THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
President Trump is doing what he can, just the Republicans in Congress need to support him.
3 trillion in more spending!?!?......Oh wait. Wrong president.
3 Trillion in cuts.
Mark Levin is crapping bricks now.
Check out the 22 agencies and programs President Trump’s budget would eliminate: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/373441-the-federal-programs-trump-proposes-cutting-in-2019-budget .
My personal favorites are: the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which includes NPR; the Global Climate Change Initiative; the Legal Services Corporation; the National Endowment for the Arts; and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
I hope POTUS INSISTS on cutting EVERY unconstitutional agency and program he can!
Trump always stated that he likes to come in under budget.
Real cuts or cuts in increases?
Related:
What’s in the White House Budget Request?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/12/us/politics/trump-budget-request.html
Trump budget wants billions more for border wall, immigration agents and judges
For anyone who simply doesn’t believe the budget proposal is real, or who says that it is unrealistic to think that this will be passed, I just say to relax.
Why? Well, the short version is that this is an opening offer, and that the guy who wrote “The Art of the Deal” is making it. Remember that he doesn’t play to lose, and always gets more than he wants by initially demanding half of the world from his opponents. He makes them feel good about signing a deal for less than that...and does way better than what is minimally acceptable to him.
This also accomplishes more - first, it helps to lock up fiscal conservatives for the election. If conservatives do well in the election, then we have to rely MUCH less on the RINOs (of which there are so many). He also paints the Dems - for 2018 AND 2020 - as the party of loose and irresponsible spending.
Let’s say that he cuts deficits by $2 trillion instead of $3 trillion - who would say that this is a bad thing (especially while simultaneously building the military)? Remember that this is a dynamic and growing economy, so the deficits are very likely to be much lower than previously estimated by the (static model) CBO. So $2 trillion of cuts will make a big difference. They’ll make an even bigger difference in the years beyond his Presidency, as those cuts will then be part of the spending upon which future budgets are based. Simply slowing the rate of growth of the overall deficit will allow Main Street to catch up with DC’s drunken sailor spending (with all due apology to drunken sailors, who uniformly have better morals than the Congress), and reduce debt as a percentage of GDP.
Is it a balanced budget, let alone a complete payback of the deficit? No...and no person is able to turn a speeding aircraft carrier on a dime so that it is going in the opposite direction very quickly. Anyone expecting that from ANY person, even someone with a unified Congress behind him, is smoking some very strong weed, because it just is NOT going to happen. Deal with reality, which is that a simple, long-term slowing of the rate of growth of federal expenditures will work wonders for assuring our financial health for many years to come - even if the deficit is never reduced to zero and the debt continues to climb. Ratios are what is important, and reducing the debt-to-income (i.e. GDP) ratio is what is critical here. Can the debt be carried with some degree of comfort? Yes = financial health. No = disaster.
FWIW, I’d personally love to see a balanced budget, and a path to repay 25% of the national debt in the next 10 years. But I’m realistic enough to know that such won’t happen very soon. Let’s work to get done what CAN be done, to discredit the other side as much as possible, and come back for more at a later date.
More:
Trump budget seeks 23 percent cut at EPA, eliminating dozens of programs
This all sounds great, but as convoluted as the process has become, I would love to have someone knowledgeable explain how this meshes with the recent 2 year budget just passed by Congress. Do all of these cuts need another round of congress to approve, or has congress already approved by the recent law and this is simply the apportionment by the executive branch (allowing Trump to spend less than what was approved?)
I would like to think we are ‘getting there’ but the process always seems to require another road blocked congressional approval.
A lot of it is CAGW’s recommendations, which I agree with.
At the end it will be an increase of 1 trillion dollars. You know it and I know it. Although I give Trump big time props, this Congress has no interest in cutting. They are already crying over the cuts in the arts. They say it is only 0.006 percent of the overall budget. Instead of republicans saying, “Well if it is that small then donations should be able to cover the loss”, they say, “Oh well you are right, we will keep it in there AGAIN.” So frustrating. Republicans suck as bad if not worse then Democrats.
$3 trillion in cuts sounds impressive a fist glance, but then we read “over a decade”. Current annual deficits are running about $600 billion, so over a decade you would either need to make $6 trillion in cuts or hope the tax base expands to cover part of it with higher tax receipts (or a combo of both). I see lots more red in our future.
>
It includes proposals to cut deficits by more than $3 trillion over a decade and lower debt levels as a percentage of the gross domestic product, but does not balance by doing away with annual deficits.
>
a DECADE? Weren’t We giving Lyin’ Ryan hell for HIS (back-loaded) budgets? But, because it’s Trump the same shell-game(s) are OK??
Sorry, Mr. President, Congress is only obligated for the year in question. If you can’t balance the budget, let alone CUT it/deficit, it ain’t gonna happen sometime in the future.
Then get rid of McConnell and revert back to 51 votes......
Here’s hoping the Trump bashing fake “news” outlets PBS and NPR have to fend without government funding.