• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Treasury to tap pensions to help fund government

Of course we reached our bounds, additional spending has not been approved.

Did you notice how the Earth continued spinning on its axis yesterday?
 
Did you notice how the Earth continued spinning on its axis yesterday?

Yes, because we can play accounting tricks to hold off the disaster for a while.
 
I do, do you? It is funny how you pull this card when most conservatives state that you should run a country like you run a company.. if that is true, then you must also be able to run a failing country as a failing company no? :)

You certainly seem not to understand the difference between a failing country and a failing economy. I don't why I have to explain the obvious difference between the two.
 
What accounting tricks?

Well, one that has been mentioned in this very thread is monkeying around with pension funds. Of course that money has to be paid back later.
 
What accounting tricks?

The US government is useing certain tricks to get money to be able to operate fully untill August.

It is in August that the debt ceiling limitation will take effect on the US government spending. When Grandma wont get her SS check, and her doctor will refuse to treat her kidney faluire
 
Why not tap the pensions? I didn't hear anyone complaining when SS was being tapped out.

The US government needs to file bankruptcy. You want to run the government like a company? That's what a company would do in this situation.
 
Not even close bud.

The US long term fiscal challenges lie simply in medicare, medicaid and social security.

Theres no hiding from that.


I'm as pro-military as the next guy but you can't claim that something which consumes over a third of the budget has nothing to do with the problem.
 
I'm as pro-military as the next guy but you can't claim that something which consumes over a third of the budget has nothing to do with the problem.

When one looks at unfunded liabilities.... It ain't even close, that's the true issue.

I'm not saying defense doesn't need to be trimmed, but the projected cost of those 3 things will destroy your nation.
 
Please lay out your plan for cutting this much, all at once. In detail.

Tough to do when there are trillions of dollars involved and a deficit of $1.5 trillion in this year alone.

Reality will be taking over soon and the politicians will be powerless.
 
All areas of spending must be cut from. Nothing is sacrosanct anymore, not even the military.

Until we are willing to embrace that idea, then nothing will change.

You know, Canada's running surplus's now, maybe we can sell our allies a few carriers, missle frigates, maybe a nuke sub or two..?? :)

Actually, I'm not kidding, why not sell some of our really cool military toys? We could have a huge yard sale, but only our friends and neighbors are invited.

Tim-
 
You know, Canada's running surplus's now, maybe we can sell our allies a few carriers, missle frigates, maybe a nuke sub or two..?? :)

Actually, I'm not kidding, why not sell some of our really cool military toys? We could have a huge yard sale, but only our friends and neighbors are invited.

Tim-

Not saying that we should, but one of the advantages of selling US military hardware is that it generates maintenance business we can further cash in on.
 
Not even close bud.

The US long term fiscal challenges lie simply in medicare, medicaid and social security.

Theres no hiding from that.

As the military takes the largest piece of the pie you're saying continue spending that money on policing the world while Americans suffer? How generous of you.
 
Not saying that we should, but one of the advantages of selling US military hardware is that it generates maintenance business we can further cash in on.

I know, right? Why not sell some of our goodies to places like Canada, Mexico, Europe? I'm sure Mexico could use some high tech gadgets to help them in their war on the drug lords? :)


Tim-
 
I know, right? Why not sell some of our goodies to places like Canada, Mexico, Europe? I'm sure Mexico could use some high tech gadgets to help them in their war on the drug lords? :)


Tim-

Actually, at this point in time we're GIVING military aid to Mexico, no charge.
 
Why not tap the pensions? I didn't hear anyone complaining when SS was being tapped out.

The US government needs to file bankruptcy. You want to run the government like a company? That's what a company would do in this situation.

It was probably suggested that it should be run as a successful company, not a failing one.
 
You know, Canada's running surplus's now, maybe we can sell our allies a few carriers, missle frigates, maybe a nuke sub or two..?? :)

Actually, I'm not kidding, why not sell some of our really cool military toys? We could have a huge yard sale, but only our friends and neighbors are invited.

Tim-

True enough, For too long the US has been the one to shoulder the responsibilities of the world. Canada, under the new government, is helping more, but all the democracies should contribute equally as it is in all our best interests.
 
Why not tap the pensions? I didn't hear anyone complaining when SS was being tapped out.

The US government needs to file bankruptcy. You want to run the government like a company? That's what a company would do in this situation.

Of course you didn't hear anyone complaining. SS has been "raided" since inception to pay for more and more social programs.
 
As the military takes the largest piece of the pie you're saying continue spending that money on policing the world while Americans suffer? How generous of you.

Lie.

SS is the biggest single cost, and if you take SS, Medicaide, Medicare and Unemployment, you break into the 55-60% "of the pie". Defense Spending is 16-20% of the budget
 
I take it you haven't gotten the memo...

