U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2011, 12:10 AM
 
Location: Piedmont, CA
34,140 posts, read 58,660,548 times
Reputation: 17434

Advertisements

Quote:
The survey finds that Americans prefer to keep Medicare just the way it is. Most also oppose cuts in Medicaid and the defense budget. More than half say they are against small, across-the-board tax increases combined with modest reductions in Medicare and Social Security benefits. Only President Obama’s call to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans enjoys solid support.

Poll shows Americans oppose entitlement cuts to deal with debt problem - The Washington Post

I agree with the majority of the American people.

My solutions?

Cut the federal workforce by a third and consolidate all redudancy. Cut military spending in half. End military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan and send all of those troops to the US/Mexico border that they would patrol as strictly as a prison wall. Cut federal subsidies to billion dollar companies and invest that money into small businesses and vocational training.

Lastly, adopt strict a pay-as-you-go spending policy. No new bonds. Period.

Idealistic and unrealistic-I know. But that's what I would do.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2011, 12:30 AM
 
31,371 posts, read 33,726,712 times
Reputation: 14928
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Cut the federal workforce by a third and consolidate all redudancy. Cut military spending in half. End military operations in Iraq & Afghanistan and send all of those troops to the US/Mexico border that they would patrol as strictly as a prison wall. Cut federal subsidies to billion dollar companies and invest that money into small businesses and vocational training.
I agree with your sentiment (although I would also restore the pre-Bush tax rate) but I at a loss as to how folks come up with these arbitrary numbers. Cut the federal workforce by a third? How do you come up with that figure? Cut Defense by one-half, based upon what criteria?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,765 posts, read 26,245,862 times
Reputation: 12286
Entitlement programs don't need to be cut but they need to be reformed. What needs to be cut is extension of useless tax cuts, re-evaluation of the tax code, tax rates, cut military spending and corporate welfare.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 08:48 AM
 
3,129 posts, read 5,621,897 times
Reputation: 1590
They need to be reformed, we cannot sustain them. The problem is people have been paying and they want their money. Can't blame them.

The other problem is these programs should not be in the general fund/budget. They should be separate and UNTOUCHED by the government. If we touch our 401k before retirement we are taxed 40% or so.

LBJ put these programs in the general fund and it gave the government billions to spend on wars etc and they had no plan to put it back.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Norman, OK
3,479 posts, read 6,613,835 times
Reputation: 1198
This poll, and polls like this, are not particularly useful when dealing with the budget problem.

How does the average American think that we will be able to pay over $14 trillion in debt without tackling the biggest expenditures of the government? Yes, defense spending can be cut, but not to completely leave Medicare or Medicaid untouched.

It doesn't make sense. That's like asking Americans how to cut their $100,000 in personal debt without somehow reforming the 75% of their income they spend on just their house, food, and clothing. It can't be done. Yes, you can cut out the frivolities (cable, limit your phone usage, eliminate vacations). But that isn't going to get rid of the massive debt. You have to move to a smaller house / rent and make sure your food budget is trimmed to the necessities. AND you have to increase your income via add'l jobs.

Of course, for the American consumer, they have the option of declaring bankruptcy and starting anew. The country is not so fortunate.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 09:01 AM
 
22,770 posts, read 27,724,444 times
Reputation: 14617
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Idealistic and unrealistic-I know. But that's what I would do.

cutting the federal workforce indiscriminately by 1/3 just seems arbitrary. To me it makes much more sense to target specific responsibilities that the federal gov't has adopted over the years, and dissolve those entire departments, shifting that responsibility to the individual states.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 09:05 AM
 
12,798 posts, read 16,445,740 times
Reputation: 8823
Worse, those receiving entitlements are the most likely to vote. It will be very interesting to see how those who voted to gut Medicare will do in the next election.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 09:11 AM
 
11,134 posts, read 13,094,805 times
Reputation: 7040
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
cutting the federal workforce indiscriminately by 1/3 just seems arbitrary. To me it makes much more sense to target specific responsibilities that the federal gov't has adopted over the years, and dissolve those entire departments, shifting that responsibility to the individual states.
Not to mention that for every 1 federal position that the government gets rid of, they often create at least one contractor position. I know they *say* that it's cheaper to outsource but, so far, I haven't seen any data that backs that up--in fact, quite the opposite.

Sof if the federal workforce gets gutted, don't turn it over to private companies and then have to pay them out of the federal budget. You haven't saved a dime.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
34,302 posts, read 20,695,940 times
Reputation: 20800
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyWatson13 View Post
They need to be reformed, we cannot sustain them. The problem is people have been paying and they want their money. Can't blame them.

The other problem is these programs should not be in the general fund/budget. They should be separate and UNTOUCHED by the government. If we touch our 401k before retirement we are taxed 40% or so.

LBJ put these programs in the general fund and it gave the government billions to spend on wars etc and they had no plan to put it back.
dingdingding-we have a winner! Spending (borrowing against) the SS trust fund has been the way to hide just how excessive our deficit spending has been since the 60s. It hid the true size of the defecit, and even allowed one president to claim a balanced budget while in fact running a defecit. SS and Medicare should be a seperate "lock box" fund, off limits to other spending, and not counted as part of general revenue. As of now, all the money borrowed from that fund contributed to the debt, and the interest and repayment will drain the general fund of $$ that would otherwise be available for other government functions.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,765 posts, read 26,245,862 times
Reputation: 12286
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
Worse, those receiving entitlements are the most likely to vote. It will be very interesting to see how those who voted to gut Medicare will do in the next election.
I would never underestimate politicians and the money that sponsors them all the way to office. This is why if I want to see drastic changes, I want to see them implemented right away. But politicians don't want to do that.

If I'm going to see my benefits cut, I don't want to pay more right now to support those who are being pandered to. If the old folks paid for their care, well, then there should be enough to take care of them.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:24 PM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top