Proposed budget via NY times
 

what's funny is Obama is able to cut money by freezing budgets. I know he can't make a bed but surely he knows the difference between a knife and a freezer. No?

For Riot: Kind of like Michele O'B coming home with a new Benz and trying the "but I was going to buy a Bentley next year and every year after but for the next nine will settle for a benz so I saved you money" :D

Oh this is good. He's cutting energy assistance (I take it gas and electricity) but increasing funding for training math and science teachers, while cutting Pell grants?

This guy is no longer just 'way over his skis' he needs to be saved.

God Bless America we have a GOP congress! Never thought Obama would give me the sense of HOPE but he has.

The most useful thing about that chart, for people who don't understand much about government spending, is that it makes it visually clear that our largest areas of spending are Medicare/Medicaid, Defense, interest on the national debt and Social Security.

Social Security is required by law to be fully funded; it's illegal for it to borrow money, so it doesn't contribute to the deficit or debt and never has. The surplus it has run and invested in Treasury Bonds will keep it solvent for several more decades (regardless of what the media would like you to believe; Social Security is fine).

We don't have any choice about interest on the national debt.

Medicare and Medicaid are non-discretionary items.

What this means, is that all of these cuts in discretionary spending don't amount to a hill of beans. Any alleged budget hawk who talks a big game about cutting the deficit and does not discuss cutting the defense budget is not actually serious about cutting spending.

If you really want to slash the deficit, you need to slash defense.

Wouldn't getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan be a good start to defense cuts. We have no business there but this country is still there.

How does keeping SS Solvent for 2.5 more decades make it "fine".

IMO that makes it terrible.

seriously, 2037 is right around the damn corner. Unless you are old and only care about yourself and not the future, nobody has a reason to think it is fine.

According to "some" people, the government can just tweak it and make it alright. Tweak meaning raise the % rate or the amount on which people have to pay, increase the retirement age to 75 or 80. Yup, you younger generation has absolutely nothing to worry about. Just keep paying into the Ponzi scheme.:rolleyes:

you're right that any serious effort to reduce deficits includes cutting defense spending but dealing with entitlements and raising revenues (taxes) also has to happen.

the really illustrative point about any of the budget discussions here is how everyone is in favor of the general idea of cutting spending but when you get down to specifics they're againt those. energy assistance and pell grants? no way!

everyone wants to blame the president and congress for the deficit but the truth is we just don't want to pay for what we get. it's a dysfunctional process that neither party really wants to deal with because they know they'll get voted out the minute they try.

the deficit commission put forth a serious plan that would begin to address the structural deficit. No ones going to touch it because the democrats will torch any republican effort to address entitlements and republicans will burn any democratic effort to cut defense or raise taxes.

The obvious answer to compromise and do some of each just isn't possible in a poisoned partisan atmosphere. So we'll cut good programs in the 13% of the federal budget that's discretionary and ignore the 87% where the real problems lie.

You nailed it. This board is a microcosm of the problem. Everyone is fine with cutting anything that doesn't directly affect them and blame the other party for the hole we are in.

The one component of the budget that could be saved w/o cutting any programs is the interest on the debt $474.15 Billion for this year. If somehow Dems and Reps could come to agreement that this is where we can save and Reps agree to raise taxes (with the understanding all new Revenue pays down the debt) at the same time Dems agree to cut spending by an equal amount (and again use that money to pay down the debt) we are capable of saving almost $5 Trillion over the next decade. With Medicare/Medicade fraud rates estimated to be 10% there's another $110 Billion or $1.1 Trillion over 10 years saved if its rooted out. One thing that is very evident looking at the budget chart is we don't need a big Obamacare square to try and squeeze in.

Hey I think there should be fairly across the board cuts of 20%. Including defense.

Other than the roads I drive on, and the national parks I visit, and of course the military's protection, there isnt really anything I get back from the government (I'm already out of high school and paid my own college).. so I'm not worried... CUT the spending across the board!

None of that has to be done. No retirement age raises, no change in benefits.

If the cap is simply raised from the current $106,800 to about $200,000, SS is flush and readily funded for about 70 more years. If the cap is simply eliminated, SS has a surplus.

The Senate Democratic plan is to simply raise the cap. The Senate Republican plan is to take away benefits and raise the retirement age, as they don't want rich people paying more, so they will take from those least able to afford it (those making less than $106,800 per year)

"Out there" plans include means testing (so the rich don't get social security or as much, in spite of paying in) or privatizing it so Wall Street has control of your retirement fund.

Which should the country choose?

A good article on what doing different tweeks to SS will do in the long run:

Just curious what are your feeling about a proposal to raise the health insurance premiums on working class Retirees. Yet the Retirees wont get any type of raise and yet thier health premium might be going up. Im confident you are all for it and many others are for it.

