How to create a budget.

[emptystep]

I pretty much found what I was looking for. This video is by people who understand the nuts and bolts of the federal budget. They understand the trade offs of one bar on the graph going up and the other one going down.

Currently I am at 42:00 of a 200 video so I don't know if I will get through it tonight but I wanted to share anyway. The speaker from the Heritage Foundation just came to the podium so I can skip this part. Actually I won't. Gotta catch them all.

If you only watch one piece of this start at 33:50 and watch 5 minutes.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9c5Vslf1EA]The USA Financial Crisis - Problems and Solutions - YouTube[/ame]
Uploaded on Jul 21, 2009

Panelists:
Alice Rivlin, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution and former Vice-Chairman of the Federal Reserve; former Director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO); and former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB);

Brian Riedl, Grover M. Hermann Fellow for Federal Budgetary Affairs, Heritage Foundation; former Staff Analyst for Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson;

Diane Lim Rogers, Chief Economist at the Concord Coalition; former Chief Economist for the House Budget Committee;

Eugene Steuerle, Vice President, The Peterson Foundation; former Senior Fellow at the Urban Institute; and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Analysis

 

[emptystep]

Want a really cold shot of reality? Watch from 46:00 to 50:00. So says the Heritage Foundation.

 

[emptystep]

Paul Ryan was on Meet the Press earlier today.
Paul Ryan talks economics, immigration - Video on NBCNews.com

Haven't watched it yet.

 

[emptystep]

Paul Ryan was on Meet the Press earlier today.
Paul Ryan talks economics, immigration - Video on NBCNews.com

Haven't watched it yet.

Well that was a waste. "Don't you want to do away with food stamps?" "No, I don't" Next question.

Food stamps are such an insignificant part of the problem that the problem is that they are using up the time needed for discussing the elephant in the room, entitlements. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. If in doubt watch that video referenced at 46:00.

We need to work out the numbers and methods going forward on entitlements. Everything else is window dressing.

 

[emptystep]

It's like a dream coming true. Maybe I am still dreaming.

Sen. Patty Murray: Your Voice Is Needed in the Budget Process

But I need your help. The budget process and conversation is too often limited to bureaucrats and politicians. The truth is that the federal budget belongs to the American people -- it belongs to you. You need to have a louder voice in this process, and your values and priorities should be heard.

That's why I am proud to announce the launch of MyBudget, a new online platform for members of the public to engage with the Senate Budget Committee.

MyBudget goes live today to help you share your stories, ideas, and priorities. It will give working families, students, and seniors one more way to let us know what a fair budget means to them. And in the weeks and months ahead, we will be adding additional tools and resources to enable people across the country to have their voices heard loud and clear as we tackle our budget and economic challenges and to help them engage their friends, organize, and advocate for their budget values and priorities.

Senate Budget Committee

 

[Truthmatters]

These are the executive departments of the federal government. I can't find where these departments are referenced in the House's budget. Is there another document somewhere?
Federal Executive Branch | USA.gov

Executive Departments

Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Department of Commerce (DOC)
Department of Defense (DOD)
Department of Education (ED)
Department of Energy (DOE)
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Department of State (DOS)
Department of the Interior (DOI)
Department of the Treasury
Department of Transportation (DOT)
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

I've always had trouble finding NUMBERS when I am looking for a budget. The government is pretty good at hiding them. It wasn't always this way either.

where is ted?

 

[Truthmatters]

Want a really cold shot of reality? Watch from 46:00 to 50:00. So says the Heritage Foundation.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw]Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube[/ame]



this is the founder of the heritage foundation

 

[Truthmatters]

Most of the time my posts are for other people's pleasure, or pain, but sometimes they are just kind of a placeholder for me to put things I might need to reference later. This is probably more the later but I still think it will do others as much good as it has done me. It is the most helpful article I think I have found on this subject. There are two video embedded in the article which are very informative.

How realistic is the Republican promise to balance the budget in 10 years? - Jan. 25, 2013
By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney January 25, 2013: 11:23 AM ET

This explains a lot about Ryan's 'budget'. Is not actually a budget but a budget resolution, which is very different than an actual budget. The talking heads might want to clarify that. Probably won't however.

One reason it may be plausible is that the House will be putting out what's called a budget resolution, which sets broad targets for spending and revenue. It's the starting point in a months-long process and doesn't require lawmakers to offer all details on how to meet those targets.

Think the Republicans are going to go back and try to undo that tax increase on the rich?

Another reason: Ironically, given Republicans' opposition to raising taxes, Ryan's job will be made somewhat easier this year by the more than $600 billion in new revenue that will be raised thanks to the fiscal cliff deal that Congress passed over New Year's.

Not exactly sure what this means but it does seem meaningful so this is the next thread I pull on.

