies is that they do not always go to the farmers in need. From 1995 to 2016 most of the agricultural subsidies paid out went to large businesses instead of small farms (Gaille, 2018). According the the Conservative- learning heritage Foundation, just 15% of farmers in the United States receive 50% of the direct benefits of agricultural subsides (Gaille, 2018). This just shows how the subsidies in their current state do little to help the small farmer instead propelling larger corporations and giving tax breaks where they are not deserved. Subsidies directly affect the supply and price of the market in which they belong therefore government involvement has a larger chance to control the industry. They manipulate the markets and make it harder for the smaller farms to survive in the current industry.

Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002 - H.R. 2646). (2019). https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/hr2646 (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/hr2646) .

Gaille, B. (2018, May 8). 17 Top Pros and Cons of Agricultural Subsidies. BrandonGaille.com. https://brandongaille.com/17-top-pros-and-cons-of-agricultural-subsidies/.

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 60 of 61

" Reply

(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719)

Breanna Majzel (h!ps://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/68288/users/126719) Yesterday

" Reply

!

Dear Professor,

In my initial post I said farm subsides should be eliminated, but ultimately I believe that it should be reduced. I am from a rural area where I am practically surrounding by farm land, so I understand that they have rough years with floods, droughts, wind, price changes, etc, but they are being overcompensated. Farming subsides is up to more than $20 billion a year (Edwards, 2018). Us tax payers are paying a lot of money towards it and the farm subsides are hurting the economy as well. I understand that farming is effected by the economy and weather, but it is not fair to other risk taking jobs that are not getting the same compensation. If the government feels that farm subsides needs to be in the federal budget somewhere, then they need to consider reducing it. It is not fair that these farm subsides are being handed out to farmers in such a large amounts. An adjustment in the amount of money towards farm subsides needs to take place. If the government feels that it is their place to help the farmers out, then so be, but the least you can do for tax payers is to put the use of the money somewhere else where it is more beneficial.

Do you guys think that other risky jobs should be given money from the government as well? Do you think the farm subsides should be reduced? Eliminated? Can you think of better ways this money can be used in the budget?

Edwards, C. (2018). Downsizing the federal government. https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/agriculture/subsidies

10/9/20, 12:52 AM Page 61 of 61