Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 252

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

  1. #31
    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
    That figure probably combines the DoD budget with the cost of Iraq/Afghanistan.
    Point being?

  2. #32
    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
    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).
    I'm using the projected deficit plan on page 11 of the debt commission report. If you add the projected deficit reduction with the projected deficit with the plan in place, that would be the projected deficit if we do nothing. It ranges from $672 Billion in 2014 to over $1 Trillion by 2020. I used $800 Billion as the middle of the road. I'm not completely against keeping the deficit at 1% of GDP. If GDP continues a trend into the future around 3%, our debt as a percentage of GDP would continue to fall with a 1% deficit strategy.

  3. #33
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,073

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Le Marteau View Post
    I'm not saying de-fang the US -- just cut the spending. Britain and France are two of the five most powerful nations on Earth -- they can both enforce their military will across the globe, just as the US can, but they've both been able to keep spending at reasonable levels. The US can still have a military presence on the world stage -- they just need to spend smarter.
    Powerful? You're dependent on us to protect you......still. You're welcome.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    London, England and Dijon, France
    Last Seen
    03-06-11 @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    598

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Powerful? You're dependent on us to protect you......still. You're welcome.
    My God, where do you come up with this stuff?

    I hear Americans say this all the time, and for the life of me, I can't figure out how they figure that. Britain and France are two of the most powerful nations on Earth, that is a fact -- and they're not dependent on anyone for their protection. The only possible way I can figure you saying that is that you must somehow be referring to NATO, an organisation in which Britain, France and the US are equal partners.

    Furthermore, I do believe it was America begging the rest of Europe to join it in Iraq, not the other way around. And yet, France and Britain have both fought wars (successfully, I might add, which can't be said about Iraq or Afghanistan) without American aide.

    Long story short, you're talking out of your arse.

  5. #35
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MCS117 View Post
    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.

    The plan would still to have over 1000 F35, but at a cost I expect to be 50% more then an F16 or F18, which can be used as second line fighters, while the F35 is the main line one. The F16 and F18 are multi role fighters as well, doing both air combat and ground attack.
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  6. #36
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:47 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,073

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Le Marteau View Post
    My God, where do you come up with this stuff?

    I hear Americans say this all the time, and for the life of me, I can't figure out how they figure that. Britain and France are two of the most powerful nations on Earth, that is a fact -- and they're not dependent on anyone for their protection. The only possible way I can figure you saying that is that you must somehow be referring to NATO, an organisation in which Britain, France and the US are equal partners.

    Furthermore, I do believe it was America begging the rest of Europe to join it in Iraq, not the other way around. And yet, France and Britain have both fought wars (successfully, I might add, which can't be said about Iraq or Afghanistan) without American aide.

    Long story short, you're talking out of your arse.
    LOL, the only thing that kept Russia or China out of your backyard was us. In fact, you're being taken over from within. Your once great nation will be a Middle Eastern satellite country before you know it.

    Of course you don't see Iraq and Afghanistan as any sort of success, as most liberal socialists tend not to. We didn't beg you; we invited you. We don't need you, but it would be nice for the world to fight terrorism, not just us.

    Again, just like in the early 40s, we're winning your battles for you.

    You're welcome.

  7. #37
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    LOL, the only thing that kept Russia or China out of your backyard was us. In fact, you're being taken over from within. Your once great nation will be a Middle Eastern satellite country before you know it.

    Of course you don't see Iraq and Afghanistan as any sort of success, as most liberal socialists tend not to. We didn't beg you; we invited you. We don't need you, but it would be nice for the world to fight terrorism, not just us.

    Again, just like in the early 40s, we're winning your battles for you.

    You're welcome.
    China? China?

    China just recently might have gained the ability to invade Taiwan and win. They do not have the resources to invade Europe. They are just now developing a reasonable blue water navy
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  8. #38
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

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

    "This proposal is simply unacceptable," said outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Any final proposal from the Commission should do what is right for our children and grandchildren’s economic security as well as for our nation’s fiscal security, and it must do what is right for our seniors, who are counting on the bedrock promises of Social Security and Medicare. And it must strengthen America's middle class families--under siege for the last decade, and unable to withstand further encroachment on their economic security.”

    AFL-CIO chairman Richard Trumka said that “the chairmen of the Deficit Commission just told working Americans to ‘Drop Dead.’ Especially in these tough economic times, it is unconscionable to be proposing cuts to the critical economic lifelines for working people, Social Security and Medicare…This deficit talk reeks of rank hypocrisy: The very people who want to slash Social Security and Medicare spent this week clamoring for more unpaid Bush tax cuts for millionaires.”
    The President's Debt Commission Proposal

    well, that was fast

  9. #39
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Personally, I thought it was the best thing I'd seen out of DC in years. Maybe ever.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  10. #40
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

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

    of course you do, and i fully appreciate what you are looking at

    but what good is your or my support if the likes of the grasping speakeress and blunt boss have already beat it with a baseball bat

    it is what it is, and obama's reliance on this trumped up and empty commission to settle his responsibilities for him has been just that, trumped up and empty

    as you and all other realists have surely recognized for months

    why did the party punt on the bush tax cuts, why the lame reliance on this duck

    why did the party fail to produce a budget in 2010

    solving what you want solved requires more leadership, perhaps, than this country has ever produced

    either way, obama/pelosi sure aint it

    the mere fact that the recommendation of this commission is associated with HIM kills it

    that's the lay of the land these days

    and realists are just gonna have to deal with it
    Last edited by The Prof; 11-13-10 at 10:34 AM.

Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •