Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They created a panel (Simpson -Bowles) to address the deficit and they came up with some great ideas, unfortunately they proceeded to ignore them all since it would have impacted their reelection chances.
The OP indicated a balanced budget, any serious deficit reduction plan needs to focus on DOD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. Things like farm subsidies, foreign aid pale by comparison to the magnitude of those programs. We are now being told that our defense budget has been decimated because of the across the board cuts so we need yet another increase. I haven't heard serious deficit reduction conversations from any of the candidates for 2016.
Both parties are guilty of this too. So many times we see both parties in power and preach how we need to balance the budget. It appears as if both parties are not capable of making cuts and just differ on how to spend money and how to use taxes on people.
You are given 60 days to cut whatever you have to to get things balanced again. What would you cut? What would you keep? Why? I want answers here instead of usual political talking points.
1. cut all loans to other countries except Israel.
2. cut all government aid to all companies and persons.
3. cut all government agencies by 50% including the military and cut all their budgets by 50% as well.
4. fire all IRS workers and repeal the 16th Amendment.
5. pass a sales tax of 18% on all purchases except basic food and clothing. any luxury items in those 2 categories would still have a sales tax.
6. stop being the planet earths policeman.
7. get rid of the federal reserve and put the power of currency back into the hands on congress. right where it should be.
Both parties are guilty of this too. So many times we see both parties in power and preach how we need to balance the budget. It appears as if both parties are not capable of making cuts and just differ on how to spend money and how to use taxes on people.
You are given 60 days to cut whatever you have to to get things balanced again. What would you cut? What would you keep? Why? I want answers here instead of usual political talking points.
Connie Mack came up with the plan I like.
Cut 1% out of every department , a real cut, not a cut of future growth , across the board until the time we have a balanced budget. Now each Department can come up with where those cuts should be, Perhaps less conventions in vegas and fewer shrimps on a tread mill. Or if you wish to find the 1% and cutting out waist will not do cut some jobs. All businesses have to go through budget cuts and make these decisions its about time the federal government does the same
A commission, like the BRAC Commission, should look at EVERY SINGLE gov't program and determine if that program is worth borrowing money to pay for it or not.
If it warrants it OK. if NOT get rid of it.
If ANY Agency looses (pick a number, 20, 30 50% if its programs, abolish the Agency.
The remaining programs can be incorporated into the Agencies that are left.
Realign all reaming programs. Why are food stamps with the Dept. of Agriculture? Shouldn't they be with Health and human Services?
What does the dept. of Education REALLY DO at a cost of a budget of $67.1 billion in discretionary appropriations.
What have they achieved?
Education is a local state responsibility anyway.
The combined annual salaries for the 22 staffers we can specifically identify as working for Michelle Obama come to $1.6 million.
(I am NOT trying to compare her budget to ANY other First Lady. I believe Lara Bush's was $1,4 million)
Do we REALLY need $1.6 million for the first lady's staff?
'Take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves."
Last edited by Quick Enough; 02-10-2015 at 02:29 PM..
1-stop sending money to countries that don't even like us.
2-think twice about who we lend money to you.
3-cut welfare spending; control what can be purchased with food stamps; do not give people on welfare cell phones for starters
4-do not give government assistance to any illegals, regardless of the reason. The exception would be a life or death situation, then give them medical care before deporting them.
Both parties are guilty of this too. So many times we see both parties in power and preach how we need to balance the budget. It appears as if both parties are not capable of making cuts and just differ on how to spend money and how to use taxes on people.
You are given 60 days to cut whatever you have to to get things balanced again. What would you cut? What would you keep? Why? I want answers here instead of usual political talking points.
If we voters had any sense, we would disallow Congress and the White House to spend any $'s on anything except that which our Constitution allows. Probably close to 90% of the expenditures are in areas that are not authorized by our Constitution.
No. 1 is Defense which includes securing our borders.
Welfare, Unemployment, and I could go on and on are "State" issues, "not under Federal jurisdiction/authority as per our Constitution.
OK
A commission, like the BRAC Commission, should look at EVERY SINGLE gov't program and determine if that program is worth borrowing money to pay for it or not.
If it warrants it OK. if NOT get rid of it.
I can tell you from experience that BRAC is so political it is a total and useless act. No thank you.
Quote:
If ANY Agency looses (pick a number, 20, 30 50% if its programs, abolish the Agency.
The remaining programs can be incorporated into the Agencies that are left.
Would agree up to a point. Most Agencies should not be "Federal" to begin with...the areas for which they are responsible should, again, be under each individual State. Any Federal Agency should only deal with areas authorized by our Constitution or when disputes arise "between" states.
Quote:
Realign all reaming programs. Why are food stamps with the Dept. of Agriculture? Shouldn't they be with Health and human Services?
What does the dept. of Education REALLY DO at a cost of a budget of $67.1 billion in discretionary appropriations.
What have they achieved?
Education is a local state responsibility anyway.
Bingo...yes, also food stamps, of one, should also be local...not country/state/Federal.
Quote:
The combined annual salaries for the 22 staffers we can specifically identify as working for Michelle Obama come to $1.6 million.
(I am NOT trying to compare her budget to ANY other First Lady. I believe Lara Bush's was $1,4 million)
Do we REALLY need $1.6 million for the first lady's staff?
'Take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves."
IMHO, Michelle Obama has no concept of financial responsibility...among many other areas for which she has no clue. Get rid of most of the staff and let her take care of herself. She is not crowned queen. There is no comparison between MO and Laura Bush...Laura Bush dedicated herself to areas of good. I can't say the same for MO.
No that was the only real answer...but I will add to it. Everything except Defense, which needs to be increased.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
