Skip to comments.How to Cut Federal Spending: The Real Country-Killer in 2013
Posted on 01/02/2013 5:44:50 AM PST by Moseley
Never mind the "fiscal cliff." America went bankrupt, technically, at midnight on December 31, 2012. We hit the debt ceiling of $16.394 trillion. Yet the U.S. government needs to borrow more money than is legally allowed. So Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is now juggling federal accounts via questionable extraordinary measures to squeeze out perhaps two more months. Uncle Sam has maxed out his credit cards.
More than ever before, America now faces national ruin unless political leaders cut federal spending. However, Washington no longer understands what budget cuts are.
Simply trim a few percent from every program -- here a little, there a little. Isn't that obvious? Yet big spenders howl as if entire programs must be completely eliminated -- all or nothing. People will be cut off and starving in the streets if the federal spending spree is slowed. "What would you cut?" candidates are asked. This is a trap. Attack journalists twist whatever a candidate answers into a scandal of heartless cruelty.
During my five years working inside government, I saw that easily 15% of the federal budget could be cut, with no reduction in the output of government services, benefits, activities, or useful functions. In fact, quality should actually improve in many instances from reducing unnecessary complication, red tape, duplication, and burdensome procedures.
Could the USA collapse during 2013? Our country is facing a disaster that most citizens, politicians, and journalists scarcely grasp. It could be next week. It could be next month. What if investors simply choose to stop loaning Uncle Sam any more money?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Guess you should have posted it here first then.
The FED monetizes the debt. Uncle FRN lends Uncle Sam the loot. Ping-pong progressive plunder continues unchecked. Legislative totalitarians living large roam the republic from sea to shining sea. The armed forces back it all up. Distractions forthcoming, if necessary. It's win/win.
not that diffucult - cut EVERY agencyy by 5% per year untl the budget balances and runs a surplus. use the surplus to buy down the debt.
Interesting that you mention your goal as “getting the word out”.
Free Republic has a better Alexa traffic ranking than American Thinker.
Global Rank 7,740
Rank in US 2,052
Global Rank 4,606
Rank in US 1,136
So, in light of your goal of “getting the word out” you’ll be ditching American Thinker, right?
Unless you failed to mention some OTHER goal.
Of course, that's not workable because the cut is larger than the entire federal budget, so either Obama would have to trim his request, or make the sequester look like a picnic.
The five-percent haircut is looking better and better, isn't it?
Thanks for posting this.
Anyone heavy into couponing knows from practical experience just how easy it is to save money. Just on parking fees alone I saved about $50 in the past few months by using coupons. Give me the federal budget and I could easily pick out the places to cut to yield 15% in savings. I bet Obama nor most of the Democrats ever used coupons and it shows in their unthinking wild and unnecessary spending.
The feral government has to be cut by at least 50% for this country to survive. I mean by firing 50% of the freeloader feral employees, not transferring them to different deparments.
Great idea! 5 % is the average attrition rate for a large business.
BTW, as an incentive, stipulate that all elected Federal Politicians are to have their total annual pay cut by 20 % per year until the Total National Debt is decreased by 1 % for two years in a row.
And Clinton-Era Welfare, Immigration, etc.
What I have learned is that when conservative say
liberals and the media hear
that is totally end entire programs (or shut off people completely from necessary social services).
The idea that spending can be cut without changing outcomes, by eliminating waste, is something liberals either dont understand or dont want to understand.
Now, there are some programs that duplicate other programs or accomplish nothing. I am not saying we could never ever end a government program.
But the topic of CUTTING SPENDING has been transformed into always meaning nothing else but TERMINATING ENTIRE PROGRAMS.
Or cutting recipients of benefits off completely, so that people are starving in the streets living under a bridge.
For liberals and the media, budget cutting is a light switch: You cant turn down the brightness. You have to cut off an entire line item completely.
For conservatives, cutting spending is (usually) a DIMMER SWITCH. You can dial it down without turning the lights out completely.
Assuming? Not even close. This might be of use to you, a thread from Jim:
If you leave the excerpt button alone, you can post your full content right here.
i agree that federal spending needs to be cut drastically, however the goevernmetn doesn’t live in a vacuumm, all tht moneyt spent goes somewhere, pays somebody for working,et c. we need to reduce federal spending, but to do it too fast will be a disaster for theeconomy, which would need time to compensate for less federal spending.
im not in favor of paying them in the first place...they ain’t worth it. and if we paid them what they’re worth, we’d have to violate the minimum wage laws
You make me so not want to come here. You’re just a punk with no power. There is someone actually posting and writing great stuff on a good website and you have claws out like a little girl with faux power. Embarrassing to me. Grow up.
You make me so not want to come here.
Oh. I guess I have the power to do that, anyway.
Yeah. That's why I suggested posting it here first, or ditching American Thinker altogether.
Unless you have some interest in getting hits there.
But you claimed your goal was to "get the word out" so we'll just discount that theory.
I take my dollar a day with me if I do.
It was your idea, not mine.
Are you suggesting I should tailor my posts to be more pleasing to you?
What is your point?