If the Fed Budget was managed like household's what programs would be cut?

[Doc1]

And I said Flat Tax method get rid of all deductions at a lower rate.............

Again.........you refuse to address specific cuts to gov't.........

We spend more than the GDP now of other nations except China...........how is this not a spending problem..................................

My plan cuts $1.4 TRILLION in spending from the budget. And that is before we get around to raising the retirement age!

I don't know of anyone who has proposed bigger spending cuts than me.

You dance around my question and redefine tax cuts as spending..............

Again, I ask you for specific spending cuts ............not an increase in taxes.......I've already addressed Subsidies, Tax Credits, and waste fraud and abuse before you posted this.

You refuse to address the other side of the sword and the fact of how much we spend compared to the GDP of other nations...........which is excessive.

Face it.........we spend too dang much and those bills are coming due.............They need to be cut before you raise taxes......

In all honesty.......if you wanted to end this mess..........both would have to be done to have a prayer at it.

Do you understand what the word "expenditure" means?

Look it up, and then try to say with a straight face I am not proposing spending cuts and lower tax rates.

Go ahead.

Or do you need me to post the definition for you?

We will disagree...........loopholes are tax deductions.......so they don't pay..........you equate that as spending cuts........we disagree...............

Tax credits are a payment........especially for the fridge you spoke of..........and child Tax Credits which are basically welfare.

Again...........in the over 4 trillion...............cut something...............hmmm

Read post 73. Over and over. Until you get it.

Read this until you get it.

"Fuck Off" if you REALLY want my money bring a gun.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Mandatory spending..........aka Entitlements and pensions are the elephant in the room. They have to be addressed to deal with this.

Current crop of politicians WILL DO NOTHING.............

 

[kyzr]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

 

[eagle1462010]

Secrets of the Federal Budget Revealed
Trying to simplify the US Budget process, 2019 revenue is about $3.4T, plus the borrowing of about $985b to cover the $4.4T 2018 Budget. That is at least $900b too high. So looking at the Budget items from the article:

Mandatory spending $2.74T
Social Security $1,050b
Medicare $625b
Medicaid $412b
Welfare $462b
Interest on the Debt $363b

Discretionary $1.3T
Defense $893b

Busting 5 Myths About Government Discretionary Spending
Department Budget Emergency Total Discretionary
Dept of Defense $597.1 $88.9 $686.0
HHS $69.5 $0.5 $70.0
Education $59.9 $59.9
VA $83.1 $83.1
Homeland Security $46.0 $6.7 $52.7
Energy Dept $29.2 $29.2
NNSA $15.1 $15.1
HUD $29.2 $29.2
State Dept $28.3 $12.0 $40.3
NASA $19. $19.9
All Other Agencies$129.8 $3.3 $133.1
TOTAL $1,303b

If you stare at the numbers for a few minutes it becomes apparent that to cut spending by more than $900b it needs to come from Entitlements.
SS can't be cut, those benefits were promised. However, the retirement age can be raised and a few tweaks can be made to keep it solvent.
Medicare can't be cut, those benefits were promised, however some savings can be realized to keep it solvent.
Medicaid can be cut, those benefits were not earned.
Welfare can be cut, those benefits were not earned.

If the deficit is covered 1/2 by cuts and 1/2 by revenue
Revenue needs to increase by $500b. (all tax rates need to increase 10%)
Defense needs to be cut by at least 10%, say $100b to $793b
Cuts of $400b need to come out of welfare ($250b) + ($150b) medicaid, with some savings from SS & Medicare if possible.

Who supports getting back to a Balanced Budget? It is not that difficult

Fuck your tax increases. When has Congress ever cut spending? Ever? Give then more revenue, and they will spend 3 times more.

This needs to be another grand bargain, the GOP eats the tax increase, and the dems eat the cuts. Needs to be both to balance the Budget or its no deal and the entire US economy tanks for a long, long time.
Even then we have a $21T Debt that eats $363b a year, so we're not really paying down the Debt at those rates/cuts.

You're delusional. It's never going to happen. It would be easier to get a lion to eat vegetables than to get Congress to agree to spending cuts.

Which is why for many years I've given up putting data forward on this issue.......will never happen and is a waste of time.............

but I decided to throw out a little today............lol

 

[hurricanewatcher]

No more foreign aid
Defense would be slashed to 200 billion per year
The border shut tight
No more immigration
40 billion illegals and legal immigrants deported
The ones remaining cut off of all benefits
Only benefits for citizens

 

[eagle1462010]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

All career politicians need to go...........All of them............

