Picard said:

---

All of our 401ks are IRAs are about to become worthless, right along with the dollar.

Prepare accordingly.

---

Please elaborate.

Over_ed said:

---

YouBet said:

---

TTUArmy said:

---

YouBet said:

---

This will all be irrelevant anyway according to Elon. He says money will no longer exist soon.

We are good.

---

Elon could be right. I also think AI has great potential.AI requires a lot of capex to get it off the ground. With capital being diverted into defense and energy, because wars and conflicts pay better, AI progress loses a bit of steam. The sooner we stop messing around in the M.E., the sooner we can push capital back into AI projects again.

---

Elon is the Tony Stark of our time...to overuse that cliche, but I'm not convinced AI and robots will solve scarcity. Neither of those do nothing to solve unlimited and unconstrained energy nor make raw resources infinite.

I hope I'm wrong though.

---

Elon thinks the immediate answer for energy is solar, and is diving into that for the US in a big way. 100 GW added capacity per year from Tesla/SpaceX. He "preaches" on X about solar regularly.

I am not a positive about the future and AI as Elon, but he repeatedly puts his money where his heart is and succeeds.

https://now.solar/2026/02/03/musk-eyes-100-gw-of-solar-panel-manufacturing-capacity-in-the-usa-green-building-africa/

---

We are actually moving into a house that happens to have solar. (It's paid for).

Makes you think.

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

Saw some reel by a guy who thinks Trump will declare US insolvent and decide to not pay every bank. Bankruptcy.

---

I think that would destroy the country. Our dollar is backed by nothing other than confidence that the US will pay its debts, and demand for oil. Even if we wipe out our debt, it's not like we have a balanced budget now. We'll immediately need to start borrowing again, and no one will loan us money.

---

The US Dollar is backed by the permission to participate in the US economy. You can't operate in the US economy unless you pay taxes. You can only pay taxes in $'s.

I'm not saying that bankruptcy is a good idea. It is a terrible idea. But the idea that the $ has absolutely nothing behind it is incorrect.

---

Quibble: almost half the population gets to participate in the economy without paying taxes and having skin in the game. They should lose the right to vote, at least.

---

Retort: People that pay zero federal income taxes pay on average between 10% and 15% of their total income in other taxes, and many have a total tax burden that is equal to middle class American's on a percentage of income basis, because things like sales tax, excise taxes, gasoline taxes, etc. are regressive.

Focusing on FIT is speciously myopic.

BusterAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

Saw some reel by a guy who thinks Trump will declare US insolvent and decide to not pay every bank. Bankruptcy.

---

I think that would destroy the country. Our dollar is backed by nothing other than confidence that the US will pay its debts, and demand for oil. Even if we wipe out our debt, it's not like we have a balanced budget now. We'll immediately need to start borrowing again, and no one will loan us money.

---

The US Dollar is backed by the permission to participate in the US economy. You can't operate in the US economy unless you pay taxes. You can only pay taxes in $'s.

I'm not saying that bankruptcy is a good idea. It is a terrible idea. But the idea that the $ has absolutely nothing behind it is incorrect.

---

Quibble: almost half the population gets to participate in the economy without paying taxes and having skin in the game. They should lose the right to vote, at least.

---

Retort: People that pay zero federal income taxes pay on average between 10% and 15% of their total income in other taxes, and many have a total tax burden that is equal to middle class American's on a percentage of income basis, because things like sales tax, excise taxes, gasoline taxes, etc. are regressive.

Focusing on FIT is speciously myopic.

---

Counter retort: Don't care. We all pay that. They get a free ride and have no skin in the game at federal level which is where we get really f'ed because these same people are able to vote themselves more largesse. We have one of the most progressive tax systems on the planet at federal level.

Frankly, it's mostly irrelevant at this point anyway. We are going down in flames and there ain't **** to do about it at this point.

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

Saw some reel by a guy who thinks Trump will declare US insolvent and decide to not pay every bank. Bankruptcy.

---

I think that would destroy the country. Our dollar is backed by nothing other than confidence that the US will pay its debts, and demand for oil. Even if we wipe out our debt, it's not like we have a balanced budget now. We'll immediately need to start borrowing again, and no one will loan us money.

---

The US Dollar is backed by the permission to participate in the US economy. You can't operate in the US economy unless you pay taxes. You can only pay taxes in $'s.

