Many of us, and that includes me, have been advocating government reducing expenditures. We can set the example by writing to Congress and asking for a 3 year freeze on Social Security COLA increases. By making our own sacrifice, we would be in a position to call for action from everyone else receiving monies from our government.

It's not much, but it is a start. As someone once said, "if not us - who, if not now - when?"

Originally Posted by BBQMan

Many of us, and that includes me, have been advocating government reducing expenditures. We can set the example by writing to Congress and asking for a 3 year freeze on Social Security COLA increases. By making our own sacrifice, we would be in a position to call for action from everyone else receiving monies from our government.

It's not much, but it is a start. As someone once said, "if not us - who, if not now - when?"

If the government was trying to do with less I would maybe agree with you, but the opposite is true. I know you mean well, but the government could cut billions in expected expenditures and I don't think people should give up their money before the government gives up theirs.

This is the excuse of everyone who wants government spending cut, but not my programs. Educators do not want DOE budgets cut, the people in the Department of Homeland Defense will assure you that they are underfunded, civil service will assure you that they deserve a pay increase. These arguments will go on forever. It has long been said that Social Security is the third rail of politics - touch it and you are dead.

ALL government expenditures impact people, whether it is for rebuilding in New Orleans, promoting new ideas in CDC, funding education on a community leve, or providing a COLA increase for Social Security, Congress, our troops, etc.

Any cut in government expenditures will require sacrifice on the part of at least one group. I suggest that someone needs to pick up the challenge of leadership. Someone needs to show the way to the mutual sacrifice that is needed to preserve the country we all love. Those of us on Social Security can make a difference by saying we will not wait for the undefined them that are driving our country into bankruptcy but admit we are part of the problem.

We need to take up the challenge of leadership or admit that we are willing to help drive this country into bankruptcy. I ask again, "if not us - who, if not now - when?"

I don't know about you, buy my wife and I have not had a COLA increase in the past 2 years and it looks like it's going to be at least one more. I have noticed, however, that congress voted themselves a sizeable pay increase.

I can think up a few real fast to cut or at least suspend. Endowment for the arts, most of our forign aid, United Nations funding.

Wonderful beginning, dklassen.

Originally Posted by BBQMan

This is the excuse of everyone who wants government spending cut, but not my programs. Educators do not want DOE budgets cut, the people in the Department of Homeland Defense will assure you that they are underfunded, civil service will assure you that they deserve a pay increase. These arguments will go on forever. It has long been said that Social Security is the third rail of politics - touch it and you are dead.

ALL government expenditures impact people, whether it is for rebuilding in New Orleans, promoting new ideas in CDC, funding education on a community leve, or providing a COLA increase for Social Security, Congress, our troops, etc.

Any cut in government expenditures will require sacrifice on the part of at least one group. I suggest that someone needs to pick up the challenge of leadership. Someone needs to show the way to the mutual sacrifice that is needed to preserve the country we all love. Those of us on Social Security can make a difference by saying we will not wait for the undefined them that are driving our country into bankruptcy but admit we are part of the problem.

We need to take up the challenge of leadership or admit that we are willing to help drive this country into bankruptcy. I ask again, "if not us - who, if not now - when?"

The examples you give are, debatably, overfunded or redundant government expenditures that I could make good arguments for substantial cuts in funding. I would say, except for vital defense spending, there would be good arguments, along with the great examples give by dk, to make cuts in these programs and maybe even the elimination of the DOE altogether at a federal level.

I still would not be suggesting that the first cut be from the American citizen who for his whole working life had his payroll deducted with the promise of his retirement being subsidized in his retirement years. He had no opt in or opt out and this promise must be kept.

I liken your position to the politicians who, whenever there is calls to cut taxes, rail about how they'll have to cut Police and Fire personal and lay off teachers. I can think of a hundred cuts before that.

How about consolidating some of these?

342 economic development programs
130 programs serving the disabled
130 programs serving at-risk youth
90 early childhood development programs
75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities
72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water
50 homeless assistance programs
45 federal agencies conducting federal criminal investigations
40 separate employment and training programs
28 rural development programs
27 teen pregnancy programs
26 small, extraneous K-12 school grant programs
23 agencies providing aid to the former Soviet republics
19 programs fighting substance abuse
17 rural water and waste-water programs in eight agencies
17 trade agencies monitoring 400 international trade agreements
12 food safety agencies
11 principal statistics agencies; and
Four overlapping land management agencies

Originally Posted by RichieLion

The examples you give are, debatably, overfunded or redundant government expenditures that I could make good arguments for substantial cuts in funding. I would say, except for vital defense spending, there would be good arguments, along with the great examples give by dk, to make cuts in these programs and maybe even the elimination of the DOE altogether at a federal level.

I still would not be suggesting that the first cut be from the American citizen who for his whole working life had his payroll deducted with the promise of his retirement being subsidized in his retirement years. He had no opt in or opt out and this promise must be kept.

I liken your position to the politicians who, whenever there is calls to cut taxes, rail about how they'll have to cut Police and Fire personal and lay off teachers. I can think of a hundred cuts before that.

This thread proves there is only one way to BEGIN the process of reducing government.
1. FREEZE ALL SPENDING.. everything, including the military, social security, medicare, pork.. everything..
2. Next year roll back everything 1% next year and continue that until the deficit is cut to 5 trillion, then freeze the budget till the deficit is gone with program reductions and economic grown. Then NEVER have deficits again without a 2/3s vote of both houses of congress and the presidential signature, and limit that deficit to 1 year.
3. Eliminate all UNNECESSARY spending.. this is the tough problem because my road is necessary, yours is not. Here is how you do it.. WHEN the budge of transportation is frozen for example, then every project will rise or fall on its merit.. If no shenanigans like ear marks are used to get stuff buy, competition in the department will determine funding, and if the results are not popular, the next election will give the people a chance to speak with their votes.
4. DONT HIT ME. I am about to go on SS myself so I will feel this too.
No one should receive a dime from social security who has not paid into it. Lots of well meaning programs got slipped into SS.. they all need to be taken out.
No one should receive more from SS than they and their employer paid in PLUS a reasonable rate of interest on that money which can be determined by looking at the average interest rates paid during each year of contribution.
If we all want more from SS than we paid, it is generational theft, pure and simple.
For those who fall into real poverty after exhausting their assets, and IF their families do not take care of them (this is what we did when I was a kid. We supported grandma and grandpa and took them into our home when they could not afford or safely live alone), then a welfare program, not cash payments, keep our poor elderly from poverty.
BUT no one is entitled to cable tv etc if they are on welfare, and no one is entitled to perfect health care if they cant pay their own bills.
It is not a question of providing NO support to the poor, elderly or young, it is how much money we are will to take from some citizens by force (IRS) to give to others. The more you take, and the higher the benefit, the less likely people work and save, and the faster the decline of a capitalistic economy.
Amen
JJ

Originally Posted by getdul981

I don't know about you, buy my wife and I have not had a COLA increase in the past 2 years and it looks like it's going to be at least one more. I have noticed, however, that congress voted themselves a sizeable pay increase.

You forgot to mention that our congress voted themselves pay raises, during the same period.

Yoda