Start Cutting, At Least Get Issue On Table!

[Annie]

There are a multitude of threads mostly started by liberals saying, 'Where are the Republicans going to cut?' Implication is everything proposed is off limits, especially defense and entitlements.

The new Congress better start wrapping their minds around the fact that they are going to have to address the debt and not kick it down the road. Defense cuts need to be made by the DOD, yet it seems clear that they should begin with waste, duplication, and foreign bases.

As for Social Security, seems the first words should not be, "No, no cuts to those needing them, we'll cut waste." It won't cut it. Instead it seems prudent and fair to start, "The program needs to be cut, perhaps eventually dismantled, but promises made to those currently enrolled or within 15 years of eligibility need to be kept where insufficient resources of the individuals are available also need to be kept. We are going to look for parameters of what is necessary to keep those programs, while addressing the needs of the remainder of the population in planning for their future. We cannot allow this sword to continue to hand over the heads of our children and grandchildren."

Yet the above is NOT what we're currently hearing from those insider politicians that are trying to align themselves with tea parties:

Commentary Blog Archive The Entitlement Crisis

The Entitlement Crisis
Peter Wehner - 11.12.2010 - 1:51 PM

On Meet the Press, Sen. Jim DeMint – widely admired by conservatives and the Tea Party for his passionate advocacy for limited government – spent a good deal of time condemning earmarks. That’s a fine idea, but it would barely begin to right our fiscal imbalance. When asked about cuts in Social Security, however, DeMint was emphatic:

Well, no, we’re not talking about cuts in Social Security. If we can just cut the administrative waste, we can cut hundreds of billions of dollars a year at the federal level. So before we start cutting–I mean, we need to keep our promises to seniors, David, and cutting benefits to seniors is not on the table. …

We don’t have to cut benefits for seniors, and we don’t need to cut Medicare like, like the Democrats did in this big Obamacare bill. We can restore sanity in Washington without cutting any benefits to seniors.
​

DeMint has been a relentless critic of big government and has rung the alarm bell on the size of our debt and the deficit. Yet on the overwhelming fiscal threat of our time – the entitlement crisis – DeMint not only doesn’t have anything constructive to say; he actually is arguing against any cuts for Social Security and Medicare. (Bear in mind that entitlements, excluding net interest, account for 56 percent of all federal spending and 14 percent of GDP — up from 10 percent of GDP three years ago.)

Earmarks are a start, but alone they cause more bad bills to be enacted than costs. I'd like to see rules for clean bills with no earmarks, but am much more concerned about real decline on the debt and shrinking of government in all of our lives.

 

[Intense]

Government, in It's current state, has become a corrupted parasite, that has out sized it's host, us. It needs to see that. Both form and size are at issue. The consent of the governed long discarded.

 

[strollingbones]

one would be amazed how much can be saved by the elimination of duplicate services and out dated programs....many states have cut these type of services and have found that the services arent missed..one you create an agency it will stay as long as it can

 

[strollingbones]

it is a machine that has taken on a life of its own

 

[Annie]

one would be amazed how much can be saved by the elimination of duplicate services and out dated programs....many states have cut these type of services and have found that the services arent missed..one you create an agency it will stay as long as it can

A general rule is that the higher the level of government, the more waste and duplication. States waste much more than counties or municipalities, in general. Fed much more than states.

 

[Intense]

Subsidies are a sore spot with me.

 

[strollingbones]

depends on what is being subsidied there....i am all for funding the arts...which seems to be a sore subject for conservatives...i am a social liberal and fiscal conservative which finds me being yelled at ...'how are you going to pay for all the feel good programs'? blah blah fucking blah...i will tell you how...we dont need one of the largest standing armies....we dont need to import all the finished products..why export raw materials and then buy them back as a finished product? why not rebuild the textiles and manufactoring jobs...i have a lot of whys....i have very few answers...its hard to think about draining the swamp when you are up to your ass in gators

 

[goldcatt]

With the amount of time and manpower they have, there's no reason they can't take the entire budget, plonk it on a table somewhere, and take the time to examine it line by line. By itself eliminating one hundred million-dollar out of date program here or ten million-dollar BS study there is nothing, but if you get all of them? It would buy them time to get to work on the Big Questions at least.

They won't, of course. But that would be the proper way to approach it if they were serious.

 

[The T]

Government, in It's current state, has become a corrupted parasite, that has out sized it's host, us. It needs to see that. Both form and size are at issue. The consent of the governed long discarded.

I would like to see many Government Departments consolidated or outright eliminated...and yes I am not targeting any particuliar one, but merely suggesting that the Congress look at repetitive tasks/functions or even ones that have long outlived their usefulness.

 

[WillowTree]

Start cutting with government employees. Cut the number, cut their salaries, and cut their benefits and that includes the people in congress.

 

[Annie]

With the amount of time and manpower they have, there's no reason they can't take the entire budget, plonk it on a table somewhere, and take the time to examine it line by line. By itself eliminating one hundred million-dollar out of date program here or ten million-dollar BS study there is nothing, but if you get all of them? It would buy them time to get to work on the Big Questions at least.

They won't, of course. But that would be the proper way to approach it if they were serious.

I'd go first for an across the board cut of 10 or 15%. Then start eliminating unnecessary and duplicate agencies and departments. Then start looking at the general budgets of each and making further cuts.

 

[The T]

Subsidies are a sore spot with me.

Ditto.

 

[The T]

Start cutting with government employees. Cut the number, cut their salaries, and cut their benefits and that includes the people in congress.

Government it totally out of touch. Just because a Government entity exists doesn't mean that it should survive.

 

[Annie]

Start cutting with government employees. Cut the number, cut their salaries, and cut their benefits and that includes the people in congress.

Government it totally out of touch. Just because a Government entity exists doesn't mean that it should survive.

I would always argue against the elimination of government. "If me were perfect..." We are not. For me it's all about size and whether or not the people can have the service provided more efficiently by private or government, individual or collective. Size matters.

 

[goldcatt]

With the amount of time and manpower they have, there's no reason they can't take the entire budget, plonk it on a table somewhere, and take the time to examine it line by line. By itself eliminating one hundred million-dollar out of date program here or ten million-dollar BS study there is nothing, but if you get all of them? It would buy them time to get to work on the Big Questions at least.

They won't, of course. But that would be the proper way to approach it if they were serious.

I'd go first for an across the board cut of 10 or 15%. Then start eliminating unnecessary and duplicate agencies and departments. Then start looking at the general budgets of each and making further cuts.

We actually started to do this on another forum I was a member of. We pulled up the budget and one of the posters started putting it up line by line, starting alphabetically with Agriculture. You'd be surprised at how many of the items we found were agreed on as waste by both sides, with no real argument.

We only got about halfway through Ag before it was closed, but the running tally was already close to ten billion. And that's only halfway through one department. And per our rules, cutting departments altogether and slashing salaries of employees in programs that survive was off the table.

Amazing, and eye-opening.

 

[Trajan]

yes well, they are swearing the newbies in tomorrow. and starting the lame duck session. I would not expect much till jan. I posted somewhere here a list of what the deficit council heads see as areas to be cut, recommendations etc. by the comm. chairs Simpson and Bowles.....anyway, nancy and her apparatchiks have already said its dead on arrival.

 

[Annie]

yes well, they are swearing the newbies in tomorrow. and starting the lame duck session. I would not expect much till jan. I posted somewhere here a list of what the deficit council heads see as areas to be cut, recommendations etc. by the comm. chairs Simpson and Bowles.....anyway, nancy and her apparatchiks have already said its dead on arrival.

Simpson and Bowles are looking for 30 years of this, no thanks. Statements like Demint's and McConnell's are the opening salvos of the political class with (R) after their names. Once again, no thanks. One way or another real change has to happen, it won't be lead by the political elites of either party, it's against their self-interests.

 

[The T]

yes well, they are swearing the newbies in tomorrow. and starting the lame duck session. I would not expect much till jan. I posted somewhere here a list of what the deficit council heads see as areas to be cut, recommendations etc. by the comm. chairs Simpson and Bowles.....anyway, nancy and her apparatchiks have already said its dead on arrival.

Simpson and Bowles are looking for 30 years of this, no thanks. Statements like Demint's and McConnell's are the opening salvos of the political class with (R) after their names. Once again, no thanks. One way or another real change has to happen, it won't be lead by the political elites of either party, it's against their self-interests.

Very true, And those elites (if this election is of any indicator), have been served notice by the people for which this country and the elites would cease to be without them.

The people must remain focused, assertive and demand accounting at every proposal coming out of every aspect of government...Local, State, or Federal...and knock it down if it doesn't meet the muster of financial responsibility paid for by the taxpayer.

 

[The T]

"Just because it's in your best interest"...does not cut it any longer.

 

[Annie]

"Just because it's in your best interest"...does not cut it any longer.

When those in government tell us 'it's in our best interest', run. Time and again the American people have demonstrated they are willing to sacrifice for others, here and abroad. The government? Not so much. Those in government work for themselves and the special interests they are slaves to, be it business, unions, or their own special interests.

Not every one is corrupt, but the very culture of Washington seems corrupting. It's up to all of us to point out when those already part of that culture, seem intent on keeping it. That's what I'm seeing in today's Demint, as opposed to his pronouncements just prior to Nov. 2.