Ok, so what do we cut?

We hear many talk about cutting spending and it's for sure we need to. But where are you willing to cut? Should it be welfare, Social Security, healthcare, foreign aid, the military, space program? There are many place we can cut, but every cut effects some thing, or some body.

 

Everything 5% across the board. I would also phase out all subsidies government pays out, such as welfare subsidies to buy hybrids, farm subsidies, etc. Hybrid subsidies are insane, they can go immediately. Most others, phase out 10% per year until gone. Do the same with overseas military bases. Phase out over 10 years. Tell South Korea if and others if they want us to continue protecting them, they better find a way to pay up. If someone attacks us, we kill 1,000 of theirs of every one of ours they kill. If it means we kill innocent civilians, tough (*)(*)(*)(*).

That'll do for starters.

 

The problem with this question is, there really are only 2 places the money can come from.

Military / social services.

IMO.

Cut the military. Close foreign bases. Bring everyone home, with the exception of what we need to keep in places like Korea and Japan in order to satisfy the words of the treaties we have signed.

The entire social program needs to be re-vamped. We can have ALL of the services we want, and probably MORE, if we could just run smaller EFFICIANT government. Efficiant being the key word here. I dont know if that is possible in todays climate sadly.

We could have ALL the programs we have today, and even more, if we would only just run those programs with some form of efficiancy.

But either way. There is no way to close out budget loopholes without money from BOTH areas. No one wants to admit that though. Both sides have their sacred cows, and expect the other side to make ALL of the sacrafices. ITs stupid.


The sign of a good compromise is that no one walks away happy.

Sadly though, both sides want it all. Liberals want to cut the military, and leave social spending alone. Conservatives want to leave the military alone, and cut social spending. Neither will accept anything less.

 

Translation: "I'm okay with government-sponsored murder."

 

All forms. Of welfare

 

My philosophical approach is to cut money to people who have made no contributions to society through taxation or effort first. Beneficiaries of social security and Medicare paid a lifetime of taxes so they are LAST on the list. Next to the bottom of the list are government WORKERS (military, active workers). The top of the list has to be Medicaid, welfare, food stamps, EITC, public housing, rent subsidies, energy subsidies, corporate subsidies (i.e. ethanol). Not only do these items not contribute to a tax base, they are a COST to society. If welfare and similar programs had a work requirement (i.e. even if it meant dig a 10x 10x10 foot ditch each day with a shovel and then fill it in), I might be more lenient. I’m certainly not against age changes in social security or cuts in the military if clearing the deadbeats doesn’t cover the bill 100 % (it should – most estimates place USA government charity at $1 trillion per year which is very close to the deficit).

 

There are tons of ridiculous programs I would like to eliminate, but they just won't save much money. The biggest driver of our long term debt are health care costs. We need to reform the Medicare and Medicaid programs so that their growth is within the normal inflation rate (as opposed to the "medical" inflation rate). If we don't get control of that, then long term, none of the other cuts, including the military, won't make much difference.

 

I vote we cut the drug war first, and see what happens.

 

I thought public sector workers were bankrupting America?

 

Isn't one of the reasons why the Great Depression lasted as long as it did; was because FDR tried to cut government spending? And, one of the reasons why the Great Depression finally ended, was due to our war time economy and effort for WWII.

 

They are at the state level. This thread is about the federal budget.

 

Our drug war is worse.

 

Lol. What state employees are bankrupting the states? In my state, employees of the "state correctional facilities" double the number of ANY OTHER state employee category. Looks like maybe we should cut back on that war on drugs, eh?

 

Why can we still afford our extra-Constitutional, War on Drugs during times of fiscal cliff diving on the part of our elected representatives?

 

Let's start by cutting corporate welfare.

 

We cut no services, just spending!!!!!

People need to start talking about how, not how much!!

We can receive the same medical service for far less money.

We can receive the same level of defense for far less money.

We can reduce drug abuse for far less money.

All you need to do this, is to start asking how the money is being spent, instead of how much!!

 

Agree with danielpalos and Dave1mo. The "War on Drugs" could turn from a severe COST to a net GAIN by liberalizing the laws regarding marijuana only. I would be open to legalization of methamphetamine, coca (the leave, not the extracted cocaine) and LSD initially with some serious knowledge about dosage.

- - - Updated - - -

Agree with danielpalos and Dave1mo. The "War on Drugs" could turn from a severe COST to a net GAIN by liberalizing the laws regarding marijuana only. I would be open to legalization of methamphetamine, coca (the leave, not the extracted cocaine) and LSD initially with some serious knowledge about dosage.

 

The drug war should go first simply because it sacrifices the end of our War on Poverty to the means of the coercive use force of the State to merely deny and disparage Individual Liberty; contrary to the "dictates of plain reason and legal axioms".

 

I'd begin by cutting all waste, luxury, and needless expenditure.
You cut all the pork, all the fat.
You trim the size and scope of government.
You look for duplicate government agencies or programs.
You look for government programs that can be better managed by private enterprise.
Reform the tax code, make it simplier, that'll cut down on the need for IRS agents and also fix some revenue issues and tax evasion.
Push for smaller, smarter government. Reduce the costs of government.

You try not to cut things people depend on, i.e. welfare, Social Security, defense, etc. But each of those things take up massive chunks of our federal budget. So look for ways to get people off food stamps and onto paychecks. Tweak Social Security to try to make it more sustainable for future retirees. Look for weapons programs we could do without (i.e. F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning II), look for military bases here or overseas that we could do without, and we'll save some by drawing down the War on Terror.


I'd rather have tons of small, simple changes that all add up to a big difference, rather than simply saying, "Cut Social Security, roads, education, etc." All those things need preserved. You can make them smarter and more efficient; get more bang for the buck...


But cut waste, luxury and needless expenditures first. Cut all you can BEFORE you get to vital programs like Social Security and Medicare.

 

Uhhhg!

This is what I am talking about.

I can save more money then this in just Medicare spending, by changing just one thing in our HC system, and no ones services will be reduced.

It is How, not how much!!!!!!!!

 

Where did you hear that?

I would cut 40% more than Rand Paul would cut.

 

I would completely cut medicare. Sometimes it's not "how" it's "why".

 

The 1929 Wall Street crash would've been a recession, things were getting better, then Europe had its own crash, and that dragged us back down and turned it into a depression. FDR tried spending and infrastructure projects to stimulate the economy, as Hoover did, and unemployment fell but things were too bad for it to make that great of a difference. As WW2 got going, American manufacturing took off to satisfy the war demand. And in post WW2, Europe and Asia were in ruins, and America had all these factories standing (since we weren't under daily bombing like England, Germany, Japan or China). So the economy did pretty good.

 

Here is part of where I formed that conclusion:

 

I wish I could force you to wear a stupid sign for the rest of your life!

I state that I can cut more money then all your suggestions by changing one rule in HC, and you respond by saying cut medicare completely, and not by asking how.