This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Think You Are Better Than Obama? Here Is Your Chance To Balance The Budget
In a way, the administration is correct in that with so many different voices each having their own opinion on how to cut the US deficit, it is next to impossible to reach a consensus. Yet the time bomb is ticking: in 2015 the projected budget deficit will be $418 billion (and likely more). This number will grow to $1.345 trillion by 2030 (both from the CBO, and thus fatally flawed). So here is your chance to give budget balancing a try: the New York Times has launched an entertaining interactive feature that allows readers to attempt to plug the upcoming $1.3 trillion hole on their own, using cuts to domestic programs and foreign aid, the military, health care, social security, existing and new taxes. Incidentally, of all proposals, the one that would have the biggest bang for the buck would be capping Medicare growth starting in 2013, which would almost halve the budget deficit in 2030, leading to a $562 billion recovery in government spending. The bulk of other "material" adjustment comes in the "New Taxes and Tax Reform" category, which is why we are certain that readers should enjoy their current tax bracket for as long as they can. It won't be around too long...
Full interactive budget balancing exercise after the jump:
»
- 8243 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Balance the budget? Easy sneezy. Just go to ZeroHedge, find the gold bugs, hit their garages for all their physical. Boo-yah!
Call the troups back from Iraqistan, we gotta "balance the budget". Yeah.
Mine isn't in the garage. It's under the bed. So there!
This interactive is a total farce.
It is impossible to cut enough spending using the tutorial to balance the budget without enacting tax increases.
This is ludicrous.
The entire federal budget should be cut in half with a chain saw.
No tax increases should be necessary to accomplish balancing the budget.
+7/16" files for you. Keep it sharp and look for big chips to fly.
+100 - this exercise is like asking "when did you stop beating your wife".
When she started behaving
We don't need consensus, we need competent leadership. We have neither.
+1
I balanced the budget. It wasn't hard. I defaulted on the debt, and eliminated the majority of the Federal agencies.
Simple.
Of course, since we won't be following my plan, what we'll get is a disorderly default. That means we'll default on the debt, and eliminate the majority of the Federal agencies.
Where was the checkbox to vote for your plan? Notably absent.
Reduce federal workers' pay 5%???? Try 50%, including pension and medical benefits. Eliminate 10% of the workforce? Try eliminating the EPA, Dept of Education, Department of Energy, Dept. of Labor, Dept. of Commerce,all Czars, all 2000+ subsidies, not just farm, the entire SS Administration with all SS benefits privatized and invested in treasury bonds, elimination of medicaid and related programs. Consolidation of the innumerable intelligence and security agencies. Elimination of all funds being paid to the UN, directly or indirectly. That would be a nice start.
Balancing a budget only out of whack by $500b or so is easy. Try $1.5t!
Still, it was easy to generate a decent surplus by cutting military spending, cutting Federal wages (don't cut workforce), adjusting entitlements, and resetting taxes to the Clinton period.
I would add a sharp rise in gasoline taxes as conservation has to be at the center of any fiscal policy otherwise nothing else will work. The taxes most Americans pay are to Saudi Arabia and Wall Street. Best to tax the latter with a finance- transaction fee and a tax on funds hoarded overseas.
Best also to rein in the outrageous TSA and its institutionalized sex abuse of air travelers. Good grief!
We aren't going to default on the debt. We're going to default on the currency because we can print!
When you say "we" can print currency...who is this "we" you speak of?
"We" the people cannot.
"We" the elected officials cannot.
And "We" are not the FED and the FED is not working for "We The People".
So...who is this "we" you say has this money printing power?
HAHAHAH so true.
It's gonna happen, it's just a question of when.
Exactly! Whats this 'Our trouble is we cant form a consensus'? I thought Obama was a miracle worker with all the answers himself! Now he's just some college encounter group moderator?
Hey I have an idea how we can begin to balance the budget. Get rid of at least half of this stupid govt just for starters, and then quit lying about everything, place a ban on kicking the can down the road, 4 year term limits for all of them, and a REQUIREMENT for a balanced budget to be passed yearly!
