Where do you cut the Budget?


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
The Exchange

How about prisons?

Strip criminals of their citizenship and herd them into cargo containers and ship them to the Battlefields of Afghanistan. So little Timmy can be stripped of his citizenship for Shop lifting and dropped off in some border land in a zeppelin hauled cargo container packed with rapists and serial killers.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

Off the top of my head:

1. End the war on drugs. Immediately free all non-violent drug possession offenders.
2. Put out of Afghanistan immediately and completely.
3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
4. Kill tobacco, energy, and a bunch of other subsidies.

But I'd also seek more revenue:
1. Tax capital gains as income. Progressively.
2. Amend the tax code to remove incentives to hide money offshore.
3. Issue work permits to aliens, and tax their income. Duh.

And, I get money out of politics. Or at least try:
1. Require anyone accepting federal office to agree to an absolute moratorium on lobbying for a period of ten years, or twice their tenure in office, whichever is greater. Incarcerate violators for the duration of the moratorium.
2. Kill "Citizens United." Dead.
3. Hell, I'd probably ban politic advertising outside of specific, equal blocks of time on PBS. The First Amendment would actually be OK. Really. Campaigns and corporations aren't people.


bugleyman wrote:

Off the top of my head:

1. End the war on drugs. Immediately free all non-violent drug possession offenders.
2. Put out of Afghanistan immediately and completely.
3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
4. Kill tobacco, energy, and a bunch of other subsidies.

But I'd also seek more revenue:
1. Tax capital gains as income. Progressively.
2. Amend the tax code to remove incentives to hide money offshore.
3. Issue work permits to aliens, and tax their income. Duh.

And, I get money out of politics. Or at least try:
1. Require anyone accepting federal office to agree to an absolute moratorium on lobbying for a period of ten years, or twice their tenure in office, whichever is greater. Incarcerate violators for the duration of the moratorium.
2. Kill "Citizens United." Dead.
3. Hell, I'd probably ban politic advertising outside of specific, equal blocks of time on PBS. The First Amendment would actually be OK. Really. Campaigns and corporations aren't people.

I'd add to the last section of bugleyman's list:

4. No elected official shall be paid a salary in office that is greater than the previous tax year's median income for the district they represent.


How about we tax investments over 1 million dollars the same way we do someone earning a wage, at an effective 30% ?


bugleyman wrote:

And, I get money out of politics. Or at least try:

1. Require anyone accepting federal office to agree to an absolute moratorium on lobbying for a period of ten years, or twice their tenure in office, whichever is greater. Incarcerate violators for the duration of the moratorium.

Include spouses, siblings, children, and anybody who shares a household with the officeholders too. They often get sweetheart deals long before the officeholder retires.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In regards to my own country the USA, the military. We have bases in over 100 countries, many of whom do not need our protection. Federal contractors overcharge the military for products which costs billions upon billions of dollars. Our military spending is approximately 42% of ALL countries in the world! Even if we cut it by 33%, we'd still be top dog.

Also, continuing foreign engagements in nations while our economy's not doing well is a bad idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.

To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

And whatever your answer, don't think about the office workers. Think about those doing manual labor. They're usually the ones that need it most anyway.

And are we raising the Medicare age too?


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

Till dead. That was the plan all along to fund the government through regressive taxation.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cut military and quit the warring. Cut the securitheater and let people travel without getting rectal exams, have their children molested, or getting fried by terahertz radiation, again. Remove the NSA completely for treason. Prosecute those who were in on what the NSA were doing, again for treason. Reroute foreign relations to actually promote Rule of Law and democracy again.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

Goblin Maximum Age: 40 +1d20 years

I'm sorry, Comrade. But it's in the book.


Is that a discrimination or equal treatment?


Gnomeland Security Enforcer wrote:

Goblin Maximum Age: 40 +1d20 years

I'm sorry, Comrade. But it's in the book.

As it turns out, according to a study that I heard about word of mouth (and never saw, but still, I believe it), retired UPS employees have a life expectancy of 2 years.

Me wrote:
My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

Now that I am awake, I see the problems with this question, i.e., that Social Security ages are locked in. Until the Grand Bargain, anyway...


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Gnomeland Security Enforcer wrote:

Goblin Maximum Age: 40 +1d20 years

I'm sorry, Comrade. But it's in the book.

