Republicans have full control, let's balance the budget finally
House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga., and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., plan to produce blueprints that would balance the budget within 10 years — without raising taxes.
Instead, they will propose major spending cuts to programs such as Medicare, health care subsidies, food stamps and the Medicaid program for the poor and elderly to produce a budget that's balanced. Such cuts, if actually implemented later, would likely slash spending by $5 trillion or so over the coming decade from budgets that are presently on track to spend almost $50 trillion over that timeframe.
"If we're going to have a lower (defense) number than the president of the United States is proposing, we have no credibility on saying that we are committed to defending this nation — not when every service chief, every witness before our committee says it will devastate ... our ability to defend the nation," McCain said. "You can't do that and claim that you care about national defense."
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/gop-offer-budget-blueprint-medicare-070808130.html
Comments
-
We should just keep spending $1 trillion more a year then we take it. No problems there.
And are they actual "cuts", or are they just cuts in the 8-10% year over year growth rates (to something like 3-5% increases).
I know you don't actually know this... -
I don't know this, but yet, you think we spend a trillion more than we take in every year. Got it.HoustonHusky said:We should just keep spending $1 trillion more a year then we take it. No problems there.
And are they actual "cuts", or are they just cuts in the 8-10% year over year growth rates (to something like 3-5% increases).
I know you don't actually know this...
-
This is a gift to the Dems -
The Executive Branch, and the VETO super majority rule both disagree with your title.
-
Why would I think that? Let's see...2001400ex said:
I don't know this, but yet, you think we spend a trillion more than we take in every year. Got it.HoustonHusky said:We should just keep spending $1 trillion more a year then we take it. No problems there.
And are they actual "cuts", or are they just cuts in the 8-10% year over year growth rates (to something like 3-5% increases).
I know you don't actually know this...
2009 - $1.4 trillion
2010 - $1.3 trillion
2011 - $1.3 trillion
2012 - $1.1 trillion
2013 - $0.7 trillion
2014 - $0.5 trillion
2015* - $0.6 trillion (estimated to go back up, and that's before bringing in reality which is that there is no chance in hell we have almost 4% GDP growth and all the other optimism).
Figured out the answer on the "cuts" yet? Didn't think so... -
"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
-
14 year old Honda's don't maintain themselves. Sometimes you have to convince Mom to take your atv to the dealer so someone with skills can repair it.
-
Add budget hawk to hondo s resume
-
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well. -
You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well. -
Welfare has already been cut. Or did you miss the memo?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
We need to either raise taxes, cut from everywhere, or do both. That's how you balance a budget. You don't cut from welfare and add to defense. -
The fuck?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
What "overly generous benefits" would those be?
-
There is not one benefit I received in 21 years of service that was "overly generous." Though reduced price booze was nice.AZDuck said:
The fuck?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
What "overly generous benefits" would those be? -
Thank you for your service
-
Chatch can afford to pay more in tax than all of you combined. So raise taxes on the rich.
-
Ex, learn how congress works. And what real man would ever support a cut to defense?
-
How did they cut welfare?
And yes, I think they should freeze defense spending for a few years (even with low inflation, it would be a "cut" in real / inflation-adjusted terms).
As for military benefits, and as I understand it, dependents (wife / children) do not have to pay any co-pay whatsoever. I have also heard elective surgeries (such as boob jobs) are much less than they should cost. I could be wrong though since it's just what I recall hearing (obligatory don't twist).2001400ex said:
Welfare has already been cut. Or did you miss the memo?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
We need to either raise taxes, cut from everywhere, or do both. That's how you balance a budget. You don't cut from welfare and add to defense. -
Hey Hondo...defense spending is only about 20% of the total budget. How again is cutting that going to fix the overall spending problem?
And you ever figure out if they were actually "cutting" like you were claiming (i.e. lying...or like they actually did to the defense budget), or are they just slowing the rate of growth?
And now lets watch Hondo continue to gurgle... -
@HFNY you were good enough to respond.HFNY said:How did they cut welfare?
And yes, I think they should freeze defense spending for a few years (even with low inflation, it would be a "cut" in real / inflation-adjusted terms).
