So what should get cut?

United States
April 1, 2010 2:36pm CST
Our states' are almost bankrupt. Our national debt is HUGE. The federal defict is growing. Lets face it...there is not enoug money to go around and the average joe can't afford a tax increase. So what do they cut? State's are faced with some hard decisions. So is the fed. Social Security reported that this year they will pay out more than they take in. So the feds are face with hard decisions. No one wants "their" programs cut. So what cuts should be made. They will have be big. So lets hear some real solutions. What programs get cut?
1 person likes this
7 responses
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
2 Apr 10
Entitlement programs are the biggest problem. Many people have no pride and won't work for something that they can get by doing nothing. They need to stop extending unemployment benefits. That may sound heartless but it's a simple fact that the longer you let people collect unemployment, the longer they will stay unemployed. Most people won't take a new job until their benefits are about to run out. At the state level they have to remove redundant bureaucracies and committees that serve as golden parachutes for politicians. If you don't know what I'm talking about, take a look at California. They have strict term limits for their politicians, and the politicians have responded by creating committees that they can parachute into when their terms are up. That way they continue to get paid for minimal, if any, work. I'm sure they're not the only state that has this problem and the vast majority of citizens are completely unaware of it.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
2 Apr 10
"Taskr, one of the largest entitlement is Social Security." It's not an entitlement when you pay directly into it. The sad thing is that it's really just become a ponzi scheme due to poor management. "explain to all of us why it made sense to raid this fund to give tax breaks" It didn't and I never said it did. We've both been posting here long enough that you should know what I do and don't support. If you don't know, ask me. This crap where you assume and accuse me of supporting things is getting old.
• United States
2 Apr 10
Taskr, one of the largest entitlement is Social Security. Do you really want to get rid of it? The only vote that both democrats and republicans have agreed on this year is NOT to cut ANY spending on Social Security. We all knew that Social Security would have a huge funding issue in 2000. So please explain to all of us why it made sense to raid this fund to give tax breaks?
@artistry (4151)
• United States
2 Apr 10
...Hi there Taskr, I agree something needs to be done, but until there are jobs that people can apply for and obtain, they are going to have to extend unemployment or send people food. There are people who want to work, but actually can't find jobs. People have children to feed, you can't leave them without. A friend of mine went out to apply for a job, there were three thousand people in line for four or five jobs, I believe he said. It's tough out there. It's not a matter of taking a job, in many cases it's finding a job that you can get. Hopefully things will pick up, so that the unemployment lines will decrease. There are many financial abuses in the government, which is an understatement, but certain things are needful until there is a change, which hopefully will be soon. Take care.
1 person likes this
@Netsbridge (3253)
• United States
1 Apr 10
How about getting out of other peoples' nations and stop playing world police? You know, I think that some money cwould also be saved if the president were to cut down on his frequent overseas travels!
• United States
2 Apr 10
I can't agree with you there. I agree we should stop playing world police. I also think we need to cut on his spending. But it is going to take more than that to get us out of this hole.
1 person likes this
• United States
2 Apr 10
I agree, but it will take a careful withdrawl so we do not appear to be cutting our influience as well. The Education Department's office in Paris, Francxe is a great place to start and missions around the world can be reviewed, too. You make a great point that this is a small dropper in an ocean of ink. I just know that we will someday look back at 2010 as the good old days when we paid for parks and benefits and incentives taht we can no longer afford.
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
1 Apr 10
Well do we want to cut out whole slabs of government, or across the board spend cuts? Cutting out whole slabs would be to eliminate the Department of Agriculture at the tune of 26 billion dollars, Department of Commerce and Labor which combines to the tune of 27 billion dollars, HUD at 47 billion, and Interior 12 billion. Couple that with deep cuts to the military spending and you will have enough savings. Option two reduce spending across the board done to levels of the 2004 level where revenue would match spending. Spend exactly according to that budget and you will be revenue neutral. As to the up coming entitlement bomb their is no solution. To fund all liabilities, Medicare and Social Security we will at some point have to max out the GDP in taxation. There is going to come a time when we have so many people on those two alone that the taxpayers will not be able to fund them and everything else. In enough time the golden goose will die. There is no real solutions.
1 person likes this
• United States
2 Apr 10
With how deep the hole is it is going to take a massive cut across the whole board to take care of it. Which no one wants. Everytime you hear of a budget cut or a cut back someone starts screaming...they want cut backs...but not ones that effect THEM.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
2 Apr 10
I would favor cutting whole departments. The Department of Energy and the Department of Education could go with only positive results. Both Departments were established with specific goals and neither has come close to those goals. Next you look at the war on poverty and the government should get out of that. Leave it up to the states to deal with their specific problems. Then look at what the Federal Government has the Constitutional Authority to deal with and if it is not specifically authorized in the Constitution then get rid of it. Along with this we need a Constitutional Amendment that limits the taxing authority of the Federal Government to tax to a percent of the Gross National Product. The Government should also have to have a balanced budget each year. Only during a national emergency could they exceed the budget and tax limits but it would require a 2/3 vote of both houses of congress to exceed the budget.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
2 Apr 10
Ok, lets see, Department of Ed, that should be the States, Health and human resource, again a state issue, IRS, Energy, there is enough hot air blowing around Washington! Also homeland security, seriously? Thats a start. Then I would cuts salaries like crazy. They are supposed to be civil servants, lets make them that way! I would get rid of the tax codes and do one flat tax across the board at the same rate for everybody!
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
2 Apr 10
You start by rolling back the entitlement programs. It took decades to get where we're at and it'll take decades to undo it, but it needs to start somewhere... Yes, I'm advocating rolling back health care reform (before it starts), Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. At the same time, you begin to dismantle all the federal agencies specifically not allowed for in the Constitution...Departments of Agriculture, Education, etc. I would also scale back the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security. And I'd take away all but one of Mrs. Obama's aides.
1 person likes this
@irishidid (8687)
• United States
2 Apr 10
Government pay should be cut to match what the regular working man makes. They weren't intended to make more than the citizens of the U.S. and get all the other perks they get. Most of them (if not all) have enough money without taking a high salary. Most of them do nothing to deserve it.