Some is some reading reading for you:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...MPLATE=DEFAULT

What are you talking about? Private retirees or Medicare recipients?
Then don't bother to ask my opinion if you are sure you can read my mind. Buh bye.

Military retirees who are of the working class age. Did I say anything about Medicare DUH.

That's why I asked, because you didn't say anything about anything. DUH.

I'm not against charging more for their Insurance. Mine just doubled. No B.S. Doubled. I can't afford to keep paying for everyone else's sh1t I have another $500 oil bill this month. Wouldn't it be fair if you people living in the sunny south were gonna start kicking up for that? I want my Global Warming!

I guess it was hard for you to decipher what a working class retiree is?

I feel sorry for you about your rate doubling. Was there a legit reason given to you as to why it doubled?

Well, Nascar, a working class retiree is NOT most usually a veteran. MOST USUALLY they are on Medicare.

That's why I politely asked you what you meant.

You're an idiot. I give up. Talk to yourself.

OBAMACARE!!

If you know anything about the people who serve in the Military after 20 years they are veterans, and during that time they usually have done some tour during war time DAH just like myself I served in numerous combat zones some people go in right after high school so when they retire they get out around the age of 40. So Im not on MEDICARE or do I live off the GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!
BTW I'm the wife of nascar1966's and just happened to walk and see you stupid comment no wonder people think you are dumb!!!

you two are perfect for each other.

Are you talking about me and Riot being perfect for each other?

This is unreal.

Well, actually it's Nascar that people think are dumb, but I digress.

Nascar said:
Just curious what are your feeling about a proposal to raise the health insurance premiums on working class Retirees.

How many here knew, from the above sentence, that Nascar was referring to retired military veterans? No? Why, isn't it obvious? I'm dumb for not magically knowing the phrase "working class retirees" really means "retired military veterans"? And it doesn't mean the millions and millions of working class retirees that are not military?

You two are perfect for each other.

who's asking the question. you or your wife?

I laughed. Nascar's "wife" has shown up before.

me

My wife and I are perfect for each other. She is not a witch like you are.

That's Funny!

Riot will disagree with you and say it is not Obamacare. Riot will also say you know nothing about Obamacare. Has Riot read the over 2000 page document? NOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is she a bigot like you?

I don't how you were raised but my wife and I were raised in the NORTH and trust me I'm not a bigot Riot that is what you are. If all you can be is a vet and take care of animals then you must not be very good with people that's no suprise. At least my wife voice's her opinion and takes care of people who need help. My wife is a Paramedic and is always scrutinized in the public eyes. Paramedics always takes care of everybody it does not matter where you come from or who they are they are alway treated with respect and that is something you don't have and more than you never had. Im glad you will never take care of any of my dogs. I would go to another town rather than go to your affice.

And you really think that just raising the cap to $200K will solve the problem?

Look at how the full retirement age has risen 2 years and % amounts of SS paid out prior to 67 have diminished -

http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/retirechart.htm

You really think that in 30 or 40 years, the full SS benefit retirement age will not have risen to 70, 72, maybe even 75 years of age? It's the only way SS will survive - gotta make sure some of those old timers die off before they can collect.

One of the most unfair benefits in the SS program is allowing a spouse who never worked a day in her life to collect 50% of her husband's social security when both he and she reach maximum retirement age. I have a friend whose husband was a bank executive making a huge salary. She is collecting half of his SS and it amounts to more than what I collect - my having worked 40 years putting into the system. That's one of the entitlements in the SS program that can be done away with or drastically reduced.

NASCAR - I've got to say - you give conservatives a bad name. It would be good if you would stop thinking emotionally and defensively. You're saying that someone who is a vet isn't good with people?!~ Do you realize that people are a vet's clients; the animal is the patient. People pay the bills and if they don't like their vet or don't get along with them, those clients move elsewhere. Quite frankly, I think vets have to have a LOT of people skills.

:tro: and that's to jms as well. everyone is in favor of cuts til the scalpel comes out.

anyone not of ss age, but retired-raise it. after all, someone with 20 years in could be all of 38 years old...
they need to raise the length of service to qualify for retirement from the military.

Twnety years is alot more than four years. If im wrong say it but doesnt the President collect a pension if they only serve one term? If I was allowed to I would of gladly stayed in the military longer.

i think they do collect a 'pension'. had something to do with men like monroe and grant dying broke, living on the charity of others after a lifetime of service. i don't agree that congress members should get a lifelong retirement, honestly they may have to revisit the presidents stipend in view of the salaries earned in speaking fees, etc. but i can see the former chief exec getting money after serving.