As for military benefits, and as I understand it, dependents (wife / children) do not have to pay any co-pay whatsoever. I have also heard elective surgeries (such as boob jobs) are much less than they should cost. I could be wrong though since it's just what I recall hearing (obligatory don't twist).2001400ex said:
Welfare has already been cut. Or did you miss the memo?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
We need to either raise taxes, cut from everywhere, or do both. That's how you balance a budget. You don't cut from welfare and add to defense.
Here's the deal. If you want a capable all-volunteer, deployable expeditionary military, you will need to either (1) pay them wages commensurate with their worth in the job market, or (2) get innovative with benefits.
The US military has traditionally chosen (2), because it is cheaper in the long run.
It is true that spouses and dependents get no-copay access to Tricare. Tricare is *not* a traditional health plan. If you are near a military base and there is an available military practitioner, that is who the dependent is going to see. Only if there is no availability on the installation will Tricare refer to an outside provider, and then Tricare reimburses physicians at rates that would make Medicare blush. Like 10% of billed fees, in my experience.
Remember that career military are making 65%-85% of what they could be making in the civilian economy, and that because the military makes them move every 2-4 years their spouses are typically unable to have careers. So they are stay-at-home moms or they make do earning far below their capabilities. Many spouses with professional certificiations and college degrees work in entry-level jobs or volunteer positions on military installations because they aren't able to find work at Fort Pigsknuckle, Kentucky.
So you want them to make copays?
Tricare uses excess capacity of military medicine when and where it exists, and pays so poorly on the outside that it isn't accepted by many providers in the civilian economy.
There was a time in the mid-Iraq war when the Army was training a bunch of residents in plastic surgery because of all the IEDs and burn cases, and they would get them to log hours with elective surgeries, which were reimbursed at Tricare (bargain-basement) rates. But this was the Army getting paid to train its plastic surgeons. That's what I call a win-win, and that program's done for now anyway.
People look at the military benefits package and get all jealous, but they forget about the moving to Nowheresville, Arkansas every 2-3 years and the low pay without even factoring in much longer hours than civilians and a training schedule that wears out bodies. Even pencil-pushers and file clerks go out and train in body armor and strain the hell out of their bodies. There's a good reason military members are eligble for retirement after 20 years. I got out of my "strenous" MOS six years ago, and they're going to put some titanium screws in my back next month. Guess what? I will be eligible for Army, VA, and SS disability. And I will have earned it.
I don't get worker's comp, I don't get to sue my doctors if they fuck up, and I don't get to quit if I don't get along with my boss. Also the military happily exempts itself from workplace safety regulations and the right to organize. -
@HoustonHusky - the problem is that once you take military spending and entitlements like Social Security, Medicare and what-not off the table there is very little discretionary spending in the federal budget.
This chart is a few years old but it is pretty similar to what we have been for the last 40 years or so. Only 18% of the Federal Budget is non-military, discretionary spending. Military spending is a huge chunk, but one that is pretty necessary in a world where our allies aren't meeting the NATO budgeting standard.
-
We can't cut and we could tax the rich 100% and not make a dent. The only answer is growth. Grow grow grow the economy. Drill baby drill. Innovate. Annex Mexico.
We have set up an entitlement system that has hooked 90% of Americans and then added "free" healthcare. -
I thought it was 81%.RaceBannon said:We can't cut and we could tax the rich 100% and not make a dent. The only answer is growth. Grow grow grow the economy. Drill baby drill. Innovate. Annex Mexico.
We have set up an entitlement system that has hooked 90% of Americans and then added "free" healthcare.
But yes, eventually we will have to grow and inflate our economy, while slowing the growth in debt. Fortunately interest expense on the debt is cheap now. -
Neither has an answer and neither want a solution.
Both are exactly the same. Special interests and making it a career job is all that matters.
More dysfunction the better, as the rhetoric increases to hook the sheep that swallows like Kjv swallows sarks frank and beans.
Carson, pelosi, Reid,Rubio, Cruz, Akin, Palin, Bachman, Perry. Proves the stupidity of the sheep.
The preppers will have their 15 minutes of fame -
I appreciate the details, especially since you know about them than I do.
I'm sure there are easier ways to trim defense spending, perhaps one would be changing the budget process for generals and commanders? A friend of mine said that they have a budget of "use it or lose it" where they get a certain amount of money to outfit their offices, etc. If they don't spend it all, they lose what they don't spend so they waste money on $3k couches and other frivolities. Yeah it's a drop of water in the ocean but if it's happening on bases around the world and every year, it can add up to real money.