And find ethical people to replace them that can't be bought............

No other way..........it's not going to happen..........so buckle up......we are headed to the cliff eventually.

 

[bripat9643]

Policy Report: Running Out of Other People’s Money

That gap is the “unfunded liability” or “implicit debt” for those programs.

Implicit debt, of course, represents the “softest” form of debt, in that there is no legal requirement to pay all the promised benefits. But “soft” does not mean debt that can be completely dismissed. Those benefit payments are called for under current law, and it would take congressional action to change them. Unless and until Congress does so, those obligations exist. That is why, for private companies, future promises to pay benefits are generally categorized as debt according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and other accounting authorities. If the government was required to report its debt in the same way public companies do, those promises would show up as debt.

Social Security’s future unfunded obligations now run to more than $24.9 trillion. Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are more difficult to nail down, in part because of the uncertainty brought about by the new health care reform law. In 2009, Medicare’s trustees estimated that the program’s unfunded liabilities were $88.9 trillion. Since then, health care inflation has been running at a slower rate. Economists debate the reason for this decline and whether it will continue, but it has resulted in a reduction of Medicare’s unfunded liabilities to just (!) $47.6 trillion. Thus, the real combined federal debt (debt held by public + intragovernmental debt + implicit debt) actually totals at least $90.5 trillion. That’s real money—even in Washington— roughly $282,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. Students graduating from college today worry about their college debt…. That’s nothing compared with what they owe as a share of the country’s debt.

Moreover, these projections assume that interest rates on government debt remain somewhere near current levels, which is about 2 percent. The CBO points out that, even at this low rate, interest on the debt is becoming an ever larger portion of federal spending. This year, the federal government will pay $229 billion in interest charges. By 2024, with just a modest expected increase in interest rates, that will rise to more than $808 billion. Not long afterward, we will be paying a trillion dollars every year just for interest on the debt. By 2035, in fact, interest on the debt will be tied with Medicare as the second-largest line item in the federal budget, trailing only Social Security.

And interest rates may not stay this low. It is estimated that every 1 percent increase in interest rates adds as much as $1 trillion in additional interest payments over the next decade. Over the past two decades the average rate of interest on government debt has been roughly 5.7 percent. Therefore, if interest rates were to return to anything close to traditional levels, it would add trillions to our future obligations.

SS is supposed to be able to pay 79% of promised benefits even if they let it go insolvent.
Social Security must reduce benefits in 2034 if reforms aren't made - CNNPolitics

Medicare's unfunded liabilities can be addressed by increasing the 20% hole to a higher percentage.

I still want the government to Balance the Budget so we aren't borrowing to cover the interest on the Debt. Its like using a credit card for everything until it maxes out, then you declare bankruptcy. Except the US can't do that.

S.S. was designed that the population would have to increase dramatically over time to pay for itself.......When it began there was plenty of people to pay in for what goes out. It was also based on how long people live. The Intergovernmental debt..........aka the money in that was robbed.........replaced by IOU's.....will eventually go to 0......and then debt will explode at even a greater rate.........

Pension debt is massive.......S.S., Medicaid, and Medicare future debt is massive..........No dang way to pay what's coming..........

For decades I would show how we could cut spending.......and increase revenue......why waste my time anymore when the the Gov't will never do it anyway. The debt will continue to explode upwards until we implode.............and have a global reset.........Every year it gets worse.......and they will do nothing to change it.............

Thus why I put up the kiss my ass video in this thread........

You're giving Roosevelt far too much credit. If you believe he was thinking beyond the next election, then you must have the word "gullible" tattooed on your forehead.

 

[kyzr]

The Mandatory spending..........aka Entitlements and pensions are the elephant in the room. They have to be addressed to deal with this.

Current crop of politicians WILL DO NOTHING.............

Why deny folks their entitlements when you can cut welfare and medicaid as per the OP?

Doing nothing means that SS gets funded at 79%. Medicare can raise the donut hole from 20% to something higher to stay solvent. The problem is that interest on the $21T Debt keeps growing and growing until that's all that the government pays. A very bleak future...

 

[bripat9643]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

All career politicians need to go...........All of them............

And find ethical people to replace them that can't be bought............

No other way..........it's not going to happen..........so buckle up......we are headed to the cliff eventually.

