OK heres the deal

[M14 Shooter]

Massively reduce government spending on all levels, stop printing money, buying up private debt and protecting corporate and personal failure so the economy can recover.
[/thread]

You forgot:
Get government out of the way of those that would move us forward.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That is your answer to creating jobs?

The economy, through those willing to invest in it, does.
Not government.

How long is this going to take?

Wrong question.
You need to ask: How long will the job growth last?
If the government creates jobs thru stimulus, the jobs evaporate when the stimilus money dries up. If the economy creates jods thru expansion, they remain.

Do you think the govt should be in charge of proving the things we need

Absofriginglutely not.

What would you cut?

Given they take up 60% of federal spending and that the money is spent regardless of available revenuse - entitlements.

and what would be the outcome of these cuts on the population in the short term

Short term doesnt matter - long term problems require long-term solutions.

 

[Big Fitz]

Well, the way that I see it is that most states are struggling at the moment and those that are not are surviving off of federal government handouts.

That means they're all broke, and going down at various speeds into default. What happens when a state defaults? Well we know what happened to Argentina in the 1980's after the junta collapsed. The Weimar republic, and there are dozens of other examples too. Everyone suffered, and often strongmen came to power that did even more horrible things that required decades to escape from.

When you end those handouts and drop social programs in the laps of the states, all 50 (um, yes, President Obama there are only 50) states will be in very deep hot water.

That is why they will end. The question is, would you rather see a 20% cut, 50% or shutdown? All these options are there, but there is no 'keep it the same or increase their spending' option.

If you increase taxes, you get a one year bump to revenues then a collapse till it's repealed because people and businesses flee the state leaving those who cannot flee stuck in poverty creating an economic wasteland.

Just like the home budget. You can't print money. You can have only so many income streams. You can declare bankruptcy but the consequences are dire. You can let your debtors repossess your goods and property or sell it off to pay debt.

At some point, you must decide what spending must end. Those trips to Disney or Vegas... done. The private schools for the kids, done. Public school for them. Buying fillet Mignon and lobster, arugula and quinoa? Try hamburger and tuna, beans and rice. Turn off the lights, turn down the HVAC, walk to work, drop the extra activities... everything.

This is the point we are at. The end of spending as we know it. Here's your new normal. Life's a *****, work hard and let's get through this helping each other without government money.

The error is in thinking this can be avoided.

Um, that is what I was saying, we have to cut spending.

The difference between you and me is what spending. You say, all social spending. I said we HAVE to become fiscally responsible. To me that does not mean cutting all spending as you have suggested. I happen to disagree with you about the social spending to a point because of my belief that the main function of government is to protect its citizens. Protecting them is not making them starve as they have been doing in Ethiopia and other places around the globe.

Immie

Um, that is what I was saying, we have to cut spending.

Oops!

 

[mnbasketball]

Right now we are in hard times and we are spending a lot of money trying to get things back to a manageable level where people have a chance to live a normal life.

The big question to me is what is the most important thing that needs to be done and how should we move towards that goal.

Fighting over little things or should we be putting our total sight on putting America back to work. Should we start doing things that will focus the private sector to create jobs by working on things we all understand that we need at this very moment. Good roads, new bridges, new electrical grids, new power plants.

Sure it is going to take public money, everything we do for the country cost public money, from running the govt to oversight, to building infrastructure to having a military.

Do people really believe that refraining from doing things as a govt because of it's cost is a bad thing, and who would do these things if not the govt .
Should we privatize the military and then think they will act in the peoples best interest? We all need roads and bridges, but should we go back to charging people a toll? The electrical system needs improvement, but if that cost is just added onto the cost of energy it most likely would force many business and citizens to not be able to afford what it would cost. Do we need to privatize the schools and turn the students over to local companies to determine what they are taught or forced to learn?

What is more important right NOW? what would you do?

We're not spending money... we're printing money and monetizing debt. As for the rest... we need to get back to basics. Cradle to grave insurance is what is killing us... i.e., 35% of the American population (122,500,000) people on some sort of public assistance?

Undoable.

WOW, 122 million on public assistance, you want to explain this a little? Are you saying that SS which has a 2 trillion dollar surplus, that is public assistance?

 

[mnbasketball]

Given they take up 60% of federal spending and that the money is spent regardless of available revenuse - entitlements.

60% of the federal budget? you want to lay that one out?

 

[Jarhead]

If I was experiencing hard times personally....and I needed to tighten my belt.....I would not spend money making my bathroom look nicer....I would deal with the inconvenience of cracked tiles and a broken towel rod.

