Warren Buffett, "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes

[BlessEwe]

Wall Photos
Warren Buffett, "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all
sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. The 26th
amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months
& 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in
1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to
the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the
land...all because of public pressure.

Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of
twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do
likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the
message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*

1. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office
and receives no pay when they are out of office.

2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security. All
funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security
system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system,
and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for
any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans
do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay
will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the
same health care system as the American people.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American
people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen
made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor,
not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours
should serve their term's), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take
three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is
time.

Warren Buffett: I could end the deficit in 5 minutes. | The Big Picture

 

[Wolseley]

Good luck, Warren. You won't get that gang to give up their grip on power.

 

[Self Improvement]

I have much different ideas of what should be done with the "people" who are "serving" in congress.

 

[sdmsanjose]

"You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all
sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election.

*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*

What a great Idea!

Instead of just complaining and complaining about congress here we have a real solution.

 

[RedDead1981]

I approve.

 

[[serious]]

I like it.

 

[Vylo]

I can get behind this.

 

[Verv]

I support Mr. Buffet's proposal.

We shouldn't reward politicians who do a bad job.

 

[VolRaider]

Yeah, I'm sure our two-party dictatorship will adopt this!
If our Founding Fathers could have seen the future of our federal government, they would have stayed under the Crown.

 

[NewUser777]

This is a very foolish statement by Warren Buffett. He's been saying a lot of foolish things lately.

This has the same chance of passing as term limits for Congress. And when's the last time they voted on that?

 

[lemur]

Two problems:

• Wars
• Depressions

During a war, an actual one with another formidable power not the skirmishes we're in now, military spending has to go up. Unless you raise taxes to accommodate this difference, the deficit increases. Raising taxes sounds great however if we are ever faced with another superpower, there's a good chance that the enough of our economy will be redirected from taxable production to war production that it's impossible to overcome this difference if only temporarily.

During massive economic downturns, the only fiscal entity large enough to bring the economy back on it's feet is the Government. Again, incomes go down due to production and this can't be recuperated, spending must also increase to buffer the blow.

 

[Ishraqiyun]

deleted.

 

[rambot]

Two problems:

• Wars
• Depressions

During a war, an actual one with another formidable power not the skirmishes we're in now, military spending has to go up. Unless you raise taxes to accommodate this difference, the deficit increases. Raising taxes sounds great however if we are ever faced with another superpower, there's a good chance that the enough of our economy will be redirected from taxable production to war production that it's impossible to overcome this difference if only temporarily.

During massive economic downturns, the only fiscal entity large enough to bring the economy back on it's feet is the Government. Again, incomes go down due to production and this can't be recuperated, spending must also increase to buffer the blow.

Seems to me that if America got into a "good real war", it would probably be with a country that they already owe hundreds of billions of dollars. I can't imagine the US has the financial fortitude to self service a war effort.

 

[lemur]

Seems to me that if America got into a "good real war", it would probably be with a country that they already owe hundreds of billions of dollars. I can't imagine the US has the financial fortitude to self service a war effort.

I agree with your assessment that we lack the capacity to fight a large scale engagement. We've been mobilized against a non-existent threat for over 2 decades now and this has been a slow leach on our resources for dynamic action should the need come. The brute force tactic however can keep us safe in the short term from any potential foes.

I'm not overly concerned about this in the short term however since right now, no country is even close to the degree of political influence that we possess or military/economic power so the engagement that I refer to is not this decade, but perhaps a century down the line. Since our current military would be the end of us by this point in time if current trends continue, I've assumed that there has already been a drastic optimization of our current resource expenditures.

 

[chaz345]

Two problems:

• Wars
• Depressions

During massive economic downturns, the only fiscal entity large enough to bring the economy back on it's feet is the Government. Again, incomes go down due to production and this can't be recuperated, spending must also increase to buffer the blow.

I fail to see how that's really a problem though because the resulting deficit will simply mean that all of congress gets tossed out, which is fine because they are probably largely responsible for the downturn in the first place.

What people who believe the government is the only one who can save us from depressions fail to realize is that it's also government that largely creates them in the first place. A smaller government that may nto be able to help dig out of a depression would also be less capable of creating the conditions that create one in the first place. Small economic dips become large recessions and depressions in large part, because of government efforts to reverse them.

 

[sdmsanjose]

Reply by Chaz
I fail to see how that's really a problem though because the resulting deficit will simply mean that all of congress gets tossed out, which is fine because they are probably largely responsible for the downturn in the first place.

Right on!!

Congress needs to be held accountable for their job just like all the rest of us.

If we perform poorly in our job for days or weeks we get fired quickly. Congress performs badly for years and they stay in office for years. If the business I run had a surplus and I ran it into a deficient for years (the worst deficit in decades) I would have been fired before the first year was finished.

A law like Buffett suggests would be a very good start!

Two problems:

• Wars
• Depressions

The last two very expensive wars were Iraq/Afghanistan and Viet Nam. Those wars were around 30 years apart. The last very serious depressions were 1929-2008 and were over 70 years apart.

Wars and depression will not be a problem if the Buffett proposal becomes law because their will be plenty of time, if needed, for congress to change things accordingly to deal with those issues that occur 30-70 years apart.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Congress is only part of the problem. Suppose a hypothetical Congress passed all the measures necessary to reduce the deficit to 3% of GDP but then a President vetoed the measures? Let's take it further, suppose the Congress above passed those measures in an election year and those up for election from that Congress consisted of a solid majority of members from the party that was in opposition to the President's party so the President used the pocket veto until election day which would in effect hand the election to the non incumbents thereby giving the President a Congress with a huge bloc that was completely indebted to him for its election and a majority of which were of his own party. You might as well give the President the power to appoint members of Congress.

 

[blueapplepaste]

Sounds good to me.

 

[lemur]

I fail to see how that's really a problem though because the resulting deficit will simply mean that all of congress gets tossed out, which is fine because they are probably largely responsible for the downturn in the first place.

Economies don't change overnight. The problems that we are dealing with today are the result of several decades of inaction/corruption. Most of the politicians who created the problem are already gone. If it were enacted today, it would take years to repair the damage, at that rate, we'd go though several cycles of politicians who could be legitimately helping before the problem is resolved.

Even worse, with the state of our congress, a small fraction of our representatives can effectively ground all progress. It's entirely conceivable that this legislation can be used to manipulate elections.

 

[sdmsanjose]

By grasping the after wind
Congress is only part of the problem. Suppose a hypothetical Congress passed all the measures necessary to reduce the deficit to 3% of GDP but then a President vetoed the measures? Let's take it further, suppose the Congress above passed those measures in an election year and those up for election from that Congress consisted of a solid majority of members from the party that was in opposition to the President's party so the President used the pocket veto until election day which would in effect hand the election to the non incumbents thereby giving the President a Congress with a huge bloc that was completely indebted to him for its election and a majority of which were of his own party. You might as well give the President the power to appoint members of Congress.

Adjust the law to avoid the above manipulations. Adjustments along the lines as described below may work:

Every congressman that does not vote to overrule the president’s veto against economic responsibility, allowing in excess of 3% GNP, cannot run for reelection. Every congressman that votes to reduce the deficit to 3% of GNP and/or votes for the override of president’s veto are exempt from being excluded from running for reelection.

Any president that goes against 2/3 of the congress and/or 2/3 of the American voters will lose the next election and will be out of office.


Grasping the after wind
What is your solution to making the politicians fiscally accountable so that we can try to avoid the financial disaster that has occurred?