There is no such thing as an ethical politician. The phrase is any oxymoron.

 

[eagle1462010]

Policy Report: Running Out of Other People’s Money

That gap is the “unfunded liability” or “implicit debt” for those programs.

Implicit debt, of course, represents the “softest” form of debt, in that there is no legal requirement to pay all the promised benefits. But “soft” does not mean debt that can be completely dismissed. Those benefit payments are called for under current law, and it would take congressional action to change them. Unless and until Congress does so, those obligations exist. That is why, for private companies, future promises to pay benefits are generally categorized as debt according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and other accounting authorities. If the government was required to report its debt in the same way public companies do, those promises would show up as debt.

Social Security’s future unfunded obligations now run to more than $24.9 trillion. Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are more difficult to nail down, in part because of the uncertainty brought about by the new health care reform law. In 2009, Medicare’s trustees estimated that the program’s unfunded liabilities were $88.9 trillion. Since then, health care inflation has been running at a slower rate. Economists debate the reason for this decline and whether it will continue, but it has resulted in a reduction of Medicare’s unfunded liabilities to just (!) $47.6 trillion. Thus, the real combined federal debt (debt held by public + intragovernmental debt + implicit debt) actually totals at least $90.5 trillion. That’s real money—even in Washington— roughly $282,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. Students graduating from college today worry about their college debt…. That’s nothing compared with what they owe as a share of the country’s debt.

Moreover, these projections assume that interest rates on government debt remain somewhere near current levels, which is about 2 percent. The CBO points out that, even at this low rate, interest on the debt is becoming an ever larger portion of federal spending. This year, the federal government will pay $229 billion in interest charges. By 2024, with just a modest expected increase in interest rates, that will rise to more than $808 billion. Not long afterward, we will be paying a trillion dollars every year just for interest on the debt. By 2035, in fact, interest on the debt will be tied with Medicare as the second-largest line item in the federal budget, trailing only Social Security.

And interest rates may not stay this low. It is estimated that every 1 percent increase in interest rates adds as much as $1 trillion in additional interest payments over the next decade. Over the past two decades the average rate of interest on government debt has been roughly 5.7 percent. Therefore, if interest rates were to return to anything close to traditional levels, it would add trillions to our future obligations.

SS is supposed to be able to pay 79% of promised benefits even if they let it go insolvent.
Social Security must reduce benefits in 2034 if reforms aren't made - CNNPolitics

Medicare's unfunded liabilities can be addressed by increasing the 20% hole to a higher percentage.

I still want the government to Balance the Budget so we aren't borrowing to cover the interest on the Debt. Its like using a credit card for everything until it maxes out, then you declare bankruptcy. Except the US can't do that.

S.S. was designed that the population would have to increase dramatically over time to pay for itself.......When it began there was plenty of people to pay in for what goes out. It was also based on how long people live. The Intergovernmental debt..........aka the money in that was robbed.........replaced by IOU's.....will eventually go to 0......and then debt will explode at even a greater rate.........

Pension debt is massive.......S.S., Medicaid, and Medicare future debt is massive..........No dang way to pay what's coming..........

For decades I would show how we could cut spending.......and increase revenue......why waste my time anymore when the the Gov't will never do it anyway. The debt will continue to explode upwards until we implode.............and have a global reset.........Every year it gets worse.......and they will do nothing to change it.............

Thus why I put up the kiss my ass video in this thread........

You're giving Roosevelt far too much credit. If you believe he was thinking beyond the next election, then you must have the word "gullible" tattooed on your forehead.

Who da fuck said I agreed with FDR..........never have...........he economically suicide us a long time ago.........

It was never meant to be a gov't to hand out money when and where they please...........That was against the Constitution until they screwed it up...................States were to decide their own path with limited Gov't powers........

Our gov't is the nightmare the Founding Fathers warned us about.

My quote was specific to the initial design............not in support of...........aim your scatter gun elsewhere.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Mandatory spending..........aka Entitlements and pensions are the elephant in the room. They have to be addressed to deal with this.

Current crop of politicians WILL DO NOTHING.............

Why deny folks their entitlements when you can cut welfare and medicaid as per the OP?

Doing nothing means that SS gets funded at 79%. Medicare can raise the donut hole from 20% to something higher to stay solvent. The problem is that interest on the $21T Debt keeps growing and growing until that's all that the government pays. A very bleak future...