I'm not saying that bankruptcy is a good idea. It is a terrible idea. But the idea that the $ has absolutely nothing behind it is incorrect.

---

Quibble: almost half the population gets to participate in the economy without paying taxes and having skin in the game. They should lose the right to vote, at least.

---

Retort: People that pay zero federal income taxes pay on average between 10% and 15% of their total income in other taxes, and many have a total tax burden that is equal to middle class American's on a percentage of income basis, because things like sales tax, excise taxes, gasoline taxes, etc. are regressive.

Focusing on FIT is speciously myopic.

---

They get a free ride and have no skin in the game at federal level

---

Technically incorrect. If you buy gasoline, you pay federal taxes, and have "skin in the game" at the federal level.

Maybe your complaint is about the level of taxation across different income levels, but that is a different discussion than "half of America doesn't pay taxes". That is just false. It is factually incorrect. It sounds great to make that argument, but it's just not true.

BusterAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

WestAustinAg said:

---

Saw some reel by a guy who thinks Trump will declare US insolvent and decide to not pay every bank. Bankruptcy.

---

I think that would destroy the country. Our dollar is backed by nothing other than confidence that the US will pay its debts, and demand for oil. Even if we wipe out our debt, it's not like we have a balanced budget now. We'll immediately need to start borrowing again, and no one will loan us money.

---

The US Dollar is backed by the permission to participate in the US economy. You can't operate in the US economy unless you pay taxes. You can only pay taxes in $'s.

I'm not saying that bankruptcy is a good idea. It is a terrible idea. But the idea that the $ has absolutely nothing behind it is incorrect.

---

Quibble: almost half the population gets to participate in the economy without paying taxes and having skin in the game. They should lose the right to vote, at least.

---

Retort: People that pay zero federal income taxes pay on average between 10% and 15% of their total income in other taxes, and many have a total tax burden that is equal to middle class American's on a percentage of income basis, because things like sales tax, excise taxes, gasoline taxes, etc. are regressive.

Focusing on FIT is speciously myopic.

---

They get a free ride and have no skin in the game at federal level

---

Technically incorrect. If you buy gasoline, you pay federal taxes, and have "skin in the game" at the federal level.

Maybe your complaint is about the level of taxation across different income levels, but that is a different discussion than "half of America doesn't pay taxes". That is just false. It is factually incorrect. It sounds great to make that argument, but it's just not true.

---

40-50% of American do not pay federal income tax which is what I'm saying and is true. And many of those get paid back by the government on top of it and are net negative.

I've never claimed that they pay no taxes at all. When I say that, my first sentence is the underlying assumption because it's fact and known.

flown-the-coop said:

---

sts7049 said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Picard said:

---

All of our 401ks are IRAs are about to become worthless, right along with the dollar.

Prepare accordingly.

---

I am curious. For you and the 5 who starred this as of this reply, but what are you doing to "prepare accordingly"?

Water source, shelter and ammo?

Buying gold with William Devaine?

Holding Chinese Yuan and Mexican Pesos?

Just curious how one prepares for a debt collapse in the United States.

---

start learning mandarin

---

You mean the country that has never successfully invaded another country (at least one its not adjacent too and even then not really successfully) in its… 4,000 THOUSAND YEAR HISTORY is going to wipe out the United States?

Got it.

---

if we wipe ourselves out they don't have to do much work

It is true that around 50% of Americans do not pay federal income tax. It is not true that they have "no skin in the game" at the federal level.

We don't need to be arguing for our government to get more taxes from poor people, we need to focus on getting the government to stop stealing the money that we give to them.

BusterAg said:

---

It is true that around 50% of Americans do not pay federal income tax. It is not true that they have "no skin in the game" at the federal level.

We don't need to be arguing for our government to get more taxes from poor people, we need to focus on getting the government to stop stealing the money that we give to them.

---

We will have to agree to disagree on bold. If they had to pay income tax, maybe they would be less apt to vote for more spending or at least spending that makes sense.

Good luck on getting the government to do that. Pipe dream. Meanwhile, we are removing more and more people from the bottom putting ever more burden on the top half.

Since we are not going to cut any spending, we should at least make everyone pay in to the total system and not just parts of it.

BusterAg said:

---

It is true that around 50% of Americans do not pay federal income tax. It is not true that they have "no skin in the game" at the federal level.

We don't need to be arguing for our government to get more taxes from poor people, we need to focus on getting the government to stop stealing the money that we give to them.

---

More taxes from poor people? They're not getting anything from poor people. Just handing out entitlements to them. Poor people continue to vote for the govt to give them other people's money. People shouldn't get to vote if they aren't paying taxes.

Aggies1322 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

It is true that around 50% of Americans do not pay federal income tax. It is not true that they have "no skin in the game" at the federal level.

We don't need to be arguing for our government to get more taxes from poor people, we need to focus on getting the government to stop stealing the money that we give to them.

---

More taxes from poor people? They're not getting anything from poor people. Just handing out entitlements to them. Poor people continue to vote for the govt to give them other people's money. People shouldn't get to vote if they aren't paying taxes.

---

How to reduce entitlements:

Eliminate 80% of entitlement fraud

There, I pretty much balanced the budget for you.

It's not poor men that are voting for the government to spend all of our money. It's liberal white women. That is the enemy. Don't let this lie that some people don't pay any taxes take your eyes off of the real problem.

If I had to choose between taking the vote away from poor people or women, I would choose women.

Realize that requiring a person to pay FIT in order to vote would require a constitutional amendment, because what you are talking about is a poll tax.

flown-the-coop said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Time to move to India.
US corporations are sending jobs to India after firing people here anyway.

---

Which areas most interest you? Mumbai and New Delhi are crazy crowded but Mumbai is warmer and has some beaches. I would stay away from contested areas in the north unless conflict is your thing.

Hyderabad is supposed to be nice and there are some very scenic areas to visit and lib. English is widely spoken.

Southern areas also trend to more Christian though Sri Lanka may feel more comfortable.

BTW - If you think evil CEOs and corrupt politicians along with their coastal elite overlords keep you down, the caste system in India may not be your cup of tea.

---

He's a hammer. Every CEO is a nail. Ignore it.

Oh I am aware. But sometimes I think they should provide some follow-up when they suggest "it's time to move to India"…

infinity ag said:

---

Time to move to India.
US corporations are sending jobs to India after firing people here anyway.

---

Oracle just fired 40% of their staff in India. Come again.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Oh I am aware. But sometimes I think they should provide some follow-up when they suggest "it's time to move to India"…

---

I agree but he won't. Just another CEO, H1B, management are evil type things.

BusterAg said:

---

Aggies1322 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

It is true that around 50% of Americans do not pay federal income tax. It is not true that they have "no skin in the game" at the federal level.

We don't need to be arguing for our government to get more taxes from poor people, we need to focus on getting the government to stop stealing the money that we give to them.

---

More taxes from poor people? They're not getting anything from poor people. Just handing out entitlements to them. Poor people continue to vote for the govt to give them other people's money. People shouldn't get to vote if they aren't paying taxes.

---

How to reduce entitlements:

Eliminate 80% of entitlement fraud

There, I pretty much balanced the budget for you.

It's not poor men that are voting for the government to spend all of our money. It's liberal white women. That is the enemy. Don't let this lie that some people don't pay any taxes take your eyes off of the real problem.

If I had to choose between taking the vote away from poor people or women, I would choose women.

---

How about both? Our country was never founded on universal suffrage.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Water source, shelter and ammo?

---

I would think a person could pick up one of the unused underground bunkers built by the hand wringers fearing a Y2K disaster for pennies on the dollar.

Though I guess Y2K handwringers might also be today's financial collapse handwringers so perhaps they can't be had at much of a discount.

You should have to take a GLP one to accept SS.

BusterAg said:

---

Realize that requiring a person to pay FIT in order to vote would require a constitutional amendment, because what you are talking about is a poll tax.

---

Agree with you on the women, but I'm also just fine with a poll tax.

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Realize that requiring a person to pay FIT in order to vote would require a constitutional amendment, because what you are talking about is a poll tax.

---

Agree with you on the women, but I'm also just fine with a poll tax.

---

Well, the US constitution is not.

Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Pretty sure FIT falls under *other tax*

There was never going to be a fix. Austerity literally can't work.

The train will go off the cliff.

What does that mean? It means the only solution is massive deflation. A bond market default coupled with a crash of everything measured in dollars. As always, just a matter of when, not if.

BusterAg said:

---

YouBet said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Realize that requiring a person to pay FIT in order to vote would require a constitutional amendment, because what you are talking about is a poll tax.

---

Agree with you on the women, but I'm also just fine with a poll tax.

---

Well, the US constitution is not.