A balanced budget is virtually guaranteed to be a non-starter with Democrats. Their goal is to stabilize the debt by the end of the decade. That is, reduce annual deficits enough so that total public debt remains constant as a share of the economy.

Like every who wants to move into the future you need to carry debt.

In a family you eventlually die.

The country can always carry debt becuase they dont have to pay off the house before they retire.

The new debt is to buy the next generations needs if they are wise.

This country or any country would be stupid to NOT incur some debt

It just must be well spent to increase the prospects of the future

 

[Freemason9]

This thread will be similar to my other threads in which I chase a topic hoping to gain a little insight,

a liberal will be dumb because he is disorganized. You are the perfect example!!. You lack the IQ to know the basic difference between a liberal and conservative so you lack the background to contribute here about the budget or anything else.

Why not go away until you're read up a little?? Do you want to be a brain dead liberal all you life??

What is your point? You have a habit of immediately ruining threads by repeating the same bullshit about liberals. I myself disagree with democrats (not that I agree with republicans) and I disagree with them on the fundamentals. What I understand that you don't is that you can convince someone to change their mind if you are polite and patient. If you troll around looking for a fight what is the point? Neither one of you are listening. It makes no sense and is such a waste of time.

I would suggest that the "edwardbaiamonte" is best placed on ignore. I did that a while back, and it has saved me a lot of time and aggrevation. He is a self-loathing troll.

 

[emptystep]

Most of the time my posts are for other people's pleasure, or pain, but sometimes they are just kind of a placeholder for me to put things I might need to reference later. This is probably more the later but I still think it will do others as much good as it has done me. It is the most helpful article I think I have found on this subject. There are two video embedded in the article which are very informative.

How realistic is the Republican promise to balance the budget in 10 years? - Jan. 25, 2013
By Jeanne Sahadi @CNNMoney January 25, 2013: 11:23 AM ET

This explains a lot about Ryan's 'budget'. Is not actually a budget but a budget resolution, which is very different than an actual budget. The talking heads might want to clarify that. Probably won't however.

One reason it may be plausible is that the House will be putting out what's called a budget resolution, which sets broad targets for spending and revenue. It's the starting point in a months-long process and doesn't require lawmakers to offer all details on how to meet those targets.

Think the Republicans are going to go back and try to undo that tax increase on the rich?

Not exactly sure what this means but it does seem meaningful so this is the next thread I pull on.

A balanced budget is virtually guaranteed to be a non-starter with Democrats. Their goal is to stabilize the debt by the end of the decade. That is, reduce annual deficits enough so that total public debt remains constant as a share of the economy.

Like every who wants to move into the future you need to carry debt.

In a family you eventlually die.

The country can always carry debt becuase they dont have to pay off the house before they retire.

The new debt is to buy the next generations needs if they are wise.

This country or any country would be stupid to NOT incur some debt

It just must be well spent to increase the prospects of the future

I never said one word about carrying or not carrying debt. That is a different matter all together.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I myself disagree with democrats (not that I agree with republicans)

so that it seems would make you very very slow indeed. Why be so afraid to state exactly what you have against the Republican philosophy!!!

you lack the education to understand political context so are trying to create your own dumbed down context. Sadly, at the end of the day what awaits you is a voting booth in which you will have only the eternal choice that has guided all of human history!!: freedom versus government!!

 

[emptystep]

This is a good article about entitlement reform.
How will the House get to a balanced budget in 10 years?
Posted by Jennifer Rubin on January 28, 2013 at 9:45 am

OMG, I have come across this woman's articles more than once scanning for info. Saying 'This is a good article..." has got me seriously questioning my identity.

- The two sides of me.

 

[emptystep]

This should balance my use of Jennifer Rubin's article from yesterday.

Look this over! There are a lot of misconceptions about this part of the budget. Please read this and then go to the article itself to get the rest of the information. I did not do the article justice. Oh, that's in there too.
(still working through the Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution Markup.)

Budget Cuts Set Funding Path to Historic Lows | Center for American Progress
By Michael Linden | January 29, 2013

“non-defense discretionary”

It includes nearly all of the federal government’s investments in primary and secondary education, in transportation infrastructure, and in scientific, technological, and health care research and development. It also includes nearly all of the federal government’s law enforcement resources, as well as essentially all federal efforts to keep our air, water, food, pharmaceuticals, consumer products, workplaces, highways, airports, coasts, and borders safe. It includes veterans’ health care services and some nutritional, housing, and child care assistance to low-income families. It even includes the funding for such national treasures as the Smithsonian Institution, our national parks system, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, better known as NASA.

Since the start of fiscal year 2010, the official Congressional Budget Office projection of nondefense discretionary spending has fallen by more than $730 billion, a cut of more than 10 percent. Those cuts are mainly the result of legislation passed in the intervening months that dramatically curtailed federal spending in this category. Furthermore, if the additional automatic cuts known as the “sequester” remain in place the overall reduction will swell to well over $1 trillion, a 15 percent cut in total.

