The U.S. has a $1.1 trillion budget shortfall staring at us in each of the next few years to come. HOW WILL WE FILL THAT GAP?

It's easy. Don't spend it.

With all that money people are now lining up for there are always strings attached. Some of those same strings got us in this mess in the first place.

There are solutions to this problem that have worked and will work again. The problem is too many people have put their faith in the wrong place. I guess we deserve what we get and trust me, we're going to get it.

We know what works and what makes this country prosperous. We are now turning away from all of it.

Don't over analyze it. The solution is simple and works every time it's tried.

Originally Posted by dklassen

It's easy. Don't spend it.

With due respect, DK, if those were the marching orders that you gave the Congress and they came back with ideas like...

• Means test Social Security payments so that only the lowest-income Americans, who had no other means of support, recieved payments.
• Eliminate Medicare insurance for all but those Americans who can't afford to pay for their own healthcare insurance.
• Simply stop spending on infrastructure projects.
• Draw down our military and reduce defense expenditures to peacetime levels.
• Or, stop completely any and all payments to foreign countries for aid to their sick, homeless or threatened citizens.

...would you be satisfied? Those types of steps would certainly meet the objective of "...simply stop spending". But would you be satisfied with the result?

We really do need to form some specific opinions on what we expect from our government, what we're willing to give up, and whether we're willing to pay any more for what government provides.

The government has a budget and they have enough money in that budget to take care of business. What I’m talking about is the extra 1.5 trillion they want to spend on their misguided and totally irresponsible “stimulus” plan that will put us so far in debt we’ll never get out not to mention it hasn’t worked and it won’t work.

What I’m saying is the solution is crystal clear and so simple and I can’t believe some can’t see it. Obama talks about creating millions of new jobs. The ONLY jobs government creates is government jobs. The government does not stimulate the economy.

Everyone knows the economy has its ups and downs just like the housing market does. We’ve been here before and it’s the government right now that’s depressing the economy and consumer confidence. Private sector are the job creators and they always have been. The longer businesses is worried about Obama’s tax increases and out of control spending the longer they will sit on their capitol and the more they will cut back jobs or at the very least stop hiring.

Ok, I’ll ask it again directly to you. When in history has the government ever successfully spent an economy out of a recession?

I'll ask it in another way to all of you reading this. If you've ever had times when your budget was tight or were having personal financial problems, when did spending money like a crazy person help you out of the problem?

Big government is not the answer it is the problem.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

With due respect, DK, if those were the marching orders that you gave the Congress and they came back with ideas like...

• Means test Social Security payments so that only the lowest-income Americans, who had no other means of support, recieved payments.
• Eliminate Medicare insurance for all but those Americans who could afford to pay for their own healthcare insurance.
• Simply stop spending on infrastructure projects.
• Draw down our military and reduce defense expenditures to peacetime levels.
• Or, stop completely any and all payments to foreign countries for aid to their sick, homeless or threatened citizens.

...would you be satisfied? Those types of steps would certainly meet the objective of "...simply stop spending". But would you be satisfied with the result?

We really do need to form some specific opinions on what we expect from our government, what we're willing to give up, and whether we're willing to pay any more for what government provides.

What is being missed is that it does not matter what piecemeal solution is recommended by the general populace. Our Congress is going to do what it d^@%#d well pleases to do - just like it always does. All the spreadsheet proposals in the world have less of an impact than a 75% change-over of who holds the title of Congressperson in November 2010. Then and only then will there be true concern of what the knowledgeable within the populace recommend and prefer.

We're stuck with increasing deficits, pork-a-la-carte, K Street influence brokering and all of the other chicanery which got us into this mess. They perpetuate the problems and each election promise to "change" things. They never do, and laugh all the way back to office on how gullible we all are. They always seem to make sure the only pain felt is by anyone not involved in their reelection and with more than $10.00 in their wallet.

All of the plans in the world are worthless unless that 9%-Approval-rated Congress sees a flushing...

Until November, 2010 we have to endure. If there is no change in the Congressional roster, we endure longer.

