What to cut: The Federal Budget

[Paulie]

i know that's not something the rightwingnuts make much use of... but some of us think it's important.

what percentage of the federal budget is the department of education?

now what percentage of the federal budget are military expenditures?

Personally I don't have a problem with cutting miitary spending. Simply because I don't believe the military should be involved in a lot of what it's doing. I think the operative word in Department of Defense is DEFENSE. We don't believe we should be spending troops to nation build or world police.

As the the Department of Education, the fed really doesn't have the constitutinaly authority to have one. Education is not their job. Leave it to the states.

I agree with you in part about our military involvement. But there are places where we have a military interest where it would be wonderful if we didn't... but we do.

As for federal involvement in education. It's clear that it falls under the general welfare clause and I'm not going to get into a debate on the issue in this context.

I'm not really sure it's "clear" jill. It's an opinion, and nothing more.

All anyone can really do with the vague clauses in the constitution is interpret what they cover.

One can make just as good of a case that education is not considered "general welfare".

Personally, I place only those things that are necessary for immediate survival in "general welfare". That's why I support the government offering food to people who can't afford it.

 

[JWBooth]

DOD - I got no problem with taking a $2 cut here for every dollar taken from somewhere else, but let there be significant, crippling cuts from everywhere else.

You described other cuts as "crippling". Why? Do you think a 2:1 cut in defense would be "crippling"? Do you want to cripple other programs because____?

2:1 would be a decent start, I haven't kept up with the specifics of the Offense budget. Carrier groups are becoming outdated for nothing more than big visible projections of force, and they make great targets for newer missile systems. 50% or more of flag rank officers are unnecessary, is there any real need for troops in Okinawa or Germany, Britain or dozens of other places?
As for crippling the rest, most surely. I would end Transportation as a department. Yet there are nuggets of necessity there, air traffic control for instance. Education is a huge pit bereft of need. Much of what was folded in to Homeland Security should go. Keep the Border Patrol, but ATF should be convenience store, not a regulatory/police agency.
What nobody left or right is eager or willing to address is that Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security is going to devour all the rest.

 

[uscitizen]

The Economy under Bush was not nearly as good as you're trying to make out it was. A lot of good folks lost jobs to outsourcing between 2001-2006. Those jobs never came back, nor did any comparible jobs ever get created. I know folks that had their own house, were saving for college for their kids, made all their payments, etc, that are now lucky to be working at the Walmart and living in an apartment. We bled out a lot of good jobs under Bush/DeLay/Frist.

As for what to cut: Cut military spending by pulling back to the borders. If an overseas base isn't absolutely positively vital to US security, close it and redeploy back home. After you do that, start devolving a lot of the education and welfare programs back to the State level along with the tax revenues to support it. Let the States decide if they want to support Social Security or not. Let them decide on Universal health care or not. 20 years from now lets see which states are doing well: Those that keep those programs or those that do not.

Many other good jobs were created as a result of outsourcing.
The U.S. is a net importer of jobs from other countries outsourcing their own. I realize that doesn't sit well with the Left. But facts is facts.

H1B visa workers and illegal immigrants?
Yep that helps the US worker a lot.

You can massage statics data to have it say what you wnat it to say.
That does not make it correct though, just wildly spinning.

 

[Charles_Main]

There is so much to cut trying to list it here would be a joke.

Suffice to say nothing would be off limits. Not Defense, and not social programs. Anywhere where we waste money I would cut. I would concentrate on reducing the size of bureaucracies. Redundant and repetitive programs, and out dated things. It is so hard to end a spending programs that our budget is loaded with things we are still paying for that have not been needed for years.

The Rural electrification act for example.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

 

[Dick Tuck]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

I'd suggest debt service, but the wingnuts who put Bush in office screwed that one up.

 

[8537]

Yes, if you ignore how much the Capital Markets swooned because we had elected a Marxist, then yes, the stock market is doing peachy keen as are the banks and the insurance companies.

All is well in ObamaVille

Rush has taught you well. megadittos! Here in reality, you might remember that capital markets collapsed and froze when Lehman went belly-up. Or perhaps you think the capital markets were responding to Obama trailing in the polls up until Lehman?

 

[Paulie]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

This is ridiculous. You can't bend and compromise?

We're in 150 fucking countries.

Why the fuck do we need to be in Malaysia, or Diego-Garcia, or Thailand, or Belgium?