When the Defense Department looked at a 15% cut they said they would basically shut down everything but immediate mission critical spending. The same type of effect would befall the above mentioned programs.

Mandatory programs such as Social Security or Medicare do not need to go through the annual congressional budget process. Of course, Congress always has the authority and ability to make changes to these sorts of programs if it so chooses, but mandatory spending does not require annual approval. Discretionary programs, on the other hand, must receive new congressionally authorized spending levels each year.

In 2012 the single largest nondefense discretionary bureau was the Veterans Health Administration with slightly more than $50 billion in spending, which represented just 8 percent of total nondefense discretionary spending. In fact, the combined spending of the 10 largest discretionary programs still makes up less than half of all nondefense discretionary spending. In 2012 no less than 77 different federal bureaus spent at least $1 billion in nondefense discretionary funding.

nondefense discretionary spending can be grouped into just seven general categories:

• Economic investments such as highways, schools, and basic scientific research
• Low-income assistance and antipoverty efforts
• Veterans services and benefits
• Law-enforcement efforts and the justice system
• International affairs
• Energy and agricultural investments and environmental protection
• General government operations and miscellaneous activities

Impact of the Budget Control Act and the sequester

On August 2, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the Budget Control Act into law. That legislation, which resolved a months-long standoff over the debt limit, placed enforceable caps on both defense and nondefense discretionary spending. These caps were set significantly below where spending would have been if the previous fiscal year’s levels had been extended, adjusting only for inflation. One year earlier, using the FY 2010 appropriation levels as a foundation, the Congressional Budget Office projected that nondefense discretionary spending would total almost $7.1 trillion from 2013 through 2022. Under the Budget Control Act, however, nondefense discretionary spending is now projected to be slightly more than $6.3 trillion from 2013 through 2022, according to the most recent Congressional Budget Office outlook. That amounts to a cut of about $740 billion, or more than 10 percent, over the next 10 years.

The sequester’s automatic across-the-board cuts will affect more than just nondefense discretionary spending. They will also cut defense spending and several mandatory programs; most mandatory spending, however, will be exempt. But if the sequester is allowed to go forward, it will also cut nondefense discretionary spending even further than it has already been cut by the Budget Control Act caps. If fully implemented, the sequester will reduce the nondefense discretionary part of the federal budget by $331 billion from 2013 through 2022, a cut of an additional 5 percent from the already-lower capped levels. The result: reducing nondefense discretionary spending even further from the already projected historic lows. Instead of totaling 3.2 percent of GDP in 2017, nondefense discretionary spending would total less than 3 percent of GDP and would be on its way down to 2.6 percent by 2022. This is less than two-thirds of what was previously its lowest level.

This nondefense discretionary budget category includes funding to maintain and improve the nation’s transportation infrastructure and educational system; support scientific, technological, and health care research and development; and support programs to boost regional and local economic development. The three largest “programs” under this category are the Federal Highway Administration, (which spent $43 billion in 2012), the National Institutes of Health ($32.7 billion), and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education ($25.3 billion). Overall spending in this category totaled $245.3 billion in 2012—40 percent of total nondefense discretionary spending but less than 7 percent of all federal spending. Discretionary spending on economic investments in 2012 was equivalent to about 1.6 percent of GDP. This is exactly in line with the average amount spent in this area in the past 10 years.

This category includes housing, nutrition, child care, and energy assistance to low-income families. It also includes some assorted other social services. More than 80 percent of all spending in this area flows through just three federal bureaus: Public and Indian Housing programs ($36.3 billion), the Administration for Children and Families ($17 billion), and the Food and Nutrition Service ($7.4 billion). In 2012 overall discretionary spending in this category totaled $75.6 billion, roughly 12 percent of total nondefense discretionary spending and slightly more than 2 percent of all federal spending. Discretionary spending on low-income assistance in 2012 was equal to about 0.5 percent of GDP, which is the average amount spent in this category over the past 10 years.

This category includes development, humanitarian, and security assistance to foreign countries. It also includes the maintenance of and security for all U.S. embassies, ambassadors, and foreign-service officers.

Nondefense discretionary spending may not have a very descriptive name, and most Americans may have little concept of what it is exactly. But, in fact, many of the federal government’s most popular and important functions are funded by nondefense discretionary dollars. Everything from border control to the Smithsonian Institution, from food inspections to cancer research, and from highways to schools is contained within the nondescript category of nondefense discretionary spending. Over the past several years, however, Congress and President Obama have enacted legislation that will dramatically curtail federal spending on all of these vital activities.

Michael Linden is the Director of Tax and Budget Policy at the Center for American Progress.