To DK:

I'm not certain there is an answer to your question, "When in history has the government ever successfully spent an economy out of a recession?" The financial crisis we're facing is of the same scale as only one other instance in history -- the 1929 Depression and the faltering economy of the 1930's. A big difference between then and now is that our economy, financial system and the availability of monetary tools to effect economic activity are far more multi-national and sophisticated than "back in the day". FDR did a lot of spending, but with the closed economy and monetary tools we had then, it took almost a decade for economic activity to begin to rebound to some normalcy. It's for that reason that I am arguing that it does little good to look backward, because of that fact that there are such huge differences between what worked or didn't work then and what may work in the future. We should remain grounded in democratic values and idealology, but that alone cannot solve the current complicated economic problems.

You have also completely avoided my question, "how can we balance the federal budget and begin to repay our national debt?" You have focused only on the proposed stimulus legislation. They are two completely different things -- other than the fact that they both contribute to deficit spending and increase the national debt. If the Congress agreed with you and concluded that regarding stimulus they should simply stop spending, an absence of any substantial action to "fill the hole" of the $1.1 trillion annual deficit in the U.S. Budget, would simply add that much each year to the national debt.

So, again focusing on the federal budget deficit -- specifically what spending cuts would you find acceptable (and how much would they reduce the deficit) or would you be willing to pay more (in taxes) for the government services being provided in order to fill the deficit gap? Or, I suppose, would you propose to simply continue borrowing to finance our deficits until we can borrow no more?

To SteveZ:

I can't agree that the only "say" we have is at the time of federal elections. If that were true, there would be a whole lot of pollsters who provide information on public sentiment to elected officials who would be out of work. And while I know I tend to be more pragmatic that enthusiastic, whether the news is good or bad, I'm going to try hard to avoid the cynicsm that you suggest regarding the power of the democratic system. If we had so little control over those we elect to represent us, one might conclude that some other system might be better. I'm not there yet.
--------------------------------------
This has been a pretty good thread. I only hope that the exchange of posts has gotten people to think a little more deeply about the crises we face and the things that can be done to correct them.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

With due respect, DK, if those were the marching orders that you gave the Congress and they came back with ideas like...

• Means test Social Security payments so that only the lowest-income Americans, who had no other means of support, recieved payments.
• Eliminate Medicare insurance for all but those Americans who could afford to pay for their own healthcare insurance.
• Simply stop spending on infrastructure projects.
• Draw down our military and reduce defense expenditures to peacetime levels.
• Or, stop completely any and all payments to foreign countries for aid to their sick, homeless or threatened citizens.

...would you be satisfied? Those types of steps would certainly meet the objective of "...simply stop spending". But would you be satisfied with the result?

We really do need to form some specific opinions on what we expect from our government, what we're willing to give up, and whether we're willing to pay any more for what government provides.

The means Test for SS troubles me.... here's why: We're told that Uncle Sam will take our $$$$ over 40 years of hard work via a Soc Security Tax but not to worry because it is "our money" and that when we reach a certain age we can get our mone back. But now, because of fiscal mismanagementby our gov't and useles politicians., you say I can't get my money back.... even though the politicians have a golden parachute that is better than anyone... it's like I'm getting penalized for doing all the right things over all of these years. Sounds like a good case for privatization of Soc Security.

Here’s your answer. Every time tax burdens have been dramatically lowered the revenues to the government actually increased. It’s a fact. That combined with less government spending and a balanced budget will pay down the debt, give consumers confidence and crank up the economy. Everyone knows governments are some of the most wasteful spenders on earth. They have plenty of room to trim their budgets. I have no idea how many thousands of wasteful programs they have but there are those who do and only seek to create even more.

I guess on one note I’m a little more radical than most. Any government program that forcibly transfers money from one person to another should be on the budget chopping block.

“Here’s my idea of social justice. You keep what you earn and I’ll keep what I earn. Do you disagree? Then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you and why?

One another note, we are not even close to where we where during the great depression. Unemployment was 25% or more and many would argue the reason it went on so long is precisely because government when on a spending binge. Now they want to do it all over again.

Though the economy is not good right now , the government is running a huge scare tactic all in the name of convincing people the government is their only solution. You may buy it but I don’t. Neither did Reagan. In many ways the government is the solution but not in the way they are proposing that’s for sure.

"When we look at the United States, not only are there the obvious populations within the 50 states, but also the Indian nations, the territories and trusts(Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Island, the Oceanic Islands) and the illegal aliens which comprise 8% of the total population. This level of diversity and ratios is unmatched in scope, cultures, and desire to be visible to any European or Asian nation. In most other nations, there is a dominant ethnic group and a very few others comprising a minority which does not skewer the statistics. The U.S. does not have a majority ethnic group - “Caucasian” is comprised of many ethic groups which happen to share a pigmentation - so the factoring of all genetic, cultural and societal factors of all of the ethnic groups comprising “Americans“ against what is often a mono-ethnic society is statistical gamesmanship."


That is who America is, and always has been, like it or not. And I am joined by the majority that is not going to stand for reducing our great melting pot to a homogenious state.

Our diversity makes us strong. We will no longer have to stand for reducing our country to a place where only wealthy white people get an education, health care, jobs, housing etc. Welcome back hope and opportunity for all Americans!

http://funding-programs.idilogic.aid...ding-programs/

And note that the ad on the top of the page says!! Get your piece of the government feeding trough and you don't even have to pay it back. I could find A LOT of cuts to make in this list. As I've said in other posts, our government wants to be Mom and Dad to all of us, to keep us voting them into office.

We will no longer have to stand for reducing our country to a place where only wealthy white people get an education, health care, jobs, housing etc.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by all that but you do realize we just elected an African American as President right?

Remember Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas and many others? I'm pretty sure they all got a good education and jobs.

Most of the diversity you speak of in the USA are actually doing very well compared to other countries. Illegals should all be deported, that's another huge drain on our economy especially in California.

Originally Posted by cglenhar

"When we look at the United States, not only are there the obvious populations within the 50 states, but also the Indian nations, the territories and trusts(Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Island, the Oceanic Islands) and the illegal aliens which comprise 8% of the total population. This level of diversity and ratios is unmatched in scope, cultures, and desire to be visible to any European or Asian nation. In most other nations, there is a dominant ethnic group and a very few others comprising a minority which does not skewer the statistics. The U.S. does not have a majority ethnic group - “Caucasian” is comprised of many ethic groups which happen to share a pigmentation - so the factoring of all genetic, cultural and societal factors of all of the ethnic groups comprising “Americans“ against what is often a mono-ethnic society is statistical gamesmanship."


That is who America is, and always has been, like it or not. And I am joined by the majority that is not going to stand for reducing our great melting pot to a homogenious state.

Our diversity makes us strong. We will no longer have to stand for reducing our country to a place where only wealthy white people get an education, health care, jobs, housing etc. Welcome back hope and opportunity for all Americans!

What a lot of intellectual crap! I don't believe for one instant that America is benefited by the fracturing of our country into separate, but equal ethnic groups. That is exactly what what is weakening us in modern times.

No longer do emigrants come to this country to be "American". They now come and demand rights and privileges specific to their separate nationalities. Spanish is demanded in our schools, consumer labeling, television access. Head scarves are demanded to be allowed in our courtrooms and interpreters at the governments expense. Free health care and driver licenses for "ILLEGALS" entering our country.

"Homogeneous" does not mean that we are devoid of our cultures, but that we willingly adopt America, it's culture and language, and not come here and demand that we change to make it "Our/America". There is too much (your nationality here)/American and too little I AM AN AMERICAN AND I ACCCEPT ALL THAT MAKES AMERICA WHAT IT IS.

This is NOT a country where only rich white people get an education, health care jobs, housing etc. We are a nation where one can achieve the highest goals that our intellect, abilities and hard work allow. No one holds Americans back but themselves. I am sick of hearing that this culture or that race can't get an even break in America. Many of the people that are successful in our country came here without knowing the language and penniless. Why is it that multi-generational Americans cannot be as successful? We have the "freedom to choose" our destinies and if we don't apply ourselves then only we are to blame.

OK, Gnu, I'm with you in completely eliminating every single one of the government programs listed in your article. That will reduce government spending by $120 billion a year.

