Module 5: Discussion: Washington Debt Ceiling Your Post Heading Numerous influe

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Module 5: Discussion: Washington Debt Ceiling
Your Post Heading
Numerous influences have shaped health and behavioral health policies. One of the most critical is the federal budget that funds health and behavioral health programs in the US. The annual budget is also a component of the US debt. Funding programs without revenue from taxes to pay for them, necessitates borrowing money from banks and paying interest. The US also sells a range of treasury securities to individuals & other nations which help to pay for our unfunded programs. These are debt instruments that require payback with interest. The federal debt ceiling is just the amount of money the US government is permitted to borrow by Congress. It’s like raising the US credit card balance. Although this ceiling has been raised at least 80 times in the past 83 years to cover expenditures, Congress has been increasingly divided about continuing to raise the debt ceiling. Restricting any increase in US borrowing power would cause the US to default on its debts. One alternative, seen by deficit hawks as a way to reduce US debt, is to cut health & social programs. This would have tremendous costs to people dependent on government programs.
Would you do better at reducing the debt than current members of Congress?
Click on the Washington Post debt challenge linkLinks to an external site. & find out:
the Washington Post Debt Challenge Link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/national-debt-cut-game/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F39fe4aa%2F645e63415dfb5222c4b40a23%2F5dd8634cae7e8a73198511d0%2F15%2F72%2F645e63415dfb5222c4b40a23
Please address the following questions in your post:
What level of debt reduction did you achieve?
What was the reasoning for your choices, that is, what goals were you hoping to achieve by your choices?
Were you satisfied with the result or did you feel like you wanted to try it again?

Your Response Section Heading
Please respond to two classmates’ posts as well as posting your own.
Classmate #1 to response to:
Amari Reece Clark
I got the Diligent Deficient Hawk level of debt reduction. Per my choices, I was able to reduce the debt amount by 6.1 trillion dollars. When making my choices I tried to be as fair as possible while still being realistic about what people need. I also thought about my personal experiences with some of the options. For example, I chose to allow loan forgiveness because I know that loans are incredibly hard to pay back, and though it would increase the debt of America, there were other ways I felt I could have pinched pennies and saved money in the game. Areas I decided to spend less money in were military engagement and international affairs. I do think that both of these areas are very crucial and important for us to put money into but I believe cuts can be made. I understand the importance of helping other countries, especially if we are receiving goods from them, but at a certain point, we are over-extending a budget that is already trillions of dollars in debt for other countries before fixing in-house first. I also did not cut any money that would go towards Medicaid/Medicare or government resources such as food stamps. I think these resources are very necessary to people and that actually more people are in need of it than the number of those who actually receive it. I personally think that if the economy was more equitable, there wouldn’t be as great as a need for government resources. I also chose to make taxes for the rich higher. I believe in equity, so to me it just made sense to tax people with more money a little more. I am very satisfied with the results of the game. I honestly thought with my choices to make public college free and forgive student loan debt I was too far gone to save any money so I am glad I was able to reduce the debt by as much as I did.
Classmate #2 to response to:
Lauren Elyse Cirko
I got the diligent deficit hawk. For most of my choices, I chose to continue funding money in social programs like Medicaid and Medicare and require additional taxes for wealthy corporations and individuals. I believe that welfare programs (like SNAP and Medicaid) are critically important. There are so many individuals and families who experience financial hardship and welfare benefits allows access to obtain basic needs. Those who are wealthy should be taxed at a higher rate. They have the funds and the means to pay for higher taxes while other individuals struggle to make ends meet and pay for groceries. Participating in this game did remind me that the government has to make extremely difficult decisions when choosing to fund or cut these programs. No matter what decisions are made, there will be groups of people who are unhappy with their decisions.
I agree in some capacity with my result, but not entirely. It states that I am skeptical the federal government should expand social programs, but I believe that the government should expand these programs as these programs provide a lifeline for many individuals and families. It would be interesting to try this game again to answer the opposite way.

Click Here To Order Now!