Can this reduce our national debt?
I'm of a slightly different mindset then some here. When I look at a certain board in Times Square here in NYC, I see that our national debt is in the 9 trilllion mark; not to make it sound like a sick joke, but I've heard that even some millionaires have trouble imagining that collosal amount of money. It's obviously contributing to our weak dollar (last estimate is that 1 Euro is worth $1.57 & steadily climbing), & I believe that it's s contributing factor to our weak economy & the reason jobs are moving overseas.
According to what I read on the main page regarding your plan, we export $700 billion to these foreign (& unstable) regimes for their oil. How much realistically could we save under this plan & reduce our debt? As important, how much would it be paid off per year? Is $700 billion a realistic number, $200 billion, dare I hope that it could be all paid off in a 10 year timeframe? Neither presidential candidate has talked about this except in terms of lowering the interest on said debt, this worries me. So far, it seems that the only reason other countries aren't "pulling the rug from under us" is that we (Americans) by & large are the biggest or one of the biggest markets. What if this changes (very likely since China & India are buying & competing at record paces)? The bigger our reliance is on others the less stable our future (the country & it's peoples) becomes.
One aside, I would love for someone to post this topic to both candidates. They can't avoid something that's directly asked to them
According to what I read on the main page regarding your plan, we export $700 billion to these foreign (& unstable) regimes for their oil. How much realistically could we save under this plan & reduce our debt? As important, how much would it be paid off per year? Is $700 billion a realistic number, $200 billion, dare I hope that it could be all paid off in a 10 year timeframe? Neither presidential candidate has talked about this except in terms of lowering the interest on said debt, this worries me. So far, it seems that the only reason other countries aren't "pulling the rug from under us" is that we (Americans) by & large are the biggest or one of the biggest markets. What if this changes (very likely since China & India are buying & competing at record paces)? The bigger our reliance is on others the less stable our future (the country & it's peoples) becomes.
One aside, I would love for someone to post this topic to both candidates. They can't avoid something that's directly asked to them
Views: 1
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Warner on -
Your concern regarding our national debt is good. And keeping our currency at home rather than
exporting it would be the right thing to do. This is just one reason to support the Pickens Plan.
Politicians are afraid to even think of plan to curtail spending and decrease the debt. Mr Obama
who says he wants change can only think of higher taxes as an answer. The real answer is found
in the Pickens Plan. But we also need the FairTax which is a national sales tax that will completely
repeal and replace the income tax system. The income tax itself costs us $100 of billions per year
to implement. That money is wasted: it doesnt build bridges or schools or help pay our bills. It robs
us of the funds necessary for ideas like the Pickens Plan which would get us on the right track
to energy independence using wind and clean fuel like natural gas. A good adjunct to the Pickens
Plan is the FairTax rather than special tax incentives which may seem good but the good is often
lost in the fine print.
The FairTax will help free up the funds necessary and will help pay our bills as we transition to
a better system for our energy needs.
You can learn more at FairTax.org. There is a link at that website where you can write your
congressman and ask him or her to support the FairTax. (Some argue that the FairTax is
regressive which may harm the poor and the middle class. It is not. Again see FairTax.org to
learn more.)
Thanks
-
Permalink Reply by JohnG on -
I like the Pickens Plan because it is a plan (we haven't had one, except 'drill more').
I am also becoming a convert to the 'fair tax' (a consumption tax). The Bush plan for any problem is 'go shopping'. Spend all of the money that you have. Spend all of the money that you can charge on your credit cards, your home equity line of credit (Heloc). And, we will borrow some more money from China and send it to you to spend (the stimulus package). The solution to all of our problems could be 'save a little'. I believe that a consumption tax would encourage that.
I have another one. Produce, distribute, sell AND tax "recreational" drugs (like we do tobacco and alcohol). This would give legal work to hundreds of thousands, bring in millions in taxes, which could pay for people who get sick/addicted/want to get off.
Athletes, lawyers, doctors, judges, etc. use these drugs and we send hundreds of millions off to Columbia, Mexico, etc to try to stop them from coming in. We could save billions on our war on drugs.
-
Permalink Reply by Warner on
-
The FairTax has been a passion of mine since I met the folks who originally developed
it. I believe it is a well-thought-out program that will free us from the onerous income
tax. If we can agree that the purpose of the income tax is to supply the funds
to run the government then the FairTax would do that. Under the FairTax the tax is
paid at the point of retail. Used goods are exempt. Things are taxed only once.
Everyone would receive a rebate of over $100 per month to cover taxes on necessary
items. This means that the poor will pay very little tax at all and therefore have the
means to get out of poverty should they so desire. Moreover they would keep their
whole paycheck. The income tax costs us many many billions of dollars. The FairTax
is easy and inexpensive to operate.
The FairTax will free up the necessary funds to build a safe, clean and domestic
energy system here in the US. We now all know the turmoil of dependence on foreign
oil. And we must do something soon.
Once again check out FairTax.org.
Thanks
-
Permalink Reply by SJC on -
Clinton balanced the budget and ran a surplus. I see no reason why the U.S. government can not run a surplus and pay down the debt. But as soon as Clinton ran a surplus, conservatives were looking for ways to give tax breaks to the rich. It seems that they want to borrow and spend. Reagan wanted debt so that there would be no more social programs. Dufus wants debt so that we stay addicted to oil and can not afford to develop any of the alternatives. As long as we have people claiming to be patriots selling the country down the river we will never pay down the debt.
-
Permalink Reply by Dale Nelson on -
The first step in this plan should be a solid commitment to never again vote for any Republican. Never. Not one. The Green Party would have done a better job.
-
Permalink Reply by WALTER REED on -
Your comments are good. Unfortunately, our trusted political leaders and think-tanks have long range visions as far out as Friday night of each week. The middle-east put a shot across out bow in the 1970's to mid 80's. Great effort was undertaken by the private industries to develop solar and wind, geothermal, clean coal conversions, alternate fuels, etc, but as soon as the 'false bubble' broke in 1986 with the collapse of oil prices to $12/Barrel, the government pulled all alternative energy tax incentives, and the race was on for big horsepower, big SUV, etc. End of planning, crises over - and that is our government's idea of long range planning. Our government is owned by private interest groups and corporate interests. No matter if twiddle-dee or tweedledum-dum is elected, it's business as usual. Any action taken will first assure the politicians pockets are well lined as will be the private interest groups that own the politicians.
40% of the electorate have currently taken the time and trouble to re-register as Independents. That's a number count of how many of our citizens are totally disgusted with politics as usual. If at least 30% of those persons would now carry through and vote for an independent candidate and party, then regardless of who wins, we will have sent a very loud message to Capitol Hill that the people are taking back their country -- that the incumbent best listen-up. The 'do-nothing' Congress is then put on notice that they may well loose their job in two years -- best listen up to the people.
To answer your question: YES, action on the Boone Pickens plan would lower our national debt and create new jobs. His plan a component to get things moving - of a much broader plan for energy. We also need to drill domestically for oil and much more. Every barrel of oil avoided from off-shore purchase is putting a halt to the export of our country's wealth and the control over us that goes with it to off-shore interests. We must seriously become energy independent - NOW.
-
Permalink Reply by DJ on -
The fact that the dollar isn't BASED on anything tangible, and that we inflate our standard of living while plugging into a global economy that doesn't, might have more to do with that dropping value of the dollar than the elements you mentioned, but yes, ONE TRILLION THREE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS (The projected cost of Picken's plan) is a massive amount of money, even for the government. In the longest Presidential campain in U.S. history, this plan of mr. Pickens seems to have allowed a mighty short time to get his legislation through. Sounds like the classic slight of hand tactics of a con artist to tell the truth. That doesn't mean that Mr. Pickens can't be genuine - but plenty of crooks have gotten legislation through in this way. Thank you for expressing your concern on this, and yes, I eagerly await to hear what Obama bin ladin, and Mr. magoo McCain have to say on this.
-
Permalink Reply by Harrison on -
...If they say anything, as I wrote in the OP I want someone to pose my query to both candidates when they inevitably debate. Whether Pickens is a sham artist or not, the fact is that he's the only one in a long time (Ross Perot was the other) that spoke in these terms. Perot spoke in terms of manufacturing,"You must be a manufacturing superpower if you expect to be a world superpower" if I remember his quote correctly. Pickens is obviously about the oil, I've looked~skimmed at Al Gores plan also. Some stuff overlaps with Pickens, but I think Mr. Pickens plan is more practical for the simple reason that you get farther with appealing to peoples greed & loyalty &/or benevolence as opposed to just appealing to their benevolence &/or loyalty.
My question becomes "how long will this take if implemented?" I seriously doubt we're talking "overnight success", so would two years be feasable? Four years? A decade, a generation?
Oh yeah, to the 1st two repliers. I checked out Fairtax.org. It looks interesting.