Now, where do we cut the other $980 billion a year in order to balance the budget?

Are we getting back to "means testing" Social Security and Medicare benefits and reducing defense spending? Where are the other costs totaling $980 billion that are candidates for cutting?

Originally Posted by dklassen

Any government program that forcibly transfers money from one person to another should be on the budget chopping block...You keep what you earn and I’ll keep what I earn..

Hmmm, that would put a lot of government programs out of business. And as you say, maybe they should be. But do we really want to discontinue the following...

• Any form of aid to foreign countries?
• Free Medicare and Medicaid healthcare for those who can't afford to pay the premiums?
• Any of the funding of education or healthcare programs for low income children?
• Eliminate funding to any of the faith-based social programs created in recent years?
• Medicare Part D Rx coverage for any who can't afford to pay the premium?

For sure this list could go on and on. But before I keep mine and you keep yours, maybe the results require just a little forethought.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Hmmm, that would put a lot of government programs out of business. And as you say, maybe they should be. But do we really want to discontinue the following...

• Any form of aid to foreign countries?
• Free Medicare and Medicaid healthcare for those who can't afford to pay the premiums?
• Any of the funding of education or healthcare programs for low income children?
• Eliminate funding to any of the faith-based social programs created in recent years?
• Medicare Part D Rx coverage for any who can't afford to pay the premium?

For sure this list could go on and on. But before I keep mine and you keep yours, maybe the results require just a little forethought.

I just started reading Ron Paul's book "The Revolution - a Manifesto" Early on he advocates the elimination of all foreign aid. I am enjoying the book tremendously. I can't wait to see how many more things on this list he addresses.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

[B]
To SteveZ:

I can't agree that the only "say" we have is at the time of federal elections. If that were true, there would be a whole lot of pollsters who provide information on public sentiment to elected officials who would be out of work. And while I know I tend to be more pragmatic that enthusiastic, whether the news is good or bad, I'm going to try hard to avoid the cynicsm that you suggest regarding the power of the democratic system. If we had so little control over those we elect to represent us, one might conclude that some other system might be better. I'm not there yet.
--------------------------------------
This has been a pretty good thread. I only hope that the exchange of posts has gotten people to think a little more deeply about the crises we face and the things that can be done to correct them.

If the Congressfolk paid any attention to the public sentiment that pollsters report, there would not be an approval rate of 9 Percent. Again, the fault is ours, not theirs, because we keep them in office in spite of their paying no true attention to us.

A democratic republic is still a fabulous governmental system. I love it. I just think the American voter as a group has lousy long-term memory skills, or we wouldn't fall for the same garbage each campaign season.

All that being said, if we are going to print $1.5Trillion and pass it out like S&H Green Stamps to banks, auto makers and others; why is it that the very first "solution" you propose is that the little guy is to take it in the chin one-more-time via losing Social Security and Medicare benefits?

Can government reduce spending? Sure it can!

1) Eliminate all those pork-barrel independent agencies that nobody even knows exists (see http://www.gpoaccess.gov/plumbook/2008/index.html for a list of them all - and how many had you never heard of?)

2) dismantle the Departments of Education and HUD - neither does anything of merit, and the FHA has been instrumental in the housing debacle;

3) reduce all foreign aid by one-quarter across-the-board, and continue that until it is down to 25% of today's numbers;

4) place a tariff on all goods imported into the US which were made in countries where the labor rate is below what would have been paid to US workers to make the same goods - and the tariff would be 90% of the difference in equivalent labor cost (this would make money!);

5) bring all US troops stationed in NATO and other such staging-area countries back to the US - we don't need to pre-position troops (and their dependents) in Germany and other countries anymore - today's transportation systems make pre-positioning virtually obsolete and many US states could use the positive economic impact that US troops provide;

6) Require that if anyl new legislation needs public funding to be implemented, corresponding existing federal program(s) equating to the same public funds obligation must be terminated , so that the budget (and deficit) doesn't grow.

The above are representative actions which would provide significant changes in the budget/deficit situation. There is no need to screw the little guy with Social Security or Medicare cuts - there's plenty of pork and special interest areas which could easily be trimmed FIRST!