I'm sure there are other, more substantial ways to cut the bloat out of defense spending but more importantly, the entitlement programs are an albatross. We can trim defense spending but it won't mean jack if we don't get Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Social Security Disability under control.AZDuck said:
@HFNY you were good enough to respond.HFNY said:How did they cut welfare?
And yes, I think they should freeze defense spending for a few years (even with low inflation, it would be a "cut" in real / inflation-adjusted terms).
As for military benefits, and as I understand it, dependents (wife / children) do not have to pay any co-pay whatsoever. I have also heard elective surgeries (such as boob jobs) are much less than they should cost. I could be wrong though since it's just what I recall hearing (obligatory don't twist).2001400ex said:
Welfare has already been cut. Or did you miss the memo?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
We need to either raise taxes, cut from everywhere, or do both. That's how you balance a budget. You don't cut from welfare and add to defense.
Here's the deal. If you want a capable all-volunteer, deployable expeditionary military, you will need to either (1) pay them wages commensurate with their worth in the job market, or (2) get innovative with benefits.
The US military has traditionally chosen (2), because it is cheaper in the long run.
It is true that spouses and dependents get no-copay access to Tricare. Tricare is *not* a traditional health plan. If you are near a military base and there is an available military practitioner, that is who the dependent is going to see. Only if there is no availability on the installation will Tricare refer to an outside provider, and then Tricare reimburses physicians at rates that would make Medicare blush. Like 10% of billed fees, in my experience.
Remember that career military are making 65%-85% of what they could be making in the civilian economy, and that because the military makes them move every 2-4 years their spouses are typically unable to have careers. So they are stay-at-home moms or they make do earning far below their capabilities. Many spouses with professional certificiations and college degrees work in entry-level jobs or volunteer positions on military installations because they aren't able to find work at Fort Pigsknuckle, Kentucky.
So you want them to make copays?
Tricare uses excess capacity of military medicine when and where it exists, and pays so poorly on the outside that it isn't accepted by many providers in the civilian economy.
There was a time in the mid-Iraq war when the Army was training a bunch of residents in plastic surgery because of all the IEDs and burn cases, and they would get them to log hours with elective surgeries, which were reimbursed at Tricare (bargain-basement) rates. But this was the Army getting paid to train its plastic surgeons. That's what I call a win-win, and that program's done for now anyway.
People look at the military benefits package and get all jealous, but they forget about the moving to Nowheresville, Arkansas every 2-3 years and the low pay without even factoring in much longer hours than civilians and a training schedule that wears out bodies. Even pencil-pushers and file clerks go out and train in body armor and strain the hell out of their bodies. There's a good reason military members are eligble for retirement after 20 years. I got out of my "strenous" MOS six years ago, and they're going to put some titanium screws in my back next month. Guess what? I will be eligible for Army, VA, and SS disability. And I will have earned it.
I don't get worker's comp, I don't get to sue my doctors if they fuck up, and I don't get to quit if I don't get along with my boss. Also the military happily exempts itself from workplace safety regulations and the right to organize. -
Here's why we can never balance a budget. If you raise taxes, it takes money out of people's pocket. If you cut welfare, it takes money out of people's pocket. If you cut defense, it takes money out of people's pocket. If you cut government employment and programs, it takes money out of people's pocket. If you cut social security and medicare/medicaid, it takes money out of people's pocket.HFNY said:I appreciate the details, especially since you know about them than I do.
AZDuck said:
@HFNY you were good enough to respond.HFNY said:How did they cut welfare?
And yes, I think they should freeze defense spending for a few years (even with low inflation, it would be a "cut" in real / inflation-adjusted terms).
As for military benefits, and as I understand it, dependents (wife / children) do not have to pay any co-pay whatsoever. I have also heard elective surgeries (such as boob jobs) are much less than they should cost. I could be wrong though since it's just what I recall hearing (obligatory don't twist).2001400ex said:
Welfare has already been cut. Or did you miss the memo?HFNY said:You're not too knowledgeable about the budget are you?
Did you know that defense has already been cut? And did you know that they are already (wisely) looking at trimming the overly generous benefits that military spouses receive?
