How to cut $600+ billion from the budget

Gutting the U.S. military would be a complete disaster for the U.S. in short order.

 

Yes, because the only viable industry left in USA is selling weapons to foreign countries or to the US military. You have little to no manufacturing for domestic consumption. Big 3 auto is not what it used to be. American politicians turn a blind eye to the fact that most of the meat packing industry, fruit picking and farms are manned by illegals from the south.

What are Americans good for these days?

 

Get rid of ObamaCare and Dodd-Frank and you might just make a trillion.

Problem is that even if you cut a solid trill off the spending, you STILL have a $300 billion deficit.

 

You could also raise taxes.

 

The U.S. is pretty much 20 years ahead of everyone else in the military. I'd rather see us focus on things that will help us in 20 years than things that will help us in 5.

 

We could cut 600 billion by simply eliminating all the 12% of federal spending that goes towards federal welfare programs (foodstamps, unemployment, housing etc) that should be the domain of state and local governments.

Done.

But why stop at 600 billion? If it were up to me I'd slash spending by about 3x that on day one.

 

What difference does it make if it is state or federal government doing it? It is the same amount of money being spent on the same thing. It is just shifted to a different place, so this doesn't do anything.

 

It makes a world of difference as the States must actually pay for spending with taxation (assuming we can prevent the democrats from bailing out the blue states). And if taxation gets too high, people and business will flee the state. Additionally, the centralization of our government is leading to a monopoly of government that is eliminating our power of exit. The power of exit is the greatest power an individual can have over government. It's much easier to move to another State than it is to exert power of your government through voting (the power of voice).

With the federal government handling these responsibilities, politicians can essentially just buy votes with printed money. There is no need for fiscal responsibility. The end result of social democracy in this country will be the same as it is elsewhere. Decline followed by collapse.

Let the states handle social welfare. The federal government has no constitutional authority to handle that role in the first place, and with good reason.

 

Funny- you cut bare to the bone and came up with $617 billion, yet we borrow a Trillion a year- find another $400 billion!

 

Eliminate social welfare and then gut medicare and SS.

Ok next problem!

 

Then you have a bunch of old people with no way to support themselves.

 

What if every state sucks?

 

With a concept so simple, it's a mystery why so few actually get it.

 

That's true, but the free market does just as much of that as government control does.

 

Ill do you one better... cut 300 billion out defense... 300 billion out of social welfare.. 300 billion out of all forms of corporate welfare (including skewed tax loopholes and subsidies)... Lower the corporate tax rate on all businesses wholly operating in the U.S to 15% . Decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana and tax it. End the hugely wasteful wars and military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bada boom ! 1trillion a year saved with real economic stimulus

 

I think that you just pointed out how GDP as a measurement of economic strength is clearly lacking. Tax revenue would increase.

 

Family and private charities will have to step up for those that made the bet that the government would be able to force servitude onto the youth. You don't think that those under 35 can see that they will eventually be holding an empty bag that so much of their money went in to?

 

I'm not sure what makes you believe central planning can actually be successful. Misallocation of resources is inevitable when privilege from the government is welded.

 

I think the opposite will happen, or it should happen. I don't think there is much reason for people under a certain age to save for retirement unless they want to retire early. I'd rather spend it while I'm young. With the technology we have now, we have failed miserably if I have to save for retirement until I'm 65 (I'm under 20 right now).

 

Misallocation of resources is inevitable when everyday people make decisions with money. I don't know what makes you believe the free market can be successful with the number of idiots we have in this world.

 

Your reasoning can also apply to democracy as well. With all these idiots running around, how can you trust the people to make the right decisions for the whole.
The truth is, you can't expect people to make the right decisions for the whole, but you can count on each individual to make the right decisions for their own benefit.

 

You think technology is what will ensure people will live long healthy lives?
The USA, supposedly one of the most technologically advanced societies, still have plenty of people getting cancer, getting obese, high blood pressure etc...
Technology is not a replacement for self control and social responsibility.

 

What does the fact that people sometimes make wrong decisions have to do with the need to cut $1.3 trillion in federal spending?

 

Society expects you to do certain things if you want to be successful. Grade levels in schools don't allow anyone to deviate from the norm. Society expects people to go to college for certain jobs even though someone who hasn't gone to college may be able to perform that job better. A democracy wouldn't be my top choice for a form of government. If people work together, it should end up being more efficient than a bunch of people looking out for their own interests.

 

Most technology we have had for the past couple of decades is for entertainment, but there hasn't been much improvement in things like energy, materials, and transportation. If you do have improvements in these areas, people will not have to work as long and can spend more time with leisure activities. There has been an increase in office jobs, and sitting around for 8 hours a day isn't going to help with that. Technology should evenutally replace these office jobs, and all kinds of jobs. Medicine is advancing very fast compared to other areas, so I'm not too worried about that.