Rebublicans advocate massive budget cuts!

[Sail Away]

Republicans advocate massive spending cuts in discretionary spending. They intend to a initiate a massive $100 Billion (1/15 of the projected 2011 deficit) from the annual budget. These draconian cuts will occur in all Federal agencies EXCEPT for; military, security, policing, DOJ (prisons), in-house spying (3,984 federal, state and local organization), contractor spying (923 contract agencies), Homeland Security, ATF, DEA, National Guard and military funding to other nations.

IF the Republicans were to eliminate Dept. of Education and Health and Human Services they would come close to their $100 goal. Go Republicans! Go Congress! Go USA!

Just remember: You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a policeman than by a terrorist
Source: National Safety Council statistics

 

[rdean]

All right. Maybe they could cut enough to force another trillion dollar tax cut for millionaires and billionaires.

Oops, seems they are too busy redefining rape. Oh well, maybe next year.

 

[mudwhistle]

OMG!!!!

So what's the problem?

 

[mudwhistle]

All right. Maybe they could cut enough to force another trillion dollar tax cut for millionaires and billionaires.

Oops, seems they are too busy redefining rape. Oh well, maybe next year.

Lies.

Since when has making $250k made anyone a millionaire or a billionaire?

Explain that one dip-shit.

 

[Sail Away]

OMG!!!!

So what's the problem?

Are you a distant relative of Hitler or just a fan?

 

[rdean]

All right. Maybe they could cut enough to force another trillion dollar tax cut for millionaires and billionaires.

Oops, seems they are too busy redefining rape. Oh well, maybe next year.

Lies.

Since when has making $250k made anyone a millionaire or a billionaire?

Explain that one dip-shit.

Because the majority of the tax cuts went to those making 250k? You're kidding, right?

Hey, check this out:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congr...o-worry-about-something-as-small-as-jobs.html

You gotta love it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

 

[gekaap]

Are you a distant relative of Hitler or just a fan?

And this stupid shit is Godwin'd.

 

[Sail Away]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

Dude, I don't want to shock your delusional balanced budget pipe dream, but... by 2013 (considering constant revenues and the Bush tax cut extension) the US will only be bring in enough revenues (taxes) to cover mandatory spending (SS, Medicare, pensions, debt interest, disability and VA). So that means if they were to cut ALL discretionary spending (military, EPA, ATF, Homeland Security, FBI, education, DOE, DOJ, etc.) they could then balance the budget.

Here is a novel idea: let's stop dropping bombs, waging wars, financing wars, spying, imprisoning (victimless crime), indicting, arresting, killing, harassing and exploiting. Let's take all that money, from those activities, and use it to invest in human capital. Once we've made that investment, people can work and pay more taxes. Once they pay more taxes we can work on the public debt problem. That is the way that smart countries do it.

 

[sparky]

isn't there a term for this?

starving the least, lashing the beast, something along those lines?

~S~

 

[Avatar4321]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

Dude, I don't want to shock your delusional balanced budget pipe dream, but... by 2013 (considering constant revenues and the Bush tax cut extension) the US will only be bring in enough revenues (taxes) to cover mandatory spending (SS, Medicare, pensions, debt interest, disability and VA). So that means if they were to cut ALL discretionary spending (military, EPA, ATF, Homeland Security, FBI, education, DOE, DOJ, etc.) they could then balance the budget.

Here is a novel idea: let's stop dropping bombs, waging wars, financing wars, spying, imprisoning (victimless crime), indicting, arresting, killing, harassing and exploiting. Let's take all that money, from those activities, and use it to invest in human capital. Once we've made that investment, people can work and pay more taxes. Once they pay more taxes we can work on the public debt problem. That is the way that smart countries do it.

Could you name a single country that is trying to reduce their deficit by spending more and has actually succeeded?

 

[mudwhistle]

OMG!!!!

So what's the problem?

Are you a distant relative of Hitler or just a fan?

What a fool.

Can't you think of someone else to compare me with?

You know, Pol-Pot. Stalin. Maybe even Genghis Khan?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

All right. Maybe they could cut enough to force another trillion dollar tax cut for millionaires and billionaires.

Oops, seems they are too busy redefining rape. Oh well, maybe next year.

Lies.

Since when has making $250k made anyone a millionaire or a billionaire?

Explain that one dip-shit.

rdean probably thinks people that make $30k are rich. His standards don't seem that high.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Except for the military?

lol

 

[mudwhistle]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

How bout cutting the Dept of Education and the IRS completely. Or the EPA.

Imagine how much we'd save.

 

[Sail Away]

Are you a distant relative of Hitler or just a fan?

And this stupid shit is Godwin'd.

Fascism is fascism. It doesn't make any difference what country it evolves in. Would you prefer; Are you a distant relative of Stalin or just a fan? Or maybe Mao, or Mussolini, etc? They all love their military, their policing, their spying, their Authoritarianism.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

Dude, I don't want to shock your delusional balanced budget pipe dream, but... by 2013 (considering constant revenues and the Bush tax cut extension) the US will only be bring in enough revenues (taxes) to cover mandatory spending (SS, Medicare, pensions, debt interest, disability and VA). So that means if they were to cut ALL discretionary spending (military, EPA, ATF, Homeland Security, FBI, education, DOE, DOJ, etc.) they could then balance the budget.

Here is a novel idea: let's stop dropping bombs, waging wars, financing wars, spying, imprisoning (victimless crime), indicting, arresting, killing, harassing and exploiting. Let's take all that money, from those activities, and use it to invest in human capital. Once we've made that investment, people can work and pay more taxes. Once they pay more taxes we can work on the public debt problem. That is the way that smart countries do it.

Dude, where's my car?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Are you a distant relative of Hitler or just a fan?

And this stupid shit is Godwin'd.

Fascism is fascism. It doesn't make any difference what country it evolves in. Would you prefer; Are you a distant relative of Stalin or just a fan? Or maybe Mao, or Mussolini, etc? They all love their military, their policing, their spying, their Authoritarianism.

Do they force people to buy health insurance and then sick the IRS on you of you don't?

 

[rdean]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

Dude, I don't want to shock your delusional balanced budget pipe dream, but... by 2013 (considering constant revenues and the Bush tax cut extension) the US will only be bring in enough revenues (taxes) to cover mandatory spending (SS, Medicare, pensions, debt interest, disability and VA). So that means if they were to cut ALL discretionary spending (military, EPA, ATF, Homeland Security, FBI, education, DOE, DOJ, etc.) they could then balance the budget.

Here is a novel idea: let's stop dropping bombs, waging wars, financing wars, spying, imprisoning (victimless crime), indicting, arresting, killing, harassing and exploiting. Let's take all that money, from those activities, and use it to invest in human capital. Once we've made that investment, people can work and pay more taxes. Once they pay more taxes we can work on the public debt problem. That is the way that smart countries do it.

Could you name a single country that is trying to reduce their deficit by spending more and has actually succeeded?

China, Germany

Oops, sorry, that was two.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nothing draconian about cutting money we don't have from programs we don't need.

It's a good start. It's not nearly enough though.

Let's start making the DoD budget much more efficient. There is no reason we can't cut a third from that budget and not keep the same security levels.

Eliminating the Dept of Energy and Homeland security would be good a good addition to the departments already mentioned.

And of course, they need to start hitting the deceptively named "mandatory" spending as there is nothing mandatory about it.

How bout cutting the Dept of Education and the IRS completely. Or the EPA.

Imagine how much we'd save.

How about getting 60 votes for that...