Lets focus on economics and a balanced budget

[JoeTheEconomist]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Cut out all the Injun subsidies...

 

[Siete]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

the President proposes, Congress disposes.

Budgets are the responsibility of Congress. The President doesn't even have to sign a budget for it to become law.

Hammer Congress if you want some sort of balance.

 

[Norman]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

 

[bendog]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

So you assume he will cut social security?

 

[Norman]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

So you assume he will cut social security?

I put it in the realm of possibility, that he will at least try to reform it.

 

[bendog]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

So you assume he will cut social security?

I put it in the realm of possibility, that he will at least try to reform it.

Wow, so would Kasich or Cruz. I guess he's a RINOOOOOOOOOO

 

[Siete]

Trump already said he wouldn't touch SS.

back to Congress ...

 

[g5000]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

What those pie charts never show is how much is spent every year on tax expenditures, and that's the biggest expenditure in the budget!

$1.2 trillion. That's how much we give away to special interests every year in the form of deductions, credits, and exemptions. It's a massive anti-free market wealth transfer scheme up the food chain, legislatively concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands. It is also a massive government behavioral modification program.

Behavioral control. If you don't buy a house, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't have kids, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of energy, you are punished with higher taxes. It was no big leap to punish you with higher taxes for not buying the right kind of health insurance.



So...you can balance the budget just by banning all tax expenditures. This would actually provide America with an $800 billion surplus. A surplus which could be used to lower EVERYONE's tax rates AND pay down the debt. Then, once the debt was paid off, tax rates could be lowered even further.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

Yeah, and it is getting closer and closer to 2:1.

When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4% of our population was over 65.

When Medicare was added in 1965, 9% of our population was over 65.

Today, 14% of our population is over 65.

As life expectancy increases, a larger and larger percentage of our population is on SS/Medicare, while a smaller a smaller and smaller percentage is supporting them.

This is clearly an unsustainable trend.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

No, we raise the eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

 

[g5000]

Ratio of Social Security Covered Workers to Beneficiaries, Calendar Years 1940-2013

 

[Slade3200]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

What those pie charts never show is how much is spent every year on tax expenditures, and that's the biggest expenditure in the budget!

$1.2 trillion. That's how much we give away to special interests every year in the form of deductions, credits, and exemptions. It's a massive anti-free market wealth transfer scheme up the food chain, legislatively concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands. It is also a massive government behavioral modification program.

Behavioral control. If you don't buy a house, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't have kids, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of energy, you are punished with higher taxes. It was no big leap to punish you with higher taxes for not buying the right kind of health insurance.



So...you can balance the budget just by banning all tax expenditures. This would actually provide America with an $800 billion surplus. A surplus which could be used to lower EVERYONE's tax rates AND pay down the debt. Then, once the debt was paid off, tax rates could be lowered even further.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

Yeah, and it is getting closer and closer to 2:1.

When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4% of our population was over 65.

When Medicare was added in 1965, 9% of our population was over 65.

Today, 14% of our population is over 65.

As life expectancy increases, a larger and larger percentage of our population is on SS/Medicare, while a smaller a smaller and smaller percentage is supporting them.

This is clearly an unsustainable trend.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

No, we raise the eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

I agree that there is a lot of fat that can be trimmed in the area of tax expenditures, especially for big business, however it would be reckless to cut everything. Many middle class households and small businesses benefit greatly from the tax deductions that they can claim, in fact, moving to a flat tax or non-deduction code would close the doors for many freelancers and small businesses. Incentives are there to encourage businesses to reinvest in growth, job creation, charitable giving, and product development. They are there to incentivize better efficiency and less waste to help improve our environment and communities. Like I opened with, there is definitely fat that can be trimmed but I think it should be focused towards big business and special interest more specifically focused at loopholes that line the pockets of the executives. Entitlements aside, this is an area that Bernie has been shinning light on during his campaign that I hope more people start listening to and taking action. It is obviously striking a nerve with the public.

 

[g5000]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

What those pie charts never show is how much is spent every year on tax expenditures, and that's the biggest expenditure in the budget!

$1.2 trillion. That's how much we give away to special interests every year in the form of deductions, credits, and exemptions. It's a massive anti-free market wealth transfer scheme up the food chain, legislatively concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands. It is also a massive government behavioral modification program.

Behavioral control. If you don't buy a house, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't have kids, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of energy, you are punished with higher taxes. It was no big leap to punish you with higher taxes for not buying the right kind of health insurance.



So...you can balance the budget just by banning all tax expenditures. This would actually provide America with an $800 billion surplus. A surplus which could be used to lower EVERYONE's tax rates AND pay down the debt. Then, once the debt was paid off, tax rates could be lowered even further.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

Yeah, and it is getting closer and closer to 2:1.

When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4% of our population was over 65.

When Medicare was added in 1965, 9% of our population was over 65.

Today, 14% of our population is over 65.

As life expectancy increases, a larger and larger percentage of our population is on SS/Medicare, while a smaller a smaller and smaller percentage is supporting them.

This is clearly an unsustainable trend.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

No, we raise the eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

I agree that there is a lot of fat that can be trimmed in the area of tax expenditures, especially for big business, however it would be reckless to cut everything. Many middle class households and small businesses benefit greatly from the tax deductions that they can claim, in fact, moving to a flat tax or non-deduction code would close the doors for many freelancers and small businesses. Incentives are there to encourage businesses to reinvest in growth, job creation, charitable giving, and product development. They are there to incentivize better efficiency and less waste to help improve our environment and communities

Bullshit. Our economy managed without them for a very long time.

If your business can't survive without government gifts, then you have a shitty business model that should be replaced by one that can.

And tax expenditures aren't "fat". They are utter corruption, tilting the playing field to the advantage of a select few. It is government picking winners and losers. Every dollar transferred is a dollar stolen from someone else.

 

[Slade3200]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

What those pie charts never show is how much is spent every year on tax expenditures, and that's the biggest expenditure in the budget!

$1.2 trillion. That's how much we give away to special interests every year in the form of deductions, credits, and exemptions. It's a massive anti-free market wealth transfer scheme up the food chain, legislatively concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands. It is also a massive government behavioral modification program.

Behavioral control. If you don't buy a house, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't have kids, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of energy, you are punished with higher taxes. It was no big leap to punish you with higher taxes for not buying the right kind of health insurance.



So...you can balance the budget just by banning all tax expenditures. This would actually provide America with an $800 billion surplus. A surplus which could be used to lower EVERYONE's tax rates AND pay down the debt. Then, once the debt was paid off, tax rates could be lowered even further.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

Yeah, and it is getting closer and closer to 2:1.

When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4% of our population was over 65.

When Medicare was added in 1965, 9% of our population was over 65.

Today, 14% of our population is over 65.

As life expectancy increases, a larger and larger percentage of our population is on SS/Medicare, while a smaller a smaller and smaller percentage is supporting them.

This is clearly an unsustainable trend.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

No, we raise the eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

I agree that there is a lot of fat that can be trimmed in the area of tax expenditures, especially for big business, however it would be reckless to cut everything. Many middle class households and small businesses benefit greatly from the tax deductions that they can claim, in fact, moving to a flat tax or non-deduction code would close the doors for many freelancers and small businesses. Incentives are there to encourage businesses to reinvest in growth, job creation, charitable giving, and product development. They are there to incentivize better efficiency and less waste to help improve our environment and communities

Bullshit. Our economy managed without them for a very long time.

If your business can't survive without government gifts, then you have a shitty business model that should be replaced by one that can.

And tax expenditures aren't "fat". They are utter corruption, tilting the playing field to the advantage of a select few. It is government picking winners and losers. Every dollar transferred is a dollar stolen from someone else.

You must be a W-2er... I'll simplify for you. If I am a freelancer starting a photography business and in my first year I make $100K in revenue that I have to pay 30% tax on, I owe $30K in Taxes. But if I spent 60K in expenses to earn that $100K and I net $40K then paying $30K in taxes pretty much wipes me out. It makes sense me to pay taxes on my NET income of $40K instead of $100K. My income as a freelancer is very much different than your W-2 salary.