As it turns out, according to a study that I heard about word of mouth (and never saw, but still, I believe it), retired UPS employees have a life expectancy of 2 years.

Once they stop going around carrying parcels they stop completely?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's what I've heard: after a life of pretty intensive labor (and, let's be honest, substance abuse and bad eating habits), they go home and atrophy and die pretty quickly.

I told one old-timer about it who's only a couple of years away and he responded, "Don't worry, I've got a girlfriend 20 years younger than me, I'll stay plenty active."

UPS employees do it in the streets!

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:

Off the top of my head:

1. End the war on drugs. Immediately free all non-violent drug possession offenders.
2. Put out of Afghanistan immediately and completely.
3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
4. Kill tobacco, energy, and a bunch of other subsidies.

But I'd also seek more revenue:
1. Tax capital gains as income. Progressively.
2. Amend the tax code to remove incentives to hide money offshore.
3. Issue work permits to aliens, and tax their income. Duh.

And, I get money out of politics. Or at least try:
1. Require anyone accepting federal office to agree to an absolute moratorium on lobbying for a period of ten years, or twice their tenure in office, whichever is greater. Incarcerate violators for the duration of the moratorium.
2. Kill "Citizens United." Dead.
3. Hell, I'd probably ban politic advertising outside of specific, equal blocks of time on PBS. The First Amendment would actually be OK. Really. Campaigns and corporations aren't people.

Kill all PACs. Period.

Outlaw lobbying, period. Some mining company from Alaska should never approach someone elected from Alabama for anything.

Other than being stronger on those two, and being less of a tax lover (seriously, they need to get a grip on spending, all that pork crap needs to go, and the bureaucracy is much larger than it needs to be), I concur.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:


As it turns out, according to a study that I heard about word of mouth (and never saw, but still, I believe it), retired UPS employees have a life expectancy of 2 years.

One of the saddest feelings I've ever had:

A guy from the support staff at the college I used to work at reached his retirement. It was a big day, he'd been there forever, was one of the most reliable workers you could ever meet, and everyone gathered to wish him well. We heard then about his plans for his retirement. If anyone had ever deserved it, he had.

A year later we heard he'd passed away :(

I hate the whole "work people till they drop" society.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I worked with the civilian munitions handlers down in Georgia for a few years, and there was this guy we called Old Tony for obvious reasons. Pretty sure the only reason he kept working was cause it kept him alive. He passed away a year or so before I transferred away, never took retirement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

(1) Cut the defense budget by 10% instantly. I would say 50%, but let's just put them in the mindset of, "Uh oh, we're no longer a blank check. We'd better start trimming our fat."

(2) Remove Social Security from the general budget. It's an independent program, and an independent budget. Congress needs to stop borrowing from it, and needs to stop including it in the budget, as it makes things seem much rosier now, and much worse later.

(3) Eliminate all subsidies. Now. You can't make your business work without government funds? Well, then your business should fail. Sorry. The only reason all of our sodas and store-bought pastries are sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup is because of subsidies.

(4) Eliminate all tax loopholes. Now. I don't care where your income came from. If you live in the U.S., and you made $100M through whatever means, you owe $20M in taxes for the privilege of living here. Don't like it? Move! Similarly for companies, though I'd set their tax at 10% just to encourage them to stay here. Offshore accounts and hiding your taxes in the Bahamas incenses me more than any other single tax loophole. If a person lives in the United States, they MUST pay their 'fair share' of taxes. I'm hugely in favor of a 'flat tax', so I'm starting at 20% just because I know that's more than enough to cover the government's expenditures, though I'm also strongly in favor of reducing those expenditures.

(5) Eliminate all programs that do not benefit ALL U.S. citizens. I can accept National Parks and interstate highways. But paying for a statue of some unknown benefactor in some podunk city? No. If it isn't something that all citizens can obviously benefit from/visit, then it shouldn't be in the federal budget. (And this applies to state budgets as well.)

OK, we've cut a bunch of fat; we're probably still hundreds of billions from where we need to be, but it's a start.


