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.
Here are the rules. Put forward your plan to balance the budget.
Rule number 1.
No changes to social security beyond increasing the retirement age. Over 70% of Americans, and 62% of TEA party members want social security to remain just the way it is. You can't change that or your party will be eliminated from the equation in two years max, and your changes reverted. So ending social security, allowing an opt out, or cutting benefits obviously isn't an option.
Rule number 2.
No changes to medicare. Again, the same numbers as before of TEA party members and Americans support medicare just the way it is.
Rule number 3.
If you say you want to end a program that is supposed to curb spending, such as the affordable care act, you must show why it isn't going to curb spending when enacted, and put forward a plan that doesn't violate either of the first two rules.
Please, debate.
If you want to know what I support. I support cutting military spending in half. We spend 4 times what the rest of the world combined does on military spending, and 8 times more then China individually. No reason for that. Europes military spending has continually gone down year over year since the 60's. To me its foreign aid to Europe and our allies to furnish them with military protection. I say end foreign aid period until our budget is balanced. I want to flatten the tax code and end subsidies and credits. I could support raising the retirement age and medicare eligibility age on anyone under the age of 40 or 30. That would give people like myself enough time to plan on a longer working time, and save appropriately. No cuts in benefits though, they stay just the way they are today. Any and all budget surplus must be used to pay down the debt, no tax decreases or increases, no more spending that money. If a real war starts in between now and then, or a national disaster, we must require removing that money from another program to pay for it, or issue things like war bonds to pay for them.
I think that those changes, along with economic growth of 3% annually for the next 10 to 15 years would not only balance the budget and decrease our deficits.
Happy to hear the answers. Notice, these are after a debt ceiling raise. Lets start thinking about what we should do when the continuing resolution ends in a few months.
Doesn't matter how many people are in favor of Medicare without changes. We cannot afford to pay $2300 for $400 wheelchairs, take terminal cancer patients out of hospice for hip replacements three weeks before the funeral, perform twice as many open-heart surgeries as are necessary, etc.
Obamacare ends Medicare as we know it; Paul Ryan's plan ends Medicare as we know it; doesn't matter what you like, Medicare as we know it is as dead as a doornail.
Give me the Gang of Six plan, flesh out the details, and get to work. On the revenue side, pro-growth tax reform (as in Simpson Bowles or Gang of Six) is the ONLY way to actually raise revenues. Barack Obama's wet dream involving corporate jet owners doesn't make a rounding error against the problem--and that exposes him as the most cynical politician in a cynical town, or seriously deficient in the brains department.
Doesn't matter how many people are in favor of Medicare without changes. We cannot afford to pay $2300 for $400 wheelchairs, take terminal cancer patients out of hospice for hip replacements three weeks before the funeral, perform twice as many open-heart surgeries as are necessary, etc.
Obamacare ends Medicare as we know it; Paul Ryan's plan ends Medicare as we know it; doesn't matter what you like, Medicare as we know it is as dead as a doornail.
Give me the Gang of Six plan, flesh out the details, and get to work. On the revenue side, pro-growth tax reform (as in Simpson Bowles or Gang of Six) is the ONLY way to actually raise revenues. Barack Obama's wet dream involving corporate jet owners doesn't make a rounding error against the problem--and that exposes him as the most cynical politician in a cynical town, or seriously deficient in the brains department.
It does matter, because votes matter.
As I said, lets say in 2012 a Republican super majority is voted into the Senate, they maintain the majority in the house, and a Republican wins the white house.
Ask Paul Ryan what happens when you start to limit medicare.
We can balance the budget without touching medicare or social security, but it would mean drastic cuts in almost everything else.
Republican pundits and those in the house now have told the President repeatedly over the debt ceiling "We won, you have to work with us" which is a valid point.
The American people don't support cutting, ending, or changing medicare or social security. You have to work within that framing.
The American people don't support cutting, ending, or changing medicare or social security. You have to work within that framing.
No, you have to work within the math. The math says both social security and medicare are unsustainable unless changes are made. Ignoring this reality may win votes, but won't solve the problem.
That said, everything needs to be on the table including defense. Closing tax loopholes with a simpler tax code and lower rates would go a long way towards solving this mess. But then the accountant lobby will be up in arms, so we're back to square one.
No, you have to work within the math. The math says both social security and medicare are unsustainable unless changes are made. Ignoring this reality may win votes, but won't solve the problem.
