Jump to content
DC Message Boards
Guest DCpages

What Would You Cut in the Federal Budget?

Recommended Posts

Guest 2%

2% Alternative Minimum Tax on Multi-National Corporations

2% Excise Tax on all finished goods entering US Ports.

2% Top Wealthy Americans return to Bush Era Tax Rates

2% Reduction in the Defense Budget

2% Salary reduction for all members of Congress... every year until micro-enterprise and manufacturing job levels return to 1970 levels and unemployment gets to 2%.

2% Federal tax on fast food to subsidize health insurance for these workers.

 

This is NOT a DEFICIT PROBLEM it's a revenue problem. (It may however be a deficit of Common Sense problem, or a deficit of math ability problem for members of congress...

 

First, Congress GAVE AWAY out nations tax revenue when they decided that "free trade" should be the law of the land. In the 50's excise taxes on imports were 40% of government budget. WalMart is cheap... too cheap. So cheap that we are all paying for the healthcare of their part-time employees.

 

Then Congress gave away our jobs (and the tax revenue derived from those jobs) when they voted for NAFTA, CAFTA... and so on.

 

Then Congress took away all the rules that prevented Wall Street from stealing Americans blind. Now the jobs that are left are all minimum wage.... reducing tax revenue again.

 

Then Congress decided that repealing the Bush tax cuts was too harsh on those that stole everything from middle class Americans...

 

Then Congress and President Obama decided that the creeps need NOT go to jail.

 

Now the GOP wants to shrink the deficit THEY CREATED by taking my Mothers Medicare and Social Security? Too many lawyers think that the solution to all of our problems lies in the crazy partisan ideas that they cling to!

 

I haven't even mentioned the 3 wars that we entered... NO MORE BOOTS ON THE GROUND! Except on our own soil. If other nations expect us to protect their freedom (and their price of oil)..... we will charge them through additional excise taxes on whatever they want to ship into our marketplace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just embrace one flat tax? No Entitlements and Tax Breaks. Create an equation that gives value to capital holdings and borrowing of money? Adjust this amount according to the deficit. Display who the money we owe to and how much?

 

The Federal Reserve can be a very good thing for our country. It protects our financial independence from the rest of the world. We just need to make it more transparent. Classifying certain information by levels of secrecy just like the military, national archives, and intelligence units use. A better community outreach of what their doing is needed.

 

We cannot have our Citizens of the United States consider the The Treasury Department's Central Bank doing business with shadow cartels or any special interest that conflict with our National Policy.

 

Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac should be moved to the Federal Reserve to unwind at a proper economic pace. The United States has no business backing home and property loans ever, but we need to honor its debt to past customers.

 

Keep Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Healthcare until 25, and Collective Bargaining in place. Benefits should only be given to citizens that have paid taxes for five years. Exempt students and the disabled that are not fit to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dixie

Why can't the United States sell the gold in Fort Knox. We can replace it at a later date.

 

It does no good sitting in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest No Sharia

Speaker Cantor is showing Obama that the truth in this country is that this debt ceiling is not real. Keep it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest USCCB

Religious leaders, including representatives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), met with President Barack Obama July 20 to urge the President and congressional leaders to protect programs for hungry and poor people in decisions surrounding the deficit and debt.

 

The delegation to the White House included Bishop Ricardo Ramirez of La Cruces, New Mexico, member of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development; Galen Carey of the National Association of Evangelicals; David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World; Jim Wallis, chief executive of Sojourners; as well as representatives of the Salvation Army, the Alliance to End Hunger, the National Council of Churches of Christ USA and others.

 

“As the Catholic Bishops’ Conference, we come here not to advance a particular plan, but a fundamental moral principle: put the needs of the poor first in allocating scarce resources,” said Bishop Ramirez. “As religious leaders, our concern is not which party wins the current political battles, but we know, if we don’t speak up, who is likely to lose: the families trying to feed their kids, the jobless looking for work, the children who need health care, the hungry and sick and hopeless around the world.”

 

Leaders who met with the President are signatories to the Circle of Protection, a non-partisan movement that insists that poor and vulnerable people should be protected, not targeted in efforts to reduce long term deficits.