1. Let the military determine how it will assign its own budget so congress stops buying things it doesn't want or need.
2. Cut the military budget. Remove troops from most hostile environments. Massively scale back active troops.
3. Raise corporate tax rate to closer to values from the 60s. Reduce loopholes for multinational corporations hiding money overseas.
4. Tax capital gains as other income, at least when it exceeds a certain value.
5. Raise funding for public school systems, including colleges. Focus money in technical carreers.


houstonderek wrote:


Kill all PACs. Period.

Outlaw lobbying, period. Some mining company from Alaska should never approach someone elected from Alabama for anything.

Other than being stronger on those two, and being less of a tax lover (seriously, they need to get a grip on spending, all that pork crap needs to go, and the bureaucracy is much larger than it needs to be), I concur.

Long time no "see," man! How are you?

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
houstonderek wrote:


Kill all PACs. Period.

Outlaw lobbying, period. Some mining company from Alaska should never approach someone elected from Alabama for anything.

Other than being stronger on those two, and being less of a tax lover (seriously, they need to get a grip on spending, all that pork crap needs to go, and the bureaucracy is much larger than it needs to be), I concur.

Long time no "see," man! How are you?

I'm right about where I need to be. First time in a loo-ong time.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

I'm not certain. But 65 was chosen when the average life expectancy was much lower.

Personally, this one would be low on my list, but I'm trying to come up with stuff that could be a reasonable compromise. Going around demanding everything be my way...well, I think most of us know how well that works. :P

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


3. Gradually raise the SS eligibility age.
To what? A quick google search reveals that I wouldn't qualify to receive my full benefits until I turn 67. My parents are 64 and 60 respectively. How much longer do you think they should have to work before they are able to draw benefits?

I'm not certain. But 65 was chosen when the average life expectancy was much lower.

Personally, this one would be low on my list, but I'm trying to come up with stuff that could be a reasonable compromise. Going around demanding everything be my way...well, I think most of us know how well that works. :P

IIRC, a lot of the nominal increase in life expectancy has more to do with decreases in infant mortality; remaining life expectancy for the average 60-year-old hasn't changed that much. That remaining life expectancy is also strongly dependent on income; do we really want to take people who've been working at physically demanding low-pay jobs and tell them that they have to work even longer to get their SS benefits, when it's the people who've been working the physically less-demanding, higher-paying jobs who are living longer?

The Exchange

1) Cut back on military spending carefully, stop getting involved in other countries wars unless it actually is truly beneficial to us.
2) End handouts to other nations. We should not take loans from china to gift to isreal
3) Cut back on entitlements and crush abuse of them. Cut foodstamps and tightly restrict what they can be used for. Aggressively prosecute false disability claims. Ban all welfare recipients from purchacing booze smokes drugs and lotto.
4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.
5) Fix the tax system and end all loopholes.
6) Eliminate or restrict almost all subsidies


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh yeah, I forgot about fixing social security.
1. Eliminate the cap on SS tax. Done. Social security becomes viable indefinetely.


IIRC, a lot of the nominal increase in life expectancy has more to do with decreases in infant mortality; remaining life expectancy for the average 60-year-old hasn't changed that much. That remaining life expectancy is also strongly dependent on income; do we really want to take people who've been working at physically demanding low-pay jobs and tell them that they have to work even longer to get their SS benefits, when it's the people who've been working the physically less-demanding, higher-paying jobs who are living longer?

No, we don't. What if people working those less-demanding jobs (such as myself) had to wait longer to collect? Might be a nightmare to manage, though.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cut back on soda and junk food.
Drop cigarettes completeley.


yellowdingo wrote:

How about prisons?

Strip criminals of their citizenship and herd them into cargo containers and ship them to the Battlefields of Afghanistan. So little Timmy can be stripped of his citizenship for Shop lifting and dropped off in some border land in a zeppelin hauled cargo container packed with rapists and serial killers.

This is an oddly apropos suggestion comming from an Aussie. :)


Caineach wrote:

Oh yeah, I forgot about fixing social security.

1. Eliminate the cap on SS tax. Done. Social security becomes viable indefinetely.

From one point of view, the problem with Social Security is that it applies to a smaller percentage of total income than it did in the past, largely due to the increase in income inequality. This happens both because more of the income is over the SS cap and because more of the high end income isn't subject to SS taxes, unearned income essentially.

The obvious solution is, as you suggest, to lift the cap and preferably apply it to other forms of incomes. The better solution, since it helps so many other problems as well, is to reduce the inequality. Raise wages on the low end and cut down on the craziness on the top end.