-
Permalink Reply by DJ on
-
LOL! Perot was the first name that popped into MY head too! *chuckle* I didn't believe a BIT of Perot when he ran for President, but I noticed how all the villians who called him a liar, NOW pretend they were best buddies and quote him as words of wisdom. Sure HOPE this Pickens fellow is as smart and genuine as Perot turned out to be.
-
Permalink Reply by Thomas Ketchum on -
AN OPEN LETTER TO MR. T. BOONE PICKENS.
We have joined your effort to reduce U.S. dependency on imported oil and gas and, in that connection, are presenting you with a method for increasing the efficiency of present natural gas usage, as it relates to fertilizer production in the United States.
Our plan is proven to increase nitrogen delivery efficiency by more than 40%, compared to currently-used methods of creating dry chemical fertilizers and dumping them on the ground.
What we are offering you is a simultaneous solution to (1) Homeland Security, (2) Agriculture, (3) Environmental concerns, and (4) Economic Stimulus and Development concerns, which are of increasing interest to all Americans.
What we have to offer is a 100% environmentally “green” liquid fertilizer manufacturing installation and processes, along with patented formulae, which produce liquid ecological fertilizers (N-P-K, plus micro elements) using common non-toxic mineral compounds.
The formulations do NOT, per se, include any organic materials. However, here in Europe, these formulations are so ecologically friendly ("green") that they are certified for use in "organic" farming operations.
These machines produce N-P-K fertilizers WITHOUT EVER using dangerous, explosive, Ammonium Nitrate. Accordingly, you will find that a broad deployment of these machines, throughout our nation can be a big help in the "War On Terror", since they form the basis of restricting Ammonium Nitrate to a very very few, large industrial farm operations. As such, terrorists will have a much harder time making Oklahoma City-styled bombs.
We have erected a pilot facility (for sales purposes, so as to not give away formulae secrets during actual operations) near the city of Buzau (about 100 km from Bucharest). We are prepared to allow close inspection of this facility by you or your designated representatives and/or by the United States government in Bucharest, which could confirm any and all claims we make about this enterprise for anyone interested.
We are requesting that you or someone you trust undertake a “fact-finding” trip to Romania to witness the machinery and the processes after an initial evaluation by the aforementioned appropriate local representatives of the U.S. government who are presently in Bucharest.
Thereafter, we would ask you to seriously consider corporate sponsorship of a deployment of these machines along your proposed wind generation corridor (as spelled-out in the Pickens Plan). Thereafter, we ask that you propose legislation back in the Congress, which would place these machines in service throughout the United States in sufficient numbers and in broad enough distribution (as to area) so as to support subsequent legislation to strictly curtail and limit access to Ammonium Nitrate fertilizers, as a measure to assist in “the War on Terror”. The machines and processes are needed because, until now, no large-scale, commercially-viable alternative existed to Ammonium Nitrate fertilizers.
Only with a nation-wide mandate to increase efficiency in nitrogen delivery, such as can be achieved by the large-scale use of these machines, can the aforementioned 40+ % increase in natural gas use efficiency be had, as it relates to natural gas use in fertilizer production.
With these machines, you eliminate a readily-available explosive from the public domain. This does not even touch the other benefits to be had from these remarkable fertilizers.
In the spirit of patriotism, we are prepared to work with you to ensure that costs for deployment of this technology is not prohibitive and also does not run counter to either good business or the National Interests of the United States.
Specifically, we offer to train trainers here in Romania and there, in the United States, once domestic production is funded and, otherwise, fully supported.
We have all information at the ready to support our proposal, immediately. Please contact us, directly, for more specific information.
Think how many people would be put to work simply manufacturing the machinery (places like closed shipyards or other facilities closed during a recent economic slowdown would be perfect, for example).
We hope to hear from you or from someone of equal vision for a more energy self-sufficient future for the United States.
While we would rather keep this simple and deal, exclusively, with one man of vision and means, we are prepared, in any case, to license those who might wish to use our inventions on some lesser scale.
Sincerely,
Thomas L. Ketchum, Jr.
and Elena M. Ketchum
for
SC Thopy7 SRL
Strada Dr. Ion Nanu Muscel, Nr. 13, Ap. 3
Bucharest, Romania
050521
fax: 011-40-21-410-8910
office: 011-40-73-100-3792
email: FOLPLANT@AOL.COM
© 2013 Created by PickensPlan.
Powered by
Badges | Community Guidelines | Report an Issue | Terms of Service