 

Representatives of USCCB and other religious leaders also met with Rep. Paul Ryan, House budget chairman, on July 8 as well as the staff of House Speaker John Boehner.

 

The Circle of Protection statement has been endorsed by more than 60 heads of Christian denominations and religious organizations, as well as 45 heads of development agencies and other faiths, as part of the Circle of Protection movement. The movement was launched in response to the disproportionate budget cuts proposed to programs for hungry and poor people.

 

“As Christian leaders, we are committed to fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice. We are also committed to resist budget cuts that undermine the lives, dignity, and rights of poor and vulnerable people,” the leaders wrote in a statement. “Therefore, we join with others to form a circle of protection around programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jane Montgomery

Our debt is now equal to our whole economy. What would you cut in the federal budget to stop deficit spending?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jane Montgomery

Cut every department in the government 20%, with savings mandated to pay down the debt. If they can't survive on 80% of their bloated budgets, they deserve to be eliminated. I think we need to elect accountants to congress, since obviously the present officeholders lack good financial sense. As an accountant, I'm outraged at the mess they have created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest John A.

I'd cut a few federal programs, but you'd better believe I'd cut tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires.

They don't need tax breaks.

As far as the "well they need tax breaks because they're the job creators"? They've had tax breaks for 10 years and the unemployment rate is still extremely high.

 

So the argument the wealthy create jobs is proven a mythical fallacy, and to all you GOPers: come up with a new lie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Melinda

I would cut entitlements for the rich and scale down every department. Especially Defense. They are the biggest hogs of our money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Wes Pruden

Lost in the sturm and drang, the clanging of the background music, the thunder of approaching doom and the pipsqueakery of the politicians, the wringing of hands and the decrying of partisanship, is the reality that this is exactly how the political system is meant to work. Debate, argument and contention are what the Founding Fathers prescribed as the means of reaching consensus and resolution. They were not much concerned with bipartisan civility and being nice. Genteel courtesy was for the parlor, not the well of the House. The noise that frightens the more refined pundits, delicate editorialists and the stock-market traders who imagine themselves masters of the universe is merely the sound of the republic at work. Not a symphony by Mozart, exactly, but music to the educated ear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American4Progress

Violent Film Motivates House GOP As They Push Us Toward Default

 

As we reported yesterday, Speaker Boehner is having some trouble rounding up the votes for his disastrous default bill. So much trouble that he had to postpone today’s planned vote until at least tomorrow. (Good thing we’re not in a rush or anything.)

 

In order to whip up support for the Boehner plan, the Washington Post reported that yesterday the GOP leadership played a clip from the Ben Affleck flick The Town. Here are the details, via ThinkProgress’ Judd Legum:

 

Ben Affleck: I need your help. I can’t tell you what it is. You can never ask me about it later. And we’re going to hurt some people.

 

Jeremy Renner: Whose car are we going to take?

 

 

According to the Washington Post, Rep. Allen West (R-FL) replied, “I’m ready to drive the car.”

 

In the movie, the characters then put on hockey masks and bludgeon two men with sticks, then shoot one man in the leg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Derek

Anyone see John McCain just tear Sean Hannity apart on Murdoch (Fox) news tonight. The Tea Party is starting to scare me. They do not care if the people who elected them get hurt. Everyone can thank Rupert Murdoch for reshaping a good idea into his Sarah Palin Tea Party Express. I wonder if this is a Murdoch New World Order ploy to destroy our country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DC Democrat

I would have loved to see that. But, watched Senator John McCain warn his Republican colleagues on Wednesday, "To hold out and say we won't agree to raising the debt limit to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, it's unfair, it's bizarro." For once I agree with the Maverick.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Macon Phillips

One of the fundamental things to understand when considering the debate about reducing our national debt is how we accumulated so much in the first place.