It's an enormous waste of money.

 

[Nosmo King]

DOD - I got no problem with taking a $2 cut here for every dollar taken from somewhere else, but let there be significant, crippling cuts from everywhere else.

You described other cuts as "crippling". Why? Do you think a 2:1 cut in defense would be "crippling"? Do you want to cripple other programs because____?

2:1 would be a decent start, I haven't kept up with the specifics of the Offense budget. Carrier groups are becoming outdated for nothing more than big visible projections of force, and they make great targets for newer missile systems. 50% or more of flag rank officers are unnecessary, is there any real need for troops in Okinawa or Germany, Britain or dozens of other places?
As for crippling the rest, most surely. I would end Transportation as a department. Yet there are nuggets of necessity there, air traffic control for instance. Education is a huge pit bereft of need. Much of what was folded in to Homeland Security should go. Keep the Border Patrol, but ATF should be convenience store, not a regulatory/police agency.
What nobody left or right is eager or willing to address is that Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security is going to devour all the rest.

What impact on the Interstate Highway system would ending the DOT have? How would student be affected by eliminating college grants? And would those eliminations also apply to those on the G.I. Bill? How would crime rates be affected by eliminating the ATF?

 

[JWBooth]

What impact on the Interstate Highway system would ending the DOT have?

State highway departments are competent to the task.

How would student be affected by eliminating college grants? And would those eliminations also apply to those on the G.I. Bill?

I know its a unique concept, but for many a generation folks went and sought employment to fund their educations.

How would crime rates be affected by eliminating the ATF?

State and local law enforcement are quite competent and generate nearly all arrests for firearm related crimes anyway.

 

[johnrocks]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

There lies the problem, everyone seems to be find with cutting....as long as it's not THEIR sacred cows.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

What nobody left or right is eager or willing to address is that Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security is going to devour all the rest.

A lot of that needs to be moved down the State level along with the revenue lines currently used to support them. Let the States decide the benefit and need levels. After all, livinig conditions vary wildly from State to State, why not let the government closest to the people make those decisions?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

Lots to cut there Frank. If you're cutting, some of that has to go too.

 

[Charles_Main]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

You honestly think there is no waste in our defense budget?

 

[Paulie]

What nobody left or right is eager or willing to address is that Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security is going to devour all the rest.

A lot of that needs to be moved down the State level along with the revenue lines currently used to support them. Let the States decide the benefit and need levels. After all, livinig conditions vary wildly from State to State, why not let the government closest to the people make those decisions?

^ that

 

[Paulie]

Healthcare and education are two things off the top of my head where centralization can not work.

You can not adequately realize the needs of someone thousands of miles away, in varying conditions, from some office in DC using generalized statistical data.

You need to be there with the people to figure out what is most necessary.

 

[JWBooth]

No cuts to defense.

Find someplace else.

I'd suggest debt service, but the wingnuts who put Bush in office screwed that one up.

Default, then it all gets to be a do over.

NObody will ever buy a bond or lend a dime to the Govt. to function ever again. Folks like all this shit that they demand from Government as long as they think somebody else will pay for it. Lets see what happens when there is no credit line.

 

[Charles_Main]

What nobody left or right is eager or willing to address is that Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security is going to devour all the rest.

A lot of that needs to be moved down the State level along with the revenue lines currently used to support them. Let the States decide the benefit and need levels. After all, livinig conditions vary wildly from State to State, why not let the government closest to the people make those decisions?

^ that

I agree. Also Federal Bail outs of State Budgets MUST END. All we are doing in encouraging states to continue to live beyond their means, and count on the next Federal hand out. We must cut them off, they are forced to make the cuts needed to get their budgets in line with something they can sustain with out constant bail outs.

 

[Paulie]

A lot of that needs to be moved down the State level along with the revenue lines currently used to support them. Let the States decide the benefit and need levels. After all, livinig conditions vary wildly from State to State, why not let the government closest to the people make those decisions?

^ that

I agree. Also Federal Bail outs of State Budgets MUST END. All we are doing in encouraging states to continue to live beyond their means, and count on the next Federal hand out. We must cut them off, they are forced to make the cuts needed to get their budgets in line with something they can sustain with out constant bail outs.

Virginia just got their act together and turned a 1.8 billion deficit into a surplus. They did it in a couple months.

 

[johnrocks]

A lot of State budgets are stressed due to Federal mandates and programs such as Medicade.