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.
Most of you want to cut any government programs you do not personally benefit from. That is just applied selfishness. Just another form of "I've got mine and to hell with you".
Most of you want to cut any government programs you do not personally benefit from. That is just applied selfishness. Just another form of "I've got mine and to hell with you".
I want all of them cut, but you seem to have the selfish attitude of government as santa claus without any regard for how things are paid for, or the inherent waste of government and the damage that taxes cause to the working class.
1. It's 2014, almost 2015. Assumed you were talking about the most recent 10 year period, not cherry-picking an interval.
2. Your chart has the wrong figure for 2012 anyway. It wasn't $3.8 trillion, it was $3.5 trillion. I assume this is because the chart is probably older and was likely using a projection for that year, especially since that's the last year it shows.
My table is from the Heritage Foundation, an established conservative think tank, and it relies on official numbers from the CBO and OMB.
3. The Heritage Foundation chart uses constant dollars, which is what you want to do if you're comparing one year to another, especially ten years earlier. Your "Intellectual Takeout" chart does not use constant dollars.
Here's what you should have said, in order to not be so misleading: "From 1999 to 2010, federal discretionary spending nearly doubled from $773 billion to $1,440 billion, using inflation adjusted dollars."
But as far as the most recent ten years goes, federal total spending went from $2.8 trillion to $3.5 trillion, which is an increase of 25%. Not "double" the size of the federal government.
I mean, isn't Detroit in the United States? I know it's been a while since i've been there, and it's a couple of thousand miles from my hometown, but i thought i was still in this country when i last passed through there.
You tell me.
I'm sure you get the point. There is only one thing that the federal government does that cant be done better by the states or private sector and that is Our Military.
Cut pay for elected positions by 50% to start. Lower it from there, as needed. Take away the incentive to make being a Senator a career and you won't see so many beholden to corporate interests, and maybe some more people who actually care about the country.
A multi-year drawdown in spending like 10% for the first year (2 years out to give time to prepare), 5% each year for the next 3 years. (approx 25% reduction).
Get the government out of the student loan business. I think we can all agree this is the reason for such high college costs. Yeah, people can go to college, but how much cheaper would it be if the government wasn't involved? And how much of our tax money is tied up to probably never be repaid?
Flat Tax. Everyone pays the same rate. Allow a small amount of a deduction for charitable donations.
Gut the EPA. As said before, the states have their own. No need for redundancy. Let the state environmental boards meet once a year and hammer out some agreements.
Gut the BATFE. There is no need for that agency. They're the Department of Redundancy Department. We have the FBI and state and local law enforcement agencies to handle their duties. And no more friggin' tanks and APCs for Bumknuckle PD from a town of 1500. OR 15000, for that matter.
Stop military waste. A friend of mine just returned from Afghanistan and told me they are destroying TVs, fridges, other appliances, etc. He has told me of hundreds or thousands of blankets being burned. Seriously? I can think of a few good places those could go. I guess it doesn't cost near as much to get it there as it does to get it back. And I'm a big supporter of our troops.
This one is such a great idea I have to mention it here even though it may not fit the topic precisely. Write bills in plain English and make them available for public review for a period no less than 30 days before they can be voted on. It's like what Obama said, but a little different. I bet if most people could understand what their reps are voting for, they just might get a little more involved. And it would be a LOT harder to hide stupid spending in a bill without 150 pages of legalese.
Just a few ideas I have.
As for the majority of posters in this thread. I thank you for keeping it civil. For those who have to make insults, your argument falls apart when you do that and it makes you look foolish, no matter what your stance. Yes, both sides, and I am looking at some right-side posters here.
To those who advocate for smaller gov't how do you decide what to cut and why to get this smaller government?
Anything not in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution.
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.
And I'm a big supporter of our troops. 