Section 1: The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Pretty sure FIT falls under *other tax*

---

Yes, I'm aware. I'm just saying I would be in favor of some form of it. We need fewer people voting.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

There was never going to be a fix. Austerity literally can't work.

The train will go off the cliff.

What does that mean? It means the only solution is massive deflation. A bond market default coupled with a crash of everything measured in dollars. As always, just a matter of when, not if.

---

Agreed.

Eliminate entitlements, period. They are unconstitutional though they have been deemed "legal".

Any federal government program that involves directly trying to take care of people should be shuttered, it is NOT the job of the federal government to take care of people.

If states or local want to try to do that, fine, but not with federal taxpayer $$.

one safe place said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Water source, shelter and ammo?

---

I would think a person could pick up one of the unused underground bunkers built by the hand wringers fearing a Y2K disaster for pennies on the dollar.

Though I guess Y2K handwringers might also be today's financial collapse handwringers so perhaps they can't be had at much of a discount.

---

I can promise you anyone dumb enough to build a fallout shelter over computer code probably did not design or engineer something to last.

Best option is to make yourself indispensable to the elite, wealthy, powerful and get on their choppa in the end times.

TTUArmy said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

I've read One Second After and the other post-apocalypse series. For me personally, I am screwed as I am dependent on insulin. So access to that and refrigeration are the weak link in my survival.

For the other topics, you would need to be able to form some true alliance amongst your family, friend, neighbors, etc. Your ability to navigate through that is equal parts preparedness and good fortune.

If TTUArmy's compound of preparedness happens to be next to FTC's vigilante gang of misfits and conflict kicks off, well lots of preparedness can be lost in some early skirmishes.

If you read those sorts of books, most will come away with the conclusion that is not really the world you want to live in.

Reformation and prevention are much better goals to work towards.

---

I'm old infantry. I have a sector of fire card on every window.

---

I am not versed in military terminology, so I had to do an internet search for "sector of fire card". Thank you, I learned something, the trick at my age will be remembering : )

I think the $14k is wrong. I am pretty sure the $173 trillion is present value of future outlays not the actual amount of outlays. Plus add state and local to this mix. It's past fixing. It won't be fixed. It will end badly but hey pick the can more

You are absolutely correct. Without going into a somewhat boring lecture, the Founders and Framers did not trust the masses. I disagree with that belief. Trying to restrict who does and doesn't vote(not talking about illegal aliens) do not have confidence in their beliefs. The fiscal conservative platform is a winning platform. While the D's may have the people who, for lack of a better term "on the government dole", the real conservative R's should focus on the working poor. They have no desire to be poor forever so they will support lower taxes and fiscal restraint. They are hard working Americans that just want a fighting chance to achieve the American Dream. For the record, when your only goal is to "own the libs" I can understand why you want to restrict voting.

You have more faith in the poor masses than me. I think many prefer to live off of entitlements.

Aggies1322 said:

---

You have more faith in the poor masses than me. I think many prefer to live off of entitlements.

---

There is little doubt that there is that. It exists in many forms. Fake disabilities and those not reporting income so they can receive Earn Income Tax Credit because of their children really irk me. To add insult to injury, many of them claim to be conservative. However, I still believe that a fiscal responsible message is a winning platform.

Principal Uncertainty said:

---

If they are going to criticize the government for reporting numbers that seem to skew reality, it's hypocritical of them to also report numbers that skew reality. The $1.1MM owed by each taxpayer is paid not all at once, but over the 75 years per their own data. That's more like $14,000 per year per taxpayer. It's a high number, but not nearly as impossible as they are trying to make it sound, especially when taxpayers like me pay 6 figures in taxes. The finances of the US are bad, and close to going over the tipping point of no return. But we've not quite fallen far enough as to make corrections meaningless like this reporting tries to make it appear. Now is the time for resolution, not resignation.

---

Good points.

170 trillion over 75 years is only about 791 billion per year in todays dollars, using 2.5% inflation. So we need 791 billion more dollars per year than we are currently taking in.

Trumps tariffs plus known fraud is more than 791 billion per year. A lot more actually. The problem could be solved if we knock out 30% of the fraud and don't let Congress, especially Democrats, spend more money. Which of course they will, which is the real problem.

The point is that its bad, but not unsolvable in theory.

No.

179 trillion in today's dollars.. If there is 2% inflation, the dollars we have to pay inflates as well.