Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 252

Thread: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

  1. #21
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,421

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Taboon View Post
    Not excited or completely against? I don't think there are many people excited about this but something needs to be done and I doubt there will be anyone who is not affected negatively in some way.
    Yeah, and what needs to be done, is to stop spending hundreds of billions of dollars on stupid ****, like Cash for Clunkers.

    What really needs to happen, is Obama needs to figure out that the government can't fix the economy and get out of the private sector's way.

    You can do what you want with the tax code, but if no one is working, it don't mean ****.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #22
    User Taboon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Last Seen
    04-15-11 @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    135

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Everyone should be aware that this is NOT the final report. Also be aware that there is a very good chance that there will be no final report which garners the mandatory 14 votes to make it go before Congress for action. This chairmans release is DOA.
    I'm completely aware that this is just a proposal.

  3. #23
    User Taboon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Last Seen
    04-15-11 @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    135

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Yeah, and what needs to be done, is to stop spending hundreds of billions of dollars on stupid ****, like Cash for Clunkers.

    What really needs to happen, is Obama needs to figure out that the government can't fix the economy and get out of the private sector's way.

    You can do what you want with the tax code, but if no one is working, it don't mean ****.
    Where would you make the cuts? Include numbers please. You need about $800 Billion per year (that excludes any stimulus like cash for clunkers).

  4. #24
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Le Marteau View Post
    Why don't you all just cut defence spending by about $600 billion? That'd do it. God knows that extra several-hundred-billion-dollars isn't making your troops unkillable in Iraq or Afghanistan. :/ Wasted money, methinks.
    You have no idea what you're talking about. That's the entire budget for the Department of Defense.

  5. #25
    User Taboon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Last Seen
    04-15-11 @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    135

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    You have no idea what you're talking about. That's the entire budget for the Department of Defense.
    Pretty darn close. We spent $663 Billion last year.

  6. #26
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    NIMBY will prevail....
    Everybody wants the govt to cut expenses, as long as it isn't an expense that benefits themselves...
    I know well off retirees who don't want their SS cut, claim to be on a "fixed" income. That is bull, they have so much that "fixed" means nothing. Those with ample income should be spending more of it to boost the economy, to help those who have "broken" income. What I don't hear at all are complaints from the rich who live in my area. They KNOW they have it good, and aren't about to complain about losing a bit of income, or paying a bit more taxes. It isn't a good idea for the rich to complain, certainly not where the new jobless can hear it.
    I do hear some whining from the rich in this forum.
    and before you ubercons start using words like "class envy", my wife and I are somewhere in the top 15% of income and assets.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  7. #27
    User Taboon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Last Seen
    04-15-11 @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    135

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    NIMBY will prevail....
    Everybody wants the govt to cut expenses, as long as it isn't an expense that benefits themselves...
    I know well off retirees who don't want their SS cut, claim to be on a "fixed" income. That is bull, they have so much that "fixed" means nothing. Those with ample income should be spending more of it to boost the economy, to help those who have "broken" income. What I don't hear at all are complaints from the rich who live in my area. They KNOW they have it good, and aren't about to complain about losing a bit of income, or paying a bit more taxes. It isn't a good idea for the rich to complain, certainly not where the new jobless can hear it.
    I do hear some whining from the rich in this forum.
    and before you ubercons start using words like "class envy", my wife and I are somewhere in the top 15% of income and assets.
    It seems like a fair across the board cut to our expenditures to me. Nothing is gutted completely that we should keep in my opinion.

  8. #28
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Taboon View Post
    Where would you make the cuts? Include numbers please. You need about $800 Billion per year (that excludes any stimulus like cash for clunkers).
    Why $800 billion?

    If we do nothing, the deficit should fall to the ~$500 billion range once the economy picks up... and while it would be wonderful to actually balance the budget or even pay down the debt...

    I think many would be thrilled if we could keep the deficit at 1% of GDP. That would take cuts more along the lines of 300 billion - more if we increase the rate of spending, less if we decrease (of course, that doesn't pay down the national debt, but it does make it less and less significant over time).

  9. #29
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Taboon View Post
    Pretty darn close. We spent $663 Billion last year.
    That figure probably combines the DoD budget with the cost of Iraq/Afghanistan.

  10. #30
    User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    United States of America
    Last Seen
    04-04-17 @ 01:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    121

    Re: Panel Chairmen Recommend Cutting Federal Spending by $200 Billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Obama panel urges deep US spending cuts, tax reform - Yahoo! News

    Some rather interesting cuts in military spending is being proposed as well. The V-22 has been an expensive program that most DOD have done their best to protect, the replacement of half the appro 2100 of the F35 with F16 and F18 is about the most suprising one
    Personally? We should direct spending to complete the F35 and then consider if it's worth the costs to build one then on. To cut a program that is essentially a new research and development is going one step backward on advancing our airforce and also buying F16 and F18 is a couple steps backward as well... And also the F35 is a JSF, so it can switch between roles easily. And one other thing, it's gonna have stealth capability. The chances of having a nonstealth fighter being shot down in the battlefield will be much higher than a stealth fighter. But I guess they deemed the costs for having more f16 and f18 lost are still cheaper than less f35 lost and the research it's gonna need.

    And why cut defenses, isn't the government's only spending should just be on military to defend our borders? I mean, medicare and SS got tagged along, but I believe the defense should really be the last to be cut, contrary to most people's feelings.
    We the People of the United States,... provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare....
    Where did it ever say, promote for the common defence, and provide the general Welfare..... Please don't mix up the two....

Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •