Posted on 09/23/2012 6:08:58 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
/johnny
Every time I see this level of handwringing, I have to laugh; and keep on laughing.
Over the next ten years?
ha ha.
Omugabe spends that much money that he doesn't have EVERY FREAKIN' YEAR!
I won't be grabbing the champagne to celebrate any time soon.
Assuming ANY cuts actually happen.
In the next fiscal year, for example, defense-related discretionary spending would be cut $54.6 billion, or 10 percent. Non-defense would be cut $38 billion, or 7.8 percent.
10% and 7.8%
Drastic I tell ya!
If anything gets cut, I'll buy the sparkling wine. I figure I'm safe with that bet.
/johnny
Cut? Cut in the rate of growth maybe?
I hear ya.
Although I recognize that Paul Ryan shows more concern, and makes more of an effort to trim the budget than most people in Washington, the “draconian” cuts that he proposed amounted to $50B a year — his plan was $500B over 10 years. The media called him a crazy man who wanted irresponsible cuts.
Fact is, Paul Ryan didn’t go nearly far enough. I have never considered his plan (as “draconian” as it is) to be a serious attempt at controlling the federal deficit.
If Obama spends over $1T a year that he doesn’t have, then the cutting (to the annual budget) needs to start well north of $1T. A year. Each year. For a start. Then we can move on to the really painful cuts.
At the current deficit spending rate of $4B/day the ‘draconian’ first year cut of $110B would amount to 27 days of deficit spending. Less than one month....
Cut it.
Congress is the root of the problem. That institution is incapable of self-restraint. No President can spend alone, they must have congressional complicity to first authorize and then appropriate the funds. Until the American people have had enough and are willing to stand up to Congress, sequestration may be the only functional method to curtail spending. The concept dilutes responsibility to the point any given congress critter can go home and deny it was his/her fault.
He wants to cut everything except welfare, financial transfers, control over medical care and social engineering.
I didn’t see any cuts for environmental efforts, either, like the EPA.
1) Increase military spending.
2) Eliminate anything else not authorized by the Constitution.
I do see a need to horsewhip some of the procurement officers for their trifling ways that move the target around on contractors.
Fly then fix. Not fix then fly. Yes, people will die. We did it that way for years, and it worked.
The money we save can be used for useful stuff.
/johnny
2 terms in the Senate (12 years) sit out one term (6 years) to regain eligibility
6 terms in the House (12 years)sit out 3 terms (6 years) to regain eligibility's
Also repeal the 17th Amendment
They passed it. Ryan called the deal ‘historic’ and ‘a great step forward’. Now they complain?
“I don’t see the downside to cutting spending.”
For all the talk about already having cut spending, taking out another 3% in spending sure has a LOT of people worked up.
2013 Mandatory spending $2.3T
2012 Mandatory spending $2.252T
2013 Discretionary spending $1.2T
2012 Discretionary spending $1.319T
Different than what they are claiming.
http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/US-Government-Federal-Budget-FY2012-Summary.htm
Most of the spending cuts are good. Military spending should be the same, but given the discretion to cut useless programs- the green navy and similar programs. Medicare providers could receive a 2% cut, but providers should be allowed the option to directly charge beneficiaries for the reduction in reimbursement.
The real harm of sequestration is the tax hikes which will contract the economy and lead to even less revenue.
This is a joke, right?
They need to cut AT LEAST $1.4 trillion, next year.
Saying that cutting $110 BILLION is a problem is just delusional.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.