Government budgets, sacred cows, and jobs.
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
February 23, 2011 6:12pm CST
Even though everyone says they want the state or federal budgets to be balanced, few people really mean it.
In fact, most people really don't care how much the government spends, as long as their sacred cows get the lion's share of the money.
To the Democrats, the Defense Department seems to be the first place they would cut. To the Republicans, the welfare programs.
Most of the defense budget goes to working people. The military, Dept of Defense Civilians, people who work for defense contractors... etc.
So how is cutting the defense budget helping workers?
While there are many people who just can't work (for whatever reason), most of the people on one form of government aid can... and probably most would rather work. However, our government programs have infiltrated our very psyche so deeply that most of us can't think of a way for unemployed people to get money without the government.
Then there is the problem that so many of the federal and state jobs are a waste in the first place. But there's that problem again.. defining "waste". There is the obvious waste, money being spent on lavish expense accounts that go further than the simple performance of the job. But a lot of what I would consider waste could easily be justified by someone else.
Then there is outright fraud. You would think that everyone could agree that fraud should be eliminated, but from the comments I've read in fraud related discussions.. well, you would be wrong.
So really, the only way to really cut spending is to cut it across the board. No sacred cows, no special interest groups, no picking and choosing. Every department, bureaucracy and branch of the government.
The minute you come up with an exception, you admit you don't really want the spending brought under control, you just want your political pet projects protected.
2 people like this
10 responses
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
24 Feb 11
I agree, I have a way to cut the DoD's Budget we pull out of the two Unconstitutional Wars is a start then we pull back a good majority of our Military Bases as they are no longer needed in the world. We need to have more of our soldiers based within the United States.
I would then go Department through Department. We need to first however change the minds of many Americans who have this Idea that we can do whatever we want in the World and not have Blow back. Also we need to change peoples mind on what government
s job is which is to protect the Individuals rights and to provide for the common defense their of.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
See, this is the problem, Dark. Too many people aren't willing to put their pet causes aside. If it doesn't further their agenda, it isn't worth bothering with.
You bring up the wars, others bring up their pet concerns...before long it's just another 9/11 commission only out to protect their interests, at the expense of actually accomplishing anything.
@dark_joev (3034)
• United States
24 Feb 11
The Wars are the two biggest expenditures that so far have really done anything. We aren't safer. I mean our enemies are profiting from us being over their right now their membership is at record levels why because they can go look they are attacking us they are in our land these outsiders these invaders trying to attack our beliefs they are going after Allah then followed with some loose reference to the Quran. We can't afford the two Unconstitutional Wars and well we also can't Afford all the Unconstitutional Departments either.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
But Joev, everyone has their sacred cows, so how are yours more valid than any other. If we waste time making sure sacred cows are exempted, then we can't say we care about reducing spending at all.
Are you against the deficits or just against Bush?
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
24 Feb 11
Do your cuts include Congressional salaries and benefits? I think that is a really good place to start.
I think that the average person does not really comprehend the enormity of the budget. They also do not have control of their own budgets. Most Americans are so deep in debt themselves that I think they kind of expect the government to over spend...it is kind of an American tradition to spend spend spend.
Once again, I think we need to walk the middle of the road. We need to cut spending in all areas of the bureaucracy. There is fraud, waste, and outright theft going on in all areas of government. People claim that it would cost more to weed out the graft than it is worth. Well, if you cut the money, they will have to weed it out...lol
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
True, the federal budget is too enormous to really understand without breaking it down. Here's a link to my favorite graphic covering the budget...
http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
Well, budgets would be cut, how the budgets are used would still be up to the department.. but yes, the budget cuts would include all elected offices too.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
24 Feb 11
I can not think of a single department or agency I wouldnt be willing to cut. But I do believe some need more cutting than others and some should be eliminated all together. I think each department should prove their relevance to the Constitution and the country as a whole.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Feb 11
I can think of one...the local Health Departments at the county level. In my county we have a very high unemployment rate and many people have lost their health insurance coverage. They can't afford to go to a private physician and pay cash in advance so being able to go to the Health Dept for minor medical care saves them from having to go to an ER and receiving a large bill from them.
2 people like this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Feb 11
Not "everyone" believes that balancing the state and federal budgets is the top priority at this particular time. I, for instance, feel that unemployment and putting folks back to work is much more important than a balanced budget and, news flash, the majority of Americans do/did not work for the Defense Department or defense contractors. Cutting spending across the board, with no regard for the services offered or the additional people who would be added to the unemployment rate is wrong.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
25 Feb 11
Obama believed that too, so he wasted almost a trillion dollars on the "stimulus package". Two years later it still hasn't accomplished Obama's stated goals. In fact, it's still worse than he said it would be if we did nothing at all.
Balancing the budget is the most important thing because it is costing every facet of our nation. The value of our money is degrading to the point that its very soundness is being questioned.
The fact that the U.S. government has become the single biggest employer is a travesty. A healthy economy depends on net tax payers. Net tax payers are people who pay more into the tax base than they get from it. When the majority of the people get more money from the government than pay into it, the government can't function without taking loans for daily functions.
How long can any organization survive if they have to borrow money just to pay the basic bills?
@millertime (1394)
• United States
24 Feb 11
It's really just human nature. Everybody is for cutting government spending as long as the cuts only effect other people. Nobody wants any of the cuts to impact them in any way.
I work for a government agency and we are going through budget cuts and they are revamping some of the overly generous pension benefits to bring them more in line with the private sector and everyone is all up in arms. Most of the changes will mainly effect new hires but they don't want to give up anything at all. Everyone is having fits about having to contribute 5% of their wages toward their own retirement. OH THE HUMANITY! I have to contribute to my own retirement??? Please...
People have to start realizing that we need our government to run it's financial matters like we have to run our households. They can't continue to spend more money than they make. It just won't work. If the money isn't there, it isn't there. No amount of protesting, or chanting, or senators fleeing the state, or wishing upon a star or whatever they try will change the cold hard money facts. Cuts have to be made, changes have to happen and those are the facts. Sometimes it hurts. Guess what? We'll all have to get by with a little less for a while.
But, some just won't be able to accept that, no matter what.
@lacieice (2060)
• United States
24 Feb 11
I just have a simple question. You say everyone needs to cut back...business, government, common people. Now, I am 65 years old and I have worked since I was 14. I have always paid my taxes and paid into social security. Now, I am disabled. I receive $850 a month SSD, of witch $95 a month goes to medicare, then I still have to pay $51 for prescription coverage, so thast leaves me about $700 a month to live on. Keep in mind, too, that I am a diabetic and I have co-pays for hospital and doctor visits. I have house payments to make of $240 a month, which is really pretty low compared with some others. So that leaves me about $460 a month for utilities, food, medicine co-pays and personal items. Gas heat, electric, and water run about $200 a month in the winter. Oh...I do have the luxury of TV and internet, so that is another $100 a month, but since I am disabled, that is my entire entainment budget. Let's see now...what does that leaave me? About $160 a month for food and medicine. A vial of insulin has a $35 co-pay, and I need two to three vial a month, so figure another hundrend bucks for just that. So now I am down to $60. I still have other meds to get at $8 each, so I guess food will have to be forgotten this month.
Now here is my question: Where should I cut? How much less social security disability should I be willing to take? How much more should I pay for medical care? By the way, I do not get food stamps or medicaid.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
No, I said all government departments and agencies need to be cut by 10%. I said nothing about private companies or individuals.
You are talking about two different things. The Social Security Administration has a budget of $696 billion. This is from the general fund. The SSA administers the $939 billion SS fund, taken in through Social Security taxes.
The budget reductions wouldn't touch the Social Security fund, it only applies to the money allocated to the SSA for administering the program.
@djbtol (5493)
• United States
24 Feb 11
Very difficult indeed, maybe impossible. I saw one article suggesting that Obama was even banking on the fact that most people (at least most of his voters) would say keep on spending.
I think the budget cutting is a process. To chop out 50 billion dollars at once is not so easy. Maybe we need to take smaller amounts out of millions of little governmental corners.
Someplace else I saw a discussion about California needing to trim the budget, so they were going after things like police and fire. Many people have been conditioned to think that way. A responder to the discussion put up a long list of California government agencies and asked the question, So we have to cut police and fire?
The government is bigger and more spread out than most of us can realize, so there are lots of sacred cows to pick on. Just the same, there will have to be job cuts.
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
24 Feb 11
Yes, everyone wants spending cut--unless it affects them or someone they care about or love.
I think the nation will have to realize that everyone will have to give something up. We've been asleep so long and let gov't spend our money unwisely that it's like oversleeping for work--we get there late and are docked for the hours we slept away.
I think the first place we should cut is to eliminate the pensions and healthcare programs for Congress. Then we wouldn't need term limits and would not be paying someone for life for getting into an office where they profited for working against (or sometimes for) the people for their own profit and power. That would save a few billion over the years, right?
There should be no pet projects and no sacred cows. The nation's existence is on the line and it's time to be ruthless.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
That should happen, but after the 10% across the board cuts.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Feb 11
Our national debt increased by $3 trillion in the last two years. That is far faster than the GDP can compete with.
But improving production is a great thing in conjunction with cutting spending.