We're $14,000,000,000,000.00+ IN DEBT.




When you're borrowing, at $14,000,000,000,000.00+ In the hole, you most certainly CANNOT afford it.



Here's a hint: If you have to borrow in the TRILLIONS to fund spending, it means... GASP! You cannot afford it.

Take it up with Congress; the fact that we need to borrow money is merely a symptom of the fact that our budget is out of balance. Congress has already approved a certain level of spending and a certain level of taxation. To now say that they are unwilling to borrow money to pay for it (thus defaulting on the debt) is the height of hypocrisy and irresponsibility.

The fact that we even HAVE a debt ceiling is a disaster waiting to happen. If not this year, then a few years down the road. The fiscal problems of the United States are long-term and chronic; we aren't in imminent danger of bankruptcy. Unless, of course, Congress chooses to default anyway despite the fact that we're fully able to make good on our obligations.

MrVicchio said:
Yeah here's where you are in lala blind folder land. DOD spending is 16-20% of the budget. SS, Medicaide, Medicare are at 55-60% of the budget.

You do the math. Politically, you cannot, WILL NOT accept that social spending is what the problem is, so you pull out the old, tired, lame canard of "It's military spending!!!" when reality is clearly, otherwise. BOTH parties are guilty of not doing the right thing, which is to say "Hey, all these social programs... ya know the ones where we take your money and promise you things... well we lied!!! We've spending way more then we're taking in so you'll vote for us... our bad. Sorry old folks but your bribes for votes, we have to stop this before we're all ****ed".

I said that the DoD is the most wasteful element of DISCRETIONARY spending. I suggest you learn the difference between discretionary spending and entitlement spending before you put words in my mouth that I didn't say, and in fact, are the exact opposite of what I said.
 
Last edited:
Only in hyper-partisan land is 16-20% of the budget too much spending while 55-60% is A-OK

Kandahar is right, as far as discretionary spending goes the military is the biggest chunk.

Mandatory spending, which compromises Medicare and SS, would require major legislation action to change/cut.



A political but decent video explaining the difference.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar is right, as far as discretionary spending goes the military is the biggest chunk.

Mandatory spending, which compromises Medicare and SS, would require major legislation action to change/cut.



A political but decent video explaining the difference.


I don't care what you call the spending Harry, discretionary or mandatory, we're 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt. We cannot afford more Social Spending. We cannot afford current levels. If you took away all the military "discretionary" spending we'd still be forced to borrow to pay for the spending.

Period.
 
I don't care what you call the spending Harry, discretionary or mandatory, we're 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt. We cannot afford more Social Spending. We cannot afford current levels. If you took away all the military "discretionary" spending we'd still be forced to borrow to pay for the spending.

Period.

I understand but discretionary spending is loads easier to cut than mandatory spending and cutting the military is hugely political.

There's a big battle coming, bigger than the health care debate.
 
I don't care what you call the spending Harry, discretionary or mandatory, we're 14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt. We cannot afford more Social Spending. We cannot afford current levels. If you took away all the military "discretionary" spending we'd still be forced to borrow to pay for the spending.

Period.

Except it isn't a matter of semantics, it's a matter of law. If you just shriek "cut spending", that will completely IGNORE the entitlement programs and focus solely on discretionary spending, which isn't a problem and never has been (except for DoD). We need to fundamentally reform our entitlement programs - social security, Medicare, and Medicaid - and revise our tax code if we want to balance the budget. In order to do that, Congress needs to CHANGE the way those programs work. They can't just decide "We're going to cut 5% from social security this year." That isn't how entitlements work.

If you're interested in how those programs can be reformed, there are plenty of threads on the subject with lots of good ideas (and some bad ones). But none of those programs are the slightest bit relevant to the current sideshow in Congress over whether discretionary spending should be cut.
 
Except it isn't a matter of semantics, it's a matter of law. If you just shriek "cut spending", that will completely IGNORE the entitlement programs and focus solely on discretionary spending, which isn't a problem and never has been (except for DoD). We need to fundamentally reform our entitlement programs - social security, Medicare, and Medicaid - and revise our tax code if we want to balance the budget. In order to do that, Congress needs to CHANGE the way those programs work. They can't just decide "We're going to cut 5% from social security this year." That isn't how entitlements work.

If you're interested in how those programs can be reformed, there are plenty of threads on the subject with lots of good ideas (and some bad ones). But none of those programs are the slightest bit relevant to the current sideshow in Congress over whether discretionary spending should be cut.

Yes Reform it by killing SS, Medicaide and Medicare. "Reform" is just code for "Punt to the next crisis." Entitlements are UNSUSTAINABLE.
 
Back
Top Bottom