Deal with cheaply filled pot holes and deal with bridges that dont look pretty becuase they need a paint job. Deal with trains that only go 80 MPH.

Spending on government programs while increasing taxes is not the answer.

The answer?

Leave the private sector alone and let them do what comes naturally....The desire to be successful and one of the biggest is what drives your typical American Business person to grow their company and hire employees.

Threaten to raise their operating costs (new taxes) will hamper if not reverse this.

 

[kwc57]

Right now we are in hard times and we are spending a lot of money trying to get things back to a manageable level where people have a chance to live a normal life.

The big question to me is what is the most important thing that needs to be done and how should we move towards that goal.

Fighting over little things or should we be putting our total sight on putting America back to work. Should we start doing things that will focus the private sector to create jobs by working on things we all understand that we need at this very moment. Good roads, new bridges, new electrical grids, new power plants.

Sure it is going to take public money, everything we do for the country cost public money, from running the govt to oversight, to building infrastructure to having a military.

Do people really believe that refraining from doing things as a govt because of it's cost is a bad thing, and who would do these things if not the govt .
Should we privatize the military and then think they will act in the peoples best interest? We all need roads and bridges, but should we go back to charging people a toll? The electrical system needs improvement, but if that cost is just added onto the cost of energy it most likely would force many business and citizens to not be able to afford what it would cost. Do we need to privatize the schools and turn the students over to local companies to determine what they are taught or forced to learn?

What is more important right NOW? what would you do?

We're not spending money... we're printing money and monetizing debt. As for the rest... we need to get back to basics. Cradle to grave insurance is what is killing us... i.e., 35% of the American population (122,500,000) people on some sort of public assistance?

Undoable.

WOW, 122 million on public assistance, you want to explain this a little? Are you saying that SS which has a 2 trillion dollar surplus, that is public assistance?

SS has a two trillion surplus? Where did you hear that? There is no actual money set aside in a lock box. There is a file cabinet with IOU's where the SS money that comes in goes out immediately as part of the general budget.

What would I do? I'd got spending 25% right off the bat. Across the board. Will it hurt? Hell yeah, but every agency of the government with a budget needs to be told to reduce their budget and spending by 25% TODAY. Then no new debt can be incurred unless there is a proven way that it will be funded.

What is the first thing you do when you go to a credit counselor because you are teetering on the edge of bankruptcy? You cut up the credit cards, then you work out a plan to pay off the debt you have and a tight budget you can exist off of until you get your debt paid and you are back on your feet.

The gubmint ain't our mama. It isn't there to make everything better.

 

[Jarhead]

Right now we are in hard times and we are spending a lot of money trying to get things back to a manageable level where people have a chance to live a normal life.

The big question to me is what is the most important thing that needs to be done and how should we move towards that goal.

Fighting over little things or should we be putting our total sight on putting America back to work. Should we start doing things that will focus the private sector to create jobs by working on things we all understand that we need at this very moment. Good roads, new bridges, new electrical grids, new power plants.

Sure it is going to take public money, everything we do for the country cost public money, from running the govt to oversight, to building infrastructure to having a military.

Do people really believe that refraining from doing things as a govt because of it's cost is a bad thing, and who would do these things if not the govt .
Should we privatize the military and then think they will act in the peoples best interest? We all need roads and bridges, but should we go back to charging people a toll? The electrical system needs improvement, but if that cost is just added onto the cost of energy it most likely would force many business and citizens to not be able to afford what it would cost. Do we need to privatize the schools and turn the students over to local companies to determine what they are taught or forced to learn?

What is more important right NOW? what would you do?

We borrowed 850 billion dollars and tried that.
It didnt work.....as many of us said it wouldnt before it was forced on us.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Given they take up 60% of federal spending and that the money is spent regardless of available revenuse - entitlements.

60% of the federal budget? you want to lay that one out?

60% of federal spending. Not all spending on on budget.
FY2009:
Total Spending:$3518.2B
Mandatory* spending:$2288.7B = 65.04%

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/AppendixF.shtml

* = Entitlements such as Soc Sec, Medicare, medicade, income security programs such as unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, and foster care, and other retirement/disability programs

 

[mnbasketball]

Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 12%
Medicaid: 7%
Other Means-tested entitlements: 6%
Mandatory payments (pensions, etc.): 6%
Net interest on debt: 11%


What I don't understand is since SS has a budget surplus of something like 2 trillion, and we collect a tax for this and Medicare and medicaid how does this count as money from the budget being spent?

and since Bushes war is on borrowed money and pensions are something that should have been paid for in advance why is it part of the budget.

Sounds to me like maybe when you promise someone something you should pay for it by raising the tax income to pay for it.

Just passing legislation and waiting for someone else to pay for it is BS, so if we owe based on what we have promised then we need to raise taxes to pay for it. Cutting overhead and waste is a simple thing that we all can agree with.

at one time we went to 90% tax to straighten things out, maybe the time has come again to have this happen. But if we want to build roads, or electric grids, or Nuk plants, or build schools or for that matter pay people wages and give them benefits then we need to pay for these things up front.


Does the govt not collect tax dollars to pay for SS, medicare and Medicaid? so as I see it, it has little to do with a % of the budget since its not something you need to take money from one source to pay for something that wasn't collected for.

And 11% of our budget is interest on DEBT, but where is the debt comming from, it looks to me that debt is comming from things you have to borrow money to do, like wage war, build roads, run the govt and pay wages. If we don't have enough to pay for this then I SAY RAISE TAXES and make it income neutral.

 

[Jarhead]

Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 12%
Medicaid: 7%
Other Means-tested entitlements: 6%
Mandatory payments (pensions, etc.): 6%
Net interest on debt: 11%


What I don't understand is since SS has a budget surplus of something like 2 trillion, and we collect a tax for this and Medicare and medicaid how does this count as money from the budget being spent?

and since Bushes war is on borrowed money and pensions are something that should have been paid for in advance why is it part of the budget.

Sounds to me like maybe when you promise someone something you should pay for it by raising the tax income to pay for it.

Just passing legislation and waiting for someone else to pay for it is BS, so if we owe based on what we have promised then we need to raise taxes to pay for it. Cutting overhead and waste is a simple thing that we all can agree with.

at one time we went to 90% tax to straighten things out, maybe the time has come again to have this happen. But if we want to build roads, or electric grids, or Nuk plants, or build schools or for that matter pay people wages and give them benefits then we need to pay for these things up front.


Does the govt not collect tax dollars to pay for SS, medicare and Medicaid? so as I see it, it has little to do with a % of the budget since its not something you need to take money from one source to pay for something that wasn't collected for.

And 11% of our budget is interest on DEBT, but where is the debt comming from, it looks to me that debt is comming from things you have to borrow money to do, like wage war, build roads, run the govt and pay wages. If we don't have enough to pay for this then I SAY RAISE TAXES and make it income neutral.

Your solutions seem to be sound...however, you are eliminating one thing from it.
To raise taxes.....and not even to 90%....but to say 60% will kill our economy and unemployment will jump dramatically.

It cant be done...especially right now.

The solution...get spending below revenue.

 

[mnbasketball]

* = Entitlements such as Soc Sec, Medicare, medicade, income security programs such as unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, and foster care, and other retirement/disability programs


And here lies the problem, you collect taxes and fees from business and then put all this in a general fund and say well were spending this amount on these programs.

Your right, SS taxpayers lay aside 7% of their money and business pays 7% of their money to pay for it. It's not an entitlement, its a paid in whole life income insuance plan.

If this wasn't paid for then you would have the money comming in to the budget. The same goes for Medcare and Medicade to an extent. If you don'r have the programs, you don't collect the money. there would be less to spend.

You guys want people to pay a tax for a benefit to you and then tell them that their benefits should not happen because it will take to much of the money that you
gave us to pay for the program.

You guys act like getting rid of something that people pay for doesn't mean that the tax collections would stop also.

 

[Jarhead]

* = Entitlements such as Soc Sec, Medicare, medicade, income security programs such as unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, and foster care, and other retirement/disability programs


And here lies the problem, you collect taxes and fees from business and then put all this in a general fund and say well were spending this amount on these programs.

Your right, SS taxpayers lay aside 7% of their money and business pays 7% of their money to pay for it. It's not an entitlement, its a paid in whole life income insuance plan.

If this wasn't paid for then you would have the money comming in to the budget. The same goes for Medcare and Medicade to an extent. If you don'r have the programs, you don't collect the money. there would be less to spend.

You guys want people to pay a tax for a benefit to you and then tell them that their benefits should not happen because it will take to much of the money that you
gave us to pay for the program.

You guys act like getting rid of something that people pay for doesn't mean that the tax collections would stop also.

No...