And exactly what "corporate welfare" would you like to cut? The devil is in the details.2001400ex said:
Because there's no fraud, waste, or abuse in defense? No corporate welfare we can cut?HFNY said:"On the backs of the poor and elderly"
I always find that talking point especially stupid because it's as if anyone who uses that phrase forgets that we are talking about massive government programs, which are uniquely vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse.
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/09/Social-Security-Watchdog-I-See-Dead-People
Or how about food stamps, whose budget has increased nearly 50% under Obama and abuse is rampant particularly since the program has grown?
thefiscaltimes.com/2015/02/26/74-Billion-Food-Stamp-Program-Budget-Crosshairs
As for Medicare, fraud is so widespread that about 10% of all Medicare billings are fraudulent and it even has its own Wikipedia page:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_fraud
And for Medicaid, Social Security Disability fraud has also been an increasing problem:
reformssdinow.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Fraud-SSDI.pdf
So don't you think if each of the budgets are trimmed it will sharpen the "minds" at these departments to hasten their work on rooting out fraud and abuse? Or will they prove that bureaucrats are mostly lazy pieces of shit who maintain the status quo of letting our taxpayer dollars walk out the door?
Here's my point. Cut from everywhere. You don't read well.
We need to either raise taxes, cut from everywhere, or do both. That's how you balance a budget. You don't cut from welfare and add to defense.
Here's the deal. If you want a capable all-volunteer, deployable expeditionary military, you will need to either (1) pay them wages commensurate with their worth in the job market, or (2) get innovative with benefits.
The US military has traditionally chosen (2), because it is cheaper in the long run.
It is true that spouses and dependents get no-copay access to Tricare. Tricare is *not* a traditional health plan. If you are near a military base and there is an available military practitioner, that is who the dependent is going to see. Only if there is no availability on the installation will Tricare refer to an outside provider, and then Tricare reimburses physicians at rates that would make Medicare blush. Like 10% of billed fees, in my experience.
Remember that career military are making 65%-85% of what they could be making in the civilian economy, and that because the military makes them move every 2-4 years their spouses are typically unable to have careers. So they are stay-at-home moms or they make do earning far below their capabilities. Many spouses with professional certificiations and college degrees work in entry-level jobs or volunteer positions on military installations because they aren't able to find work at Fort Pigsknuckle, Kentucky.
So you want them to make copays?
Tricare uses excess capacity of military medicine when and where it exists, and pays so poorly on the outside that it isn't accepted by many providers in the civilian economy.
There was a time in the mid-Iraq war when the Army was training a bunch of residents in plastic surgery because of all the IEDs and burn cases, and they would get them to log hours with elective surgeries, which were reimbursed at Tricare (bargain-basement) rates. But this was the Army getting paid to train its plastic surgeons. That's what I call a win-win, and that program's done for now anyway.
People look at the military benefits package and get all jealous, but they forget about the moving to Nowheresville, Arkansas every 2-3 years and the low pay without even factoring in much longer hours than civilians and a training schedule that wears out bodies. Even pencil-pushers and file clerks go out and train in body armor and strain the hell out of their bodies. There's a good reason military members are eligble for retirement after 20 years. I got out of my "strenous" MOS six years ago, and they're going to put some titanium screws in my back next month. Guess what? I will be eligible for Army, VA, and SS disability. And I will have earned it.
I don't get worker's comp, I don't get to sue my doctors if they fuck up, and I don't get to quit if I don't get along with my boss. Also the military happily exempts itself from workplace safety regulations and the right to organize.
The only cut that I can think of is corporate welfare. Regardless of what conservatives say, if you cut from corporations, they won't fire people and the cost of goods won't go up. However, the amount we can cut from corporations is rather meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
So as long as democrats won't cut from welfare and Republicans won't raise taxes or cut from defense, we won't get anywhere on the deficit. That's a reality. -
The one thing about the various QEs is that they have been successful in rolling over maturing debt at higher interest rates into new debt at artificially low interest rates. In a few years with a new president (and no deep recession), we might even get into a primary budget surplus (revenues exceeding expenses before interest payments).
I believe in term limits (the power of the incumbency is too strong) and wonder if faster progress would be made on some items if we did have term limits. Ultra-partisans like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Cruz etc etc wouldn't be able to be professional politicians for too long if they were limited to 12 years (2 terms in the Senate, 6 terms in the House).