Their entitlements...........List them..........Mandatory spending is made of many.........entitlement spending is not all there........

It is the 66% of the budget........and growing.........

Can't feed it forever............politicians will do nothing.............nothing.........why I have been not wasting my time on these threads.

 

[eagle1462010]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

All career politicians need to go...........All of them............

And find ethical people to replace them that can't be bought............

No other way..........it's not going to happen..........so buckle up......we are headed to the cliff eventually.

There is no such thing as an ethical politician. The phrase is any oxymoron.

Then we are fucked 10 ways sideways......and we go to perdition.....strap in ...........it's gonna be a hell of a ride off the cliff.......

 

[LoneLaugher]

Who is most vociferous in opposition to this “fair tax”?

And....why?

The Fair Tax doesn't get any press coverage. Very, very few people have even heard of it. Even less understand it.

Who needs opposition when there is widespread ignorance?

That’s a nice walk you just took. Like a tightrope.

 

[LoneLaugher]

As an aside......

Anyone who compares the federal budget to that of a “household”....is a moron.

It was meant to be a no bullshit, no excuses, no gimmicks, way to balance the budget before we go bankrupt. Money is money without the "3rd rail" politics and/or lobbyists selling loopholes. Why do you object to simple choices of reducing spending or raising revenue? We're $900b in deficit, so how do you propose raising revenue or cutting spending to balance the budget?

Households need to balance spending, the US should balance the budget too. Stop name calling and come up with viable solutions to the most important problem facing the nation.

No. I will call out anyone who thinks a federal budget and a household budget can IN ANY WAY be compared.

 

[g5000]

Who is most vociferous in opposition to this “fair tax”?

And....why?

The Fair Tax doesn't get any press coverage. Very, very few people have even heard of it. Even less understand it.

Who needs opposition when there is widespread ignorance?

That’s a nice walk you just took. Like a tightrope.

The Fair Tax is a Libertarian idea. It really doesn't get much coverage, and most people really never have heard of it.

The only people who would actually be hurt by the Fair Tax are savers, especially the elderly and their retirement nest eggs.

Your money in the bank prior to the enactment of a Fair Tax has already been income taxed. So to then apply the Fair Tax to that money when you spend it is unfair, and there would clearly have to be a temporary vehicle in the law to mitigate that.

 

[eagle1462010]

As an aside......

Anyone who compares the federal budget to that of a “household”....is a moron.

It was meant to be a no bullshit, no excuses, no gimmicks, way to balance the budget before we go bankrupt. Money is money without the "3rd rail" politics and/or lobbyists selling loopholes. Why do you object to simple choices of reducing spending or raising revenue? We're $900b in deficit, so how do you propose raising revenue or cutting spending to balance the budget?

Households need to balance spending, the US should balance the budget too. Stop name calling and come up with viable solutions to the most important problem facing the nation.

No. I will call out anyone who thinks a federal budget and a household budget can IN ANY WAY be compared.

Correct............

Let's check out the differences...............take a look

 

[bripat9643]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

There is no solution. This country is doomed. The only thing smart people can do is start over again somewhere else.

 

[LoneLaugher]

There must be a reason why the “fair tax” idea has not become more mainstream. Mike Huckabee took a shine to it a few years back. But I doubt that idiot really understands the subject.

I wonder why it hasn’t gained more positive attention?

 

[LoneLaugher]

The OP uses the actual 2019 Budget. It doesn't balance by ~$900b. Baseline budgeting gets increased by emergency spending for wars, etc. Keep it simple. Revenue needs to be greater than spending. I proposed 50/50 between cuts/revenue. The dems will whine about the cuts, and the GOP will squeal about the 10% tax increase, which is really 3% less due to the recent tax cut, so its really a 7% tax increase above the 2016 rates.

Except for the defense budget, Congress has never cut anything, ever. No plan that doesn't get around the irrefutable fact is doomed from the get-go.

OK, what is your solution? At the rate of borrowing $1T a year the interest payments crowd out all discretionary spending by 2030 as interest rates rise, so what do you propose?????? How do you fund defense and the federal government?

There is no solution. This country is doomed. The only thing smart people can do is start over again somewhere else.

What are YOU gonna do, then. We sure ain’t gonna take you along.

 

[Muhammed]

If it was a household they would use some of the defense money to build a southern wall to stop the neighbors from just walking in and proceeding to rape, murder and pillage your household.