"Us guys" are looking for a solution to a severe problem that will not make things worse.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Social Security: 23%
Medicare: 12%
Medicaid: 7%
Other Means-tested entitlements: 6%
Mandatory payments (pensions, etc.): 6%
Net interest on debt: 11%

Yes. 65%

What I don't understand is since SS has a budget surplus of something like 2 trillion

It doesn't.
FY2009 it was $137B.
FY2010, there's a deficit.

and we collect a tax for this and Medicare and medicaid how does this count as money from the budget being spent?

Read what I said:
Federal spending. Not all spending on on budget.
Federal spending always counts as federal spending.

Sounds to me like maybe when you promise someone something you should pay for it by raising the tax income to pay for it...at one time we went to 90% tax to straighten things out, maybe the time has come again to have this happen.

Aside from the fact that this is self-serving hooey... it denotes a considerable lack of understanding of just how serious the problem really is.

If you were to take -every dime- from the "rich" - those making $250k/yr or more (<$674B) - you'd cover less than 30% of all entitlement spending.

65% of federal spending goes to entitlements, and, alone, exceeds total revenue by almost 9%.
Entitlement spending -must- be cut for there to be any meaningful reduction of the deficit.

 

[mnbasketball]

Your solutions seem to be sound...however, you are eliminating one thing from it.
To raise taxes.....and not even to 90%....but to say 60% will kill our economy and unemployment will jump dramatically.

It cant be done...especially right now. I don't think so, it can be done.
(why because you read that? sometimes what you don't want is exactly what you need).

#1-"The solution...get spending below revenue. ( But spending what you collected taxes for is not deficiet speding as far as I am concerned.)
#2-"So the biggest thing is the military, (how much you want to cut? 50% for now?)

(For every dollar we cut I say you must raise taxes that much. double the pain and it will be over shortly. we just cut 50 billion, so drop 50 billion in tax cuts, I would say to those who can afford it. If in two weeks they find another 100 billion then get rid of another 100 billion worth of tax cuts or raise taxes that much.)

 

[mnbasketball]

* = Entitlements such as Soc Sec, Medicare, medicaid, income security programs such as unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, and foster care, and other retirement/disability programs



Well i agree that we should not provide what we don't want to pay for.
But we also shouldn't include in this figure what we have collected taxes to pay for and then use it for something else.

You take what you collect away from what you spend on SS, medicare and Medicaid there isn't much of a deficiet is there.

The other thing is a social net for people mostly who can't fend for themselves, and I would think most people would not want to cut most of it.

so the problem is what are we spending that we don't need and isn't paid for through payroll tax.

So what do we cut? or maybe not give big tax cuts or raise taxes or a mix of all three?

 

[mnbasketball]

65% of federal spending goes to entitlements,

Pure BS, to include something that you collect a special tax to provide as part of the budget. and then turn around and add the intrest that the deficet has a an entitlement cost. What part of our budget is deficiet military spending?

 

[M14 Shooter]

You take what you collect away from what you spend on SS, medicare and Medicaid there isn't much of a deficiet is there.

FY2009
Income, Social insurance taxes: $890B
Outlays, Soc Sec/Medicare: $1176B
Deficit: $277B

The other thing is a social net for people mostly who can't fend for themselves, and I would think most people would not want to cut most of it.

You can make every excuse that you care to thnk of - until you're willing to discuss significant cuts in entitlement spending, you aren't serious about reducing the deficit.

 

[mnbasketball]

FY2009
Income, Social insurance taxes: $890B
Outlays, Soc Sec/Medicare: $1176B
Deficit: $277B

well since people actually do pay taxes shouldn't some of it goes to these things?

I mean I have paid a lot in taxes over the years and I still pay taxes, shouldn't some of that go to help me when I need help. But I don't have a problem with giving back by tax cuts, if it will help I say keep all the tax cuts.

 

[M14 Shooter]

65% of federal spending goes to entitlements

Pure BS,

I showed you the facts.
Denying them only denotes an abject unwilingess to accept reality.

to include something that you collect a special tax to provide as part of the budget

Read what I said:
Federal spending. Not all spending on on budget.
Federal spending always counts as federal spending.

and then turn around and add the intrest that the deficet has a an entitlement cost.

Because it -is- an entitlement cost.

What part of our budget is deficiet military spending?

You can cut defense spending ($655B) to $0 and take every dime from those making $250k/yr (<$534B) and cover just over 50% of entitlement spending.

You -also- still have a $360B deficit - which incorrectly assumes that those making more than $250k pay $0 in tax.
Given that the top 5% of earners pay 58% of federal income tax, that number is more like $909B

Now that you've taken every dime from the rich and eliminated defense spending, how do you plan to make up that $909B?

As I said: You simply do not understand just how serious the problem really is.