A different example would be the Research and Development Tax credit which can give a business up to a 20% tax credit on expenditures involved in R&D and product development. This can also be extended to wages for small businesses with less than $250K in revenue. Instead of that 20% going to the FED government in taxes it goes back to the business and encourages them to reinvest into innovative products and technological growth. So your saying that this is "utter corruption" and those dollars are better given to the Government? There are tons of examples of expenditures that benefit businesses in a similar way so I'm not following your logic...

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

He is about 40 million jobs from the truth. At that point, he might as well recite numbers from the phone book. People believe not because of what he says but because they simply want to believe.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

No. He will do nothing just like the other 4 candidates, and the 30 years of politicians

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

So you assume he will cut social security?

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

we can talk about cutting food stamps or eliminating the department of education or cutting farm subsidies or foreign aid but those are such small pieces of the pie. Everything has to be on the table

Yes, yes and yes.

Trump will eliminate it all and make America great once more. At least that is what I hope.

The OP is about entitlements, which Trump believes will not be touched much less eliminated. In order for you to get what you hoped, just in SS, the Trump economy would need to create 40 million new jobs.

I would put in the realm of a meteor strike. By the time he is president the system will be another 2 trillion in the hole.

He knows that he won't get elected if he says anything else. Too many people were indoctrinated with Marxism and don't realize that they were scammed. It's impossible to win if you tell the truth. He's not an idiot.

So you assume he will cut social security?

I put it in the realm of possibility, that he will at least try to reform it.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

View attachment 69109

Ok so roughly 33% of the federal budget is discretionary spending. To balance the budget will require more than just cuts in discretionary spending.

What those pie charts never show is how much is spent every year on tax expenditures, and that's the biggest expenditure in the budget!

$1.2 trillion. That's how much we give away to special interests every year in the form of deductions, credits, and exemptions. It's a massive anti-free market wealth transfer scheme up the food chain, legislatively concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands. It is also a massive government behavioral modification program.

Behavioral control. If you don't buy a house, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't have kids, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, you are punished with higher taxes. If you don't buy the right kind of energy, you are punished with higher taxes. It was no big leap to punish you with higher taxes for not buying the right kind of health insurance.



So...you can balance the budget just by banning all tax expenditures. This would actually provide America with an $800 billion surplus. A surplus which could be used to lower EVERYONE's tax rates AND pay down the debt. Then, once the debt was paid off, tax rates could be lowered even further.

One of the huge drivers of medicare and social security is the baby boomer generation retirees. We have an enormous number of old people drawing benefits. I think the current stat on ratio of those paying in for those receiving is 3:1 where as it was 15:1 when we started the program.

Yeah, and it is getting closer and closer to 2:1.

When Social Security was enacted, only 5.4% of our population was over 65.

When Medicare was added in 1965, 9% of our population was over 65.

Today, 14% of our population is over 65.

As life expectancy increases, a larger and larger percentage of our population is on SS/Medicare, while a smaller a smaller and smaller percentage is supporting them.

This is clearly an unsustainable trend.

How do we get there?
1. do we cut social security benefits?
2. do we gut medicare?
3. do we lift the cap on taxed income?

No, we raise the eligibility age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward.

We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

How fast are you will to raise the age to 70. Immediately - great you are 50% of the way to kicking the can. The SSA says that we are living 18 days longer per co-hort. That means that with last increase in retirement age pretty much explains all of the increase through about 2050. That retiree will work 2 years longer to get .5 years of longer benefits over a retiree of 2005.

 

[Kosh]

Why the hell do you want to destroy the economy?

Voting far left will destroy the economy!

 

[Dovahkiin]

There is no need to balance the federal budget.

You are indeed correct. These idiots want the government to drain the private sector of dollars year after year and force people to rely on loans.

 

[Centinel]

There is no need to balance the federal budget.

You are indeed correct. These idiots want the government to drain the private sector of dollars year after year and force people to rely on loans.

Drain the private sector of dollars? How would that happen?