If Obama was a true leader rather than a politico masquerading as a head of state, he'd focus on corporate tax reform. We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world and then it is distorted by various exemptions, deductions, and loopholes so why not lower the rate to somewhere between 15 and 25% and get rid of all the accounting tricks (legal, since Congress has passed them over the years).
Congress could also apply a reduced 15% tax on repatriated foreign profits to increase tax revenues. There are hundreds of billions of dollars sitting abroad and even just a 15% would see over $100 billion flow to the treasury. A good compromise would be to split the, say, $120 billion (estimating about $800 billion overseas) with $60 billion going towards deficit reduction and $60 billion going towards starting an infrastructure bank. Both sides want to reduce our deficit and both sides want to improve our National infrastructure so what's not to like?2001400ex said:
I thought it was 81%.RaceBannon said:We can't cut and we could tax the rich 100% and not make a dent. The only answer is growth. Grow grow grow the economy. Drill baby drill. Innovate. Annex Mexico.
We have set up an entitlement system that has hooked 90% of Americans and then added "free" healthcare.
But yes, eventually we will have to grow and inflate our economy, while slowing the growth in debt. Fortunately interest expense on the debt is cheap now. -
Don't disagree one bit...just disagree with the initial (moronic) post that started this thread. You have to address those, with most reasonable methods being limiting how fast they grow. Recommending that gets morons like 2001400ex to start claiming people are trying to kill the old and poor and crap like that.
And if/when interest rates go up...the budget is going to blow up.
-
You are correct that politicians like to call slower future growth a "cut". However, welfare spending outside of medical and social security, are actually declining right now already. Just the natural job growth has reduced benefit payments. This is marginal in dollar terms, and drastic in terms of percent if GDP.HoustonHusky said:Don't disagree one bit...just disagree with the initial (moronic) post that started this thread. You have to address those, with most reasonable methods being limiting how fast they grow. Recommending that gets morons like 2001400ex to start claiming people are trying to kill the old and poor and crap like that.
And if/when interest rates go up...the budget is going to blow up.
Here is food stamps:
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=4054
Like I said, that is as a percent if GDP, but if you look at straight dollars, it is declining as well.
(This chart is technically number is participants) -
Nice to see but we need to get back to where we were faster. Not dismissing the mild progress so far as much as worried about structural changes that could make it difficult.
But food stamps are pretty far down the spending list...besides Medicare and Medicaid, there's also SSDI.2001400ex said:
You are correct that politicians like to call slower future growth a "cut". However, welfare spending outside of medical and social security, are actually declining right now already. Just the natural job growth has reduced benefit payments. This is marginal in dollar terms, and drastic in terms of percent if GDP.HoustonHusky said:Don't disagree one bit...just disagree with the initial (moronic) post that started this thread. You have to address those, with most reasonable methods being limiting how fast they grow. Recommending that gets morons like 2001400ex to start claiming people are trying to kill the old and poor and crap like that.
And if/when interest rates go up...the budget is going to blow up.
Here is food stamps:
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=4054
Like I said, that is as a percent if GDP, but if you look at straight dollars, it is declining as well.
(This chart is technically number is participants) -
What politician is going to support cutting social security disability? Lol I mean, regular social security should have some changes, but I'm pretty sure cutting funding to the disabled is a tough sell for either party.HFNY said:Nice to see but we need to get back to where we were faster. Not dismissing the mild progress so far as much as worried about structural changes that could make it difficult.
But food stamps are pretty far down the spending list...besides Medicare and Medicaid, there's also SSDI.2001400ex said:
You are correct that politicians like to call slower future growth a "cut". However, welfare spending outside of medical and social security, are actually declining right now already. Just the natural job growth has reduced benefit payments. This is marginal in dollar terms, and drastic in terms of percent if GDP.HoustonHusky said:Don't disagree one bit...just disagree with the initial (moronic) post that started this thread. You have to address those, with most reasonable methods being limiting how fast they grow. Recommending that gets morons like 2001400ex to start claiming people are trying to kill the old and poor and crap like that.
And if/when interest rates go up...the budget is going to blow up.
Here is food stamps:
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=4054
Like I said, that is as a percent if GDP, but if you look at straight dollars, it is declining as well.
(This chart is technically number is participants)
It all comes back to the beginning. We need to cut from everywhere. And until Congress realizes that and both parties agree, we will have an unbalanced budget.