Under the current monetary system, a debt based system, it is not possible to balance the budget. This is merely a distraction to create the illusion that everything than can be done is being done when the reality is that the only thing that MUST be done is not even being discussed let alone considered.
As long as the control of the nations money supply is in the hands of private banks and the government must borrow at interest, there is no hope.
We have the best and the brightest tweeking code designed to dig our way out of this hole, but nobody wants to face the consequences though. Better to just let it meltdown at room temperature.
I think you may be confusing the US economy with the Federal budget. I believe there have been Federal budget surpluses in the past, so I would assume that it would be technically possible to do this again (admittedly more difficult with a couple of unwinnable wars thrown in). With regards to the economy as a whole though, I think the US may be fucked....
There were many years of US budget surpluses, especially in the 19th century. Not with an entitlement based welfare state, however.
Did anyone notice that of the military choices offered, none would allow you to actually end the two wars, just reduce the number of troops deployed? And the choices to reduce were at the bottom of the military list.
And they say the MSM isn't biased in favor of the government and it's (war) agenda.
Well, at least it is realistic, as it isn't like wars ever really end. You just never know when Japan and Germany are going to rearm.
Our military hegemony is the lynchpin of our reserve currency status... the reason why no proposal will include material changes to our military is because it is the lifeblood of the money changers and government at large (it's the wellspring from which all the principal actors, leaches, and blackmailers drink). Once this goes, it will not be long before the dollar goes with it.
If that lynchpin breaks, lynch mobs will replace it.
Ultimately lead by the spoils of the wealth gap that were the most cleverly converted from the ether and into hard assets... the henchmen of our neo robber barons. The saddest part is, they'll be our only source of protection from the even more lawless... strange days ahead... to be clamoring for the support of your owner.
As best I could tell the options available were based on various proposal that have already been floated. In other words, this is the best they can do.
Where's the option to cut public sector pay and benefits by 30%?
Where's the option to close the 'double irish' loopholes that let google have an effective tax rate of 2.5%?
Where's the option to REDUCE (yes, I said it) corporate tax rates?*
We could spend hours at this, but I'm pretty sure coming up with ways to reduce the budget isn't the hard bit.
*US corporate tax rates are a joke. The only companies that pay corporate tax are the small to medium sized businesses that can't afford the infrastructure to pull the sort of stunts that GE/Google et al do. So while google pays 2.5% tax, the combined federal and state tax for the small business down the road can exceed 40%. What a joke.
Eliminating the Imperial wars would save over $500Bn a year starting in 2011 but that's off the table of course. The whole thing is a scharade meant to cover up the fact that the American political system is failing and will collapse before to awful much longer. The power to govern is the power to tax and i submitt that the current political authorities are incapable of either raising taxes or cutting spending in any material way. They simply can't do either. So all they can do is have Benny buy their debt while they pretend that they still can govern.
agreed:
also not considered is curbing Medicare costs by controlling health care costs with a real "reform" that cuts into the excess health insurance and pharmaceutical profits.
nor was taxing the TBTF banks on a variety of their unproductive transactions.
Nor was ending the "drug wars" and reducing the prison industry.
Nor was cutting away Homeland Security, NSA, and the CIA
here's the real waste:
The total (often back door) financial handouts/bailouts over the past two years totals many trillion$.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Total_Wall_Street_Bailout_CostThe global militarism costs trillion$ more, deforms the economy, precludes useful investments, and ruins the environment.
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/commentary/wars-sinking-the-economy
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16609i thought the answer was just to print more FRNs?
$418 billion in 2015? That would be a miracle. Call me crazy but I got a feeling that the days of sub trillion deficits are nothing more then a memory of the past.
So many metaphors, so little time to mix them.
Share Your Plan on Twitter or share this link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=v40rg0u1
I am taking the rest of the day off.
You did OK, but remember that JOB CREATORS are people who make more than $100,000/yr - All increases to the income tax have a negative impact on job creation. The government wants you to forget that the *real* rich bastards who are destructive to our nation are the ones who scream for the rich to do their part and pay more in taxes while they sit back with their inhereted "wealth" which is, of course, not taxable.