More fundamentally though, I say do nothing with Social Security for at least a decade. Maybe longer. In the long run, the program has to return to being essentially a pay as you go program, with just enough of a trust fund to cover unexpected short term changes. We've spent the last 30 years building up a huge trust fund to cover the baby boom. Well, they're retiring. It's time to start running that trust fund down. All the proposals to fix SS, whether they involve cutting benefits or increasing revenue, essentially continue to increase the Trust Fund.
The problem with that is that the Trust Fund is invested in Treasury Bonds, which is good. You've got to do something with the money and that's the safest, best place to put it. But it does mean we've been able to use a chunk of Social Security money in place of other general revenues. When we start paying that down, it's going to have to be paid back out of current revenue.
In a sense, we didn't really save up any money by building up the Trust Fund. All we did was replace progressive income tax revenues with flat/regressive revenues. The economic powers-that-be would love for that to continue. At the very least, they don't want any more taxes on themselves to help pay off the Trust Fund. But that's where we need to go.
Keep the SS structured as it is until the Trust Fund is down to more reasonable levels. Use a steeply progressive income tax to fund that as necessary. Once the Trust Fund is paid down, restructure SS to fund itself on a year by year basis, fiddling with the cap, rates and benefits as needed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:


4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.

This would most likely drive the recidivism rate even higher than it already is and cost more in both money and societal effects in the long run. Treating criminals like s@$! does not convince them to better themselves and avoid getting back into prison.


Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.
This would most likely drive the recidivism rate even higher than it already is and cost more in both money and societal effects in the long run. Treating criminals like s++! does not convince them to better themselves and avoid getting back into prison.

What do you mean "like s++!" You mean three meals a day, plenty of exercise, access to computers and the internet, a librabry, cable tv and free health care! CA spends something like $70,000.00 a year on each inmate. I think there is probably some trimming that could be done.

Unfortunately, we could cut the entire prison budget and the entire law enforecement budget and it would not affect our long term budget problems one bit.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Unfortunately, nationally in the U.S. we could cut 100% of the "discretionary" portion of the budget and we would still run a deficit, the national debt would still increse and we would only slow down our wild ride to insolvency. This is the dirly secret that neither party wants to talk about. We are like a person that contiunes to pay for everything with a credit card eventhough he can see that if he spends just a little more he won't even be able to afford the minimum monthly payments.

In order for us to do anything real to solve our problem, we need to take on the entitlements and debt (interest payments) which now comprise over 60% of our budget each year.

The US is bringing in record levels of tax revenue, more than we ever have in the history of the country...more than any other country in the history of the world. We have plenty of money to spend, we need to figure out how to live within our means. We are like the richest person in the world complaining that he can't pay his bills because he can't stop spending.

It appears that our current crop of politicians would rather watch the country crash and burn and then try to blame someone else than tackle the tough problems we face and face the scorn of an angry and uninformed electorate.

I worry for our children's future. Their lives will be much harder than ours.

Silver Crusade

Utilize the increase military budget. Begin World War III. In the post nuclear age when 95% of humanity has wiped itself out, money will no longer have meaning and barter will be the primary form of currency.

Probably more likely to happen than any of the effective suggestions above, sadly.


Mike Franke wrote:


What do you mean "like s++!" You mean three meals a day, plenty of exercise, access to computers and the internet, a librabry, cable tv and free health care! CA spends something like $70,000.00 a year on each inmate. I think there is probably some trimming that could be done.

Unfortunately, we could cut the entire prison budget and the entire law enforecement budget and it would not affect our long term budget problems one bit.

This is one of my pet peeves too, when I see the homeless and the elderly living in worse conditions than criminals. I'm not saying turn off the heating and power to the prisons and stop feeding them, but I am saying they certainly shouldn't be as high on the budget priority as the people that haven't actually committed a crime.

The Exchange

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.
This would most likely drive the recidivism rate even higher than it already is and cost more in both money and societal effects in the long run. Treating criminals like s%$~ does not convince them to better themselves and avoid getting back into prison.

So you are saying that better food than schoolkids get, free medical, a gym that many of us wish we had, cable tv etc are helping us have such a low crime rate and incarceration rate?

The Exchange

Matt Thomason wrote:
Mike Franke wrote:


What do you mean "like s++!" You mean three meals a day, plenty of exercise, access to computers and the internet, a librabry, cable tv and free health care! CA spends something like $70,000.00 a year on each inmate. I think there is probably some trimming that could be done.

Unfortunately, we could cut the entire prison budget and the entire law enforecement budget and it would not affect our long term budget problems one bit.

This is one of my pet peeves too, when I see the homeless and the elderly living in worse conditions than criminals. I'm not saying turn off the heating and power to the prisons and stop feeding them, but I am saying they certainly shouldn't be as high on the budget priority as the people that haven't actually committed a crime.

Sadly some think it is still too barbaric, they are not giving enough to criminals and anything resembling actual punishment would be inhuman.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I thought we had solved out prison problem by making them private for-profit institutions.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think the question of how much to pay to support prisoners isn't the first thing to ask. The place to start is why do we in the US have so many people in prison in the first place? Why have we, e.g., paid private contractors to operate prisons and promised them a specific occupancy rate, on penalty of additional charges? The US incarcerates far too many of its citizens. That's the real issue.

WRT deficits, owing money isn't inherently a bad thing. If the debt-to-GDP ratio goes down with time, it's at least arguable that the money borrowed by the government isn't significantly impairing economic growth, if not actively facilitating it. Focusing on the US deficit now, though, is kind of like a household deciding to pay off its mortgage early when one spouse is out of work and the other had to take a pay cut. Government fiscal policy should be countercyclical, like consultant income--during the flush times, save as much as possible and pay down debts; during the lean times, when you have time to spare, spend your savings and/or borrow money for things like training and home improvements. Things that will improve your position in the long run. Unfortunately, the US didn't do that (even though we did a better job of it than Great Britain and a fair chunk of the rest of Western Europe).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Franke wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.
This would most likely drive the recidivism rate even higher than it already is and cost more in both money and societal effects in the long run. Treating criminals like s++! does not convince them to better themselves and avoid getting back into prison.

What do you mean "like s++!" You mean three meals a day, plenty of exercise, access to computers and the internet, a librabry, cable tv and free health care! CA spends something like $70,000.00 a year on each inmate. I think there is probably some trimming that could be done.

Unfortunately, we could cut the entire prison budget and the entire law enforecement budget and it would not affect our long term budget problems one bit.

You want to cut the prison budget, stop locking up more people than the rest of the civilized world. End the war on drugs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:


The US is bringing in record levels of tax revenue, more than we ever have in the history of the country...more than any other country in the history of the world. We have plenty of money to spend, we need to figure out how to live within our means. We are like the richest person in the world complaining that he can't pay his bills because he can't stop spending.

Record levels of tax revenues in nominal dollars. Which doesn't really mean anything.

As a percentage of GDP it's still below long term average.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:


The US is bringing in record levels of tax revenue, more than we ever have in the history of the country...more than any other country in the history of the world. We have plenty of money to spend, we need to figure out how to live within our means. We are like the richest person in the world complaining that he can't pay his bills because he can't stop spending.

Record levels of tax revenues in nominal dollars. Which doesn't really mean anything.

As a percentage of GDP it's still below long term average.

Plus everyone conveniently forgets that the US has always (well, not counting a year or so during 1835 - 1836) ran a debt.

Or that a government's finances are nothing like a large business', let alone a person or family's.


Krensky wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:


The US is bringing in record levels of tax revenue, more than we ever have in the history of the country...more than any other country in the history of the world. We have plenty of money to spend, we need to figure out how to live within our means. We are like the richest person in the world complaining that he can't pay his bills because he can't stop spending.

Record levels of tax revenues in nominal dollars. Which doesn't really mean anything.

As a percentage of GDP it's still below long term average.

Plus everyone conveniently forgets that the US has always (well, not counting a year or so during 1835 - 1836) ran a debt.

Or that a government's finances are nothing like a large business', let alone a person or family's.

But we have the BIGGEST debt ever! more than any other country in the history of the world!!!

It's in numbers so big I can't even understand them. That's how I know they're scary and we have to do something drastic right now!!!!

Like cut foreign aid.
Or cut taxes. [ooc]that's always a solution[ooc]
Or cut my retirement!
Something! Anything!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Andrew R wrote:


2) End handouts to other nations. We should not take loans from china to gift to isreal

U.S. aid to Israel isn't a gift. Israel is a proxy for our actions in the Middle East, from which the U.S. gets an important chunk of it's cheap oil. Pretty much all of U.S. aid is simmilarly calculated as a benefit to American foreign policy.

Liberty's Edge

To start: Real 4% across the board cut in all areas of the budget, including benefits, military ,social security, and pensions. Pay and hiring freeze for all federal employees. Eliminate Obamacare. Raise tariffs on imports. Raise taxes, including a minimum tax which would apply to all. Eliminate many subsidies and most foreign aid. re-evaluate progress after two years and make further adjustments accordingly. The inconvenient truth is that we are well on our way towards national bankruptcy and strict measures are needed. Too bad the spineless politicians of both parties will probably never do anything to stop our nation from economic ruin.


Caineach wrote:

Oh yeah, I forgot about fixing social security.

1. Eliminate the cap on SS tax. Done. Social security becomes viable indefinetely.

Excellent suggestion.


thejeff wrote:

Record levels of tax revenues in nominal dollars. Which doesn't really mean anything.

As a percentage of GDP it's still below long term average.

Preach on, brother.

Liberty's Edge

LazarX wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


2) End handouts to other nations. We should not take loans from china to gift to isreal
U.S. aid to Israel isn't a gift. Israel is a proxy for our actions in the Middle East, from which the U.S. gets an important chunk of it's cheap oil. Pretty much all of U.S. aid is simmilarly calculated as a benefit to American foreign policy.

Wrong.

Aid to Israel is about placating wealthy right wing religious folks, primarily of the Christian persuasion.

Aid to the middle east is about maintaining regional stability which contributes to lower oil prices in general.

Only 12% of our oil imports (not use since we export most of it back out as gasoline and other refined products) comes from the persian gulf. We get more from Canada (15%) and Latin America (20%).

I realise railing against US Imperialism is hip and all, but check your facts before ranting about the big bad US and it's sinister motives.


Andrew R wrote:
Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


4) Make prison cheap and not fun. no more entertainment and minimal medical care, cheaper crappier food. 6x8 cell water and sandwiches. no more cafeteria and no more yard. cheaper and safer for the guards.
This would most likely drive the recidivism rate even higher than it already is and cost more in both money and societal effects in the long run. Treating criminals like s%$~ does not convince them to better themselves and avoid getting back into prison.
So you are saying that better food than schoolkids get, free medical, a gym that many of us wish we had, cable tv etc are helping us have such a low crime rate and incarceration rate?

It's an ugly cycle where extremes on either end start very much to look like each other.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Krensky wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Pyrrhic Victory wrote:


The US is bringing in record levels of tax revenue, more than we ever have in the history of the country...more than any other country in the history of the world. We have plenty of money to spend, we need to figure out how to live within our means. We are like the richest person in the world complaining that he can't pay his bills because he can't stop spending.

Record levels of tax revenues in nominal dollars. Which doesn't really mean anything.

As a percentage of GDP it's still below long term average.

Plus everyone conveniently forgets that the US has always (well, not counting a year or so during 1835 - 1836) ran a debt.

Or that a government's finances are nothing like a large business', let alone a person or family's.

But we have the BIGGEST debt ever! more than any other country in the history of the world!!!

It's in numbers so big I can't even understand them. That's how I know they're scary and we have to do something drastic right now!!!!

Like cut foreign aid.
Or cut taxes. [ooc]that's always a solution[ooc]
Or cut my retirement!
Something! Anything!

I guess you are going for sarcasm, the problem is that you must not have really studied this issue. Most people assume they understand when they really don't.

Yes the us and many modern countries have often run deficits and sometimes pilled up national debt. Debt by itself is not a boogey man and neither are short term deficits used for national emergencies such as great depressions and wars.

The problem comes when deficit spending becomes the norm and debt begins to grow out of control. Solvent countries can not have a national debt so big that just paying the interest on the debt requires the totality of the countries tax revenue. Forget the post office and the office of the interior or even the army. Imagine a country that can't do anything except pay its debt interest. That is where the US is headed and soon. At the rate of over a trillion dollars in new debt a year we enter a debt death spiral within the next 20 years.

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Where do you cut the Budget? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.