 

To explain the impact various policies have had over the past decade, shifting us from projected surpluses to actual deficits and, as a result, running up the national debt, the White House has developed a graphic for you to review and share:

 

post-2502-131189806891_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest RT



The countdown to armadebtdon continues and we are just four days away from the debt ceiling deadline. Many agree that the real issue isn't raising the debt ceiling, but the actual problem is the debt itself. Peter Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital, tells us what he'd do if he was in charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Altasshrug

This is incorrect argument. We should not be talking about more gov or less gov regulation. We should be talking about the kind of government participation in the marketplace. Government should be enforcing level playing field for all participants instead of playing favorites as they do now by channeling resources to the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American4Progress

With the wealthy, Big Oil, and other corporations asked to contribute nothing in the first round of the austerity plan President Obama signed today to avoid a catastrophic default on our nation’s obligations, there is little for progressives to celebrate.

 

At the same time, the deal sets up a new “super committee” to identify an additional $1.2-1.5 TRILLION in deficit reduction — reductions which can come from more austerity cuts (including cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security) or more revenues. This presents progressives with an opportunity to channel their anger over the first round into relentless action to push for the kind of progressive second round of deficit reduction that America wants — and needs. Only a progressive plan will help fund the kinds of investments we need to make to start putting America back to work.

 

WHO: The new 12-member Super Committee composed of six members of the House and Senate from each party.

 

Progressive action: Appoint members to the committee who will only support a deal that includes new revenues, will promote job growth, and protects progressive priorities like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

 

WHAT: A plan for $1.2-1.5 TRILLION in additional deficit reduction, which the new super committee is supposed to produce by Thanksgiving and which the House and the Senate are supposed to vote on before Christmas. Failure to do so (or a presidential veto) will trigger an additional $1.2 TRILLION in automatic cuts. Putting additional revenues in the plan will also allow job-creating items to be included.

 

Progressive action: A truly balanced plan that includes:

Programs that will actually create jobs, such as an infrastructure bank — an idea supported by both unions like the AFL-CIO and the right-wing U.S. Chamber of Commerce

An end to the more than $1 TRILLION in wasteful and unnecessary tax giveaways, including those to Big Oil, corporate jet owners, horse breeders, and hedge fund billionaires

An end to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, which could reap more than $700 BILLION in deficit reduction

An extension of long-term unemployment insurance benefits (which will otherwise expire in December) and an extension of the payroll tax cut or something similar that benefits the middle class (this will also expire in December)

 

AMERICANS AGREE: Survey after survey shows that Americans want a progressive plan:

 

60 percent disapprove of the fact that revenues from the wealthy and corporations were not included in the first round of the deal

66 percent wanted a deal that included both new revenues and spending cuts

72 percent support raising taxes on those making over $250,000

64 percent support raising taxes on hedge fund managers

59 percent support ending tax breaks for Big Oil

 

NOTABLE QUOTABLE: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, speaking just before the Senate voted today to pass the debt deal, said Republican members of the Super Committee must have “open minds” about including revenue in the second round. Reid said the only the way an agreement to stop the automatic cuts in the second round from going into effect can be reached is by including revenue in the Super Committee's deal:

 

We’ve had too much talk the last few days of Republicans as early as this morning, Republican leaders in the Senate saying there will be no revenue. That’s not going to happen. Otherwise, the trigger is going to kick in. The only way we can arrive at a fair arrangement for the American people with this joint committee is to have equal sharing…There has to be equal spending cuts, there has to be some revenue that matches that

 

IN ONE SENTENCE: Washington ignored the American people’s overwhelming desire for a balanced plan in round one of the debt deal; now it’s time for progressives to fight for a plan that creates jobs and doesn’t allow most Americans to bear the burden, while those with lobbyist get to write the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Norm Lindelaub

Our debt is now equal to our whole economy. What would you cut in the federal budget to stop deficit spending?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jason

Senate Democrats cleaned up the House Republicans’ mess again, narrowly averting a government shutdown.

 

After the House GOP passed a measure to hold disaster funding hostage, demanding job-creation programs as a ransom, they promptly went home. They have no regard for who lies in their path of destruction, as long as they can blame a dismal economy they created on President Obama and the Democrats.

 

Good thing there are some adults in the room. Last night, the Senate averted a shutdown while standing against Republican efforts to dismantle job-creation programs. And they’ll keep on defending Medicare, Social Security and Pell grants, too.

 

That’s why we need to protect the Democratic majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×