Here's my take:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=zzbpg018
And hell, that's *without* the easy button known as "Restrict government to its constitutionally denoted role" which would of course cause a major collapse followed by a period of sustainable growth and prosperity not seen since the 1800s. Of course, that assumes government doesn't try to "fix" things, which *always* has the effect of making the government bigger and growth smaller.
Why didn't you eliminate farm subsidies Sharon?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=wmx8q6qj
Hrmm, that looks pretty terrible as it just scales back costs without bothering to address the size of government. My Favorite part is where you say "Yes!" to reducing social security benefits given to them richies, while also saying we should raise the ceiling for how much those rich bastards pay in! But hey, at least you raised taxes alot! I especially like how you make sure to focus on raising taxes for those "rich bastards" who... create jobs....
oh wait
right....
Seriously though, you're posting on ZH and you didn't even select tort reform? Come on now.
Which rich bastards are creating jobs again?
None anymore, the Government took over the responsibility with the 50% overall taxation not including currency depreciation caused inflation.
How's that going you think?
The "rich"...at least the left finally defined it...single or married, wages of 200-250k...can't wait for them to walk this puppy back home.
Given enough rope there is nothing they are incapable of...ROTFLMFAO!
Meanwhile...they are steadily creeping up on what they demonize the most...albeit from a statist direction ;-)
"The number of federal workers earning $150,000 or more a year has soared tenfold in the past five years and doubled since President Obama took office, a USA TODAY analysis finds." http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-11-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htmRight, and wages is the important factor here. If "Fairness" was the issue we'd have the Fairtax http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Tax because it taxes consumption rather than income. Everybody consumes but only "new money" has to bother with Income.
If you earn your money the old fashioned way (inherit it) there is no tax at all (and don't talk about the inheritence tax because these folks start planning their kids estates before their born).
Front page of ZH currently is federal workers making more than 180k up 2,000% in the last 5 years.
If you want talented employees you have to pay them, right? Think of how high that number would be if they included government contractors - blackwater (xe) etc.
Eliminate the department of energy. Established by Jimmy the-peanut-farmer Carter in 1977, it's purpose is to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has been an abject failure as our dependence on foreign oil has increased significanytly since then. With a budget of $12 billion, it's a good start.
yeah, only a hundred or so trllion to go... just balancing the budget doesn't get sinking funds for all that debt established...
Great logic. It's too small so don't do it. That's why there is so much bloat to begin with. How about you get rid of your military's "policeman" status and the DOE. 512 billion saved is better than 500 billion unless you are an accountant for the US govt., the TBTF's, or Enron.
I didn't say to abstain from doing it so much as that, in the end, all of our efforts to rekindle the credit system will not work and, as a result, our ability to repay our obligations, both foreign and domestic, will cease to exist. To quote the tombstone on Rushmore, "all paths of glory lead but to the grave".
To a creditor who will likely not get to transfer the FRNs out of the ether and into real assets, $500b is likely immaterial... any amount of repayment is immaterial... because the only way that repayment will happen is through an artificial and nondemanded increase in the supply of dollars.
This is like engaging in the debate about which political party is better without first making a determination as to whether the entire political process has not been captured and is simply a distraction.
The US and mostly all developed countries' ability to repay their debt is long gone my friend. Unless you meant ability to service your obligations? Despite, debt must keep growing so interests can be repaid.
Agreed. I missed your context.
You do Spock an injustice. Carter's energy programs are responsible for the R standard of home insulation, energy compliant appliances, and a myraid of industrial changes. Had the part of his plan that limited the displacement in all passenger cars with no exception for trucks under 5 tons to 284 cubic inches been followed we aould use roughly 30% less oil than we do today. But of course a politican that does something that makes sense gets kicked out and the pandering asshole that replaced him started us on deficit spending in earnest and the rise of the military. Just as an aside as of 2007 the current department of Energy sent 80% of its budget on the development and maintenance of nuclear weapons which expenses should properly be under the Defense department.
END THE WARS.
End all entitlements and unconstituional wars tomorrow! Problem solