76% here are against massive debt, annual budget deficits, & continuing resolutions, so where to cut spending? (illegal aliens, extremist)
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.
Where will the funding come from then? I work for a small nonprofit organization with a budget of about $5 million, 75% which is from government grants and contracts to provide services such as child care, adult education, rent and utility assistance, senior services, etc. Our budget is braided from dollars from federal, state, and county (and some of that is federal funding given to the states and counties to fund services). So you end "the middleman" and you throw 125 people out of work because we can't operate on charitable dollars alone.
Statewide, there are 78,044 nonprofits in Pennsylvania employing more than a million people and create more than $160 billion in revenue. Multiply that by 50.
If my nonprofit goes under, that affects our vendors as well - the folks that provide office supplies and equipment, food for kids in child care, benefits, payroll services, our auditors ... Multiply that by thousands of nonprofits in 50 states.
Do I believe there's room to cut back? Of course. But eliminating "the middleman" isn't the answer, doesn't affect only government employees themselves, and will cause more upheaval than it solves.
Quote:
Government has NEVER successfully alleviated poverty nor eradicated it.
Hm. Well, I guess all the kids who have been fed with government surplus food, all the older people who owe food and shelter to Social Security and health care to Medicare ... Yeah, they'd probably by dead without government help. That sure would alleviate poverty.
Where will the funding come from then? I work for a small nonprofit organization with a budget of about $5 million, 75% which is from government grants and contracts to provide services such as child care, adult education, rent and utility assistance, senior services, etc. Our budget is braided from dollars from federal, state, and county (and some of that is federal funding given to the states and counties to fund services). So you end "the middleman" and you throw 125 people out of work because we can't operate on charitable dollars alone.
Statewide, there are 78,044 nonprofits in Pennsylvania employing more than a million people and create more than $160 billion in revenue. Multiply that by 50.
If my nonprofit goes under, that affects our vendors as well - the folks that provide office supplies and equipment, food for kids in child care, benefits, payroll services, our auditors ... Multiply that by thousands of nonprofits in 50 states.
Do I believe there's room to cut back? Of course. But eliminating "the middleman" isn't the answer, doesn't affect only government employees themselves, and will cause more upheaval than it solves.
God forbid nonprofits have to go out and earn their funding on the open market like everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
Hm. Well, I guess all the kids who have been fed with government surplus food, all the older people who owe food and shelter to Social Security and health care to Medicare ... Yeah, they'd probably by dead without government help. That sure would alleviate poverty.
Yes. Socialist Insecurity. The #1 cause of generational poverty and government dependence.
Compare the returns on the S&P 500 on 12.4% of your earnings to your Socialist Insecurity benefits. S&P 500 outperforms by a factor of multiple hundred percentage points.
Oh. And you still retain your principal which you can pass on to your children.
For Government to alleviate or reduce poverty, it must produce wealth. Government produces no wealth. Government can only transfer poverty from one party to another.
The IRS alone produces $1 trillion of overhead cost to this country's economy. And that's ONE of hundreds of alphabet soup agencies.
This is a follow up thread to an earlier poll where 76% voted as the title states...
Cutting entitlements is political suicide...look at how the Dems SCORCHED the Pubs (Rick Scott) for suggesting how to save Social Security 3 weeks ago. Any party saying that is suicidal.
So, everything else must be cut, except entitlements...initially. We all know that entitlements will need to ultimately be reduced too, but lets start with the easier cuts first to gain traction.
I suggest cutting an equal % across-the-board annually. The amount of the % is up for debate.
Do you support across-the-board cuts in everything except entitlements? Yes, or no, & explain.
What % should it be? I think it should be larger at first, then declining, such as 5% yr 1, 4% yr 2, 3% yr 3, 2% yr 4, then 1% yr 5, then re-assess.
This should be very easy to accomplish, even in DC.
You CANNOT balance the budget or cut spending with our Federal Reserve System.
No it wouldn't. It would be a rounding error. Again, look at the total budget, defense, social security, medicare medicaid make up almost the entire budget. All the rest is a pittance. If you want to actually balance the budget, you have to do it on defense, ss, medicare, medicaid. The numbers don't lie. Or raise revenue, of course. The tax cuts we've had are unforgiveable, there were temporary cuts to the middle class, to get the permanent cuts to the upper classes past the GAO. Disgusting. Lets go back to the taxt structure of the 1950s when we could afford infrastructure.
People in the higher brackets got the same cuts as everyone else in the lower brackets. The brackets are marginal rates, not the rate on all income. That means that the million dollar earner got the same tax cuts as the lower earners, plus the cut on the to brackets. You are trying to make it sound like the millionaire pays 37% on their entire income, which is not the case at all.
You get it!
And the cuts at the bottom and the middle are temporary, while the cuts at the top were permanent.
No it wouldn't. It would be a rounding error. Again, look at the total budget, defense, social security, medicare medicaid make up almost the entire budget. All the rest is a pittance. If you want to actually balance the budget, you have to do it on defense, ss, medicare, medicaid. The numbers don't lie. Or raise revenue, of course. The tax cuts we've had are unforgiveable, there were temporary cuts to the middle class, to get the permanent cuts to the upper classes past the GAO. Disgusting. Lets go back to the taxt structure of the 1950s when we could afford infrastructure.
Yes. The tax cuts were unforgivable. My income tax bill is still greater than $0.
Nope. It doesn't work that way. The much smaller tax cuts those in the higher tax brackets got are why the top income earners paid a HIGHER percentage of the total Individual Federal Income Tax revenue after the Trump tax cuts than they did before.
What are you talking about? Are you saying the rich paid more tax after the cuts? That's simply not the case.
For this thread, SS & Medicare are considered to be entitlements...that is the general concensus.
It may be the "consensus", but the fact remains that Real Live People pay that money with every paycheck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus
Nice post ^^^ & I agree. I heard that back in 2000-2001 they adversely impacted Social Security (hate that) to get to a balanced budet, but still, it got done. That was the most recent time we balanced it.
Only 5 times in the last 50 years have we had a balanced budget, and absolutely, both political parties are guilty. Arguing which political party is worse, is like re-arranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic
Interest on the debt is now $500B and growing fast. Imagine if we had no interest, and could use that $500B to help save the SS trust fund each year.
We haven't HAD a Budget since 2008 - we have Continuing Resolutions that tack on Percentages to previous Budgets.
A real good start would be to PASS a Real Budget.
Another good start would be to Sunset all Agencies and Programs UNLESS they can PROVE they are working ...... that's exactly what Texas does. Every 10 years, every Agency & Program has to PROVE to the Legislature that they Deserve to continue and be Funded.
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.