That said, everything needs to be on the table including defense. Closing tax loopholes with a simpler tax code and lower rates would go a long way towards solving this mess. But then the accountant lobby will be up in arms, so we're back to square one.
The math is tied to politics.
I already said, and its been proven that if other spending is cut, that we can afford social security and medicare.
If Republicans vote to repeal, change, or anything else the largest majority of Americans support, then they will be doomed to failure, and their vote will be overturned.
All any of you are saying is "I don't know" with these responses.
I'm looking for real solutions here. I want to know where you stand in a couple of months when the budget comes back up.
If you can't say "I don't know" or "We have to end/change social security", then please don't comment in my thread.
We cannot compete in a global economy and continue to pay the wages we currently pay. Thus, unemployment will continue to rise until folks figure out that we cannot grow as a consumer society. We must PRODUCE.
All the other discussion is irrelevant to that one fact. Tax revenue is gonna continue on the downslide, no matter how much we tax wages. Heck, take all the money from "the rich" - that won't last long w/ our commitments to entitlements, and I include a LOT more than just Medicare, Medicaid and SS. The Feds underwrite everything imaginable - including education. It is absurd.
Until we start PRODUCING something . . . we are gonna continue w/ the jobless rate and the national deficit. We are dependent on other nations to supply our goods. This does not take a rocket scientist to figure out - it creates an imbalance - trade deficits.
1. Roll back ALL military operations to the borders of the United States. Close ALL overseas bases that are not funded 100% by the hoste country.
2. Cancel ALL discretionary spending that is not enumerated in the Constitution
3. Transfer all non-consititutional programs and services to the STATES and allow them to maintain or CANCEL them if they duplicate an existing state program.
Cut military spending by ending the unnecessary wars we're waging and closing down foreign bases, simplify tax code to have less loopholes, credits and deductions while also slightly lowering the tax rate. End up collecting from more people/companies which will make up for the drop in rate.
Increase SS retirement age to 70, gradually.
Medicare would need to be made more efficient or something. Sorry, but plenty of people supported segregation as well, doesn't mean it's right.
Nuke the Obamacare act and instead pass a model similar to Germany's or maybe the UK's. If not, then allow interstate purchasing of health insurance... basically create a hyper-competitive market to bring down costs. Keep the rule that they cannot deny you because of pre-existing conditions.
Here are the rules. Put forward your plan to balance the budget.
Rule number 1.
No changes to social security beyond increasing the retirement age. Over 70% of Americans, and 62% of TEA party members want social security to remain just the way it is. You can't change that or your party will be eliminated from the equation in two years max, and your changes reverted. So ending social security, allowing an opt out, or cutting benefits obviously isn't an option.
Rule number 2.
No changes to medicare. Again, the same numbers as before of TEA party members and Americans support medicare just the way it is.
.
when you say "no changes" what does that exactly mean???
I want "NO changes" on SS for those CURRENTLY on AND those over 50...but think that it should be phased out for those under 50 (probably in steps (40-50...., 30-40...., 20-30....etc).......its YOUR retirement, its YOUR money..should we (the people) be RESPONSIBLE to save ourselve (to include a governmnet mandate for us to save....ie the powerws that be state EVERYONE (working) will put 11-16% (the 6% that is currently ss plus ablut 5-10% that we would currently have in a 401k)(with employeer matching) away in a investment program that YOU THE INDIVIDUAL control...no government coffers
medicare no changes.....why not....why not make medciare BETTER for out elderly...why should medicare be a very restrictive 80/20...yet medicaid is 100%
its just like disability....it sometimes takes 3-4 years to get it....steamline it to make it FASTER, but also make it more accountable (if you are 100% disabled and cannot work, then you shouldnt be climbing ladders doing roofs on the side-----ie abuse and fraud)
#3
scale down the FEDERAL department of ed....why....because the FEDERAL SIDE only needs a few achedemics to set the STANDARDS and a few clerks for processing (federal) grants...all other is STATE?LOCAL run....the federal DOE CURRRENTLY has 7000 employees...could easily be cut down to 357 (or less) (5 compliance personnel per state plus 100(2 per state) of grant clerks, and a 7 member achedemic board)).......ie the the 7 member board sets a STANDARD, the 5 compliance personnel per state (250) ensure the standards are being met, and the 2 clerks per state process any grant requests from the federal level)
Last edited by workingclasshero; 08-01-2011 at 08:14 AM..
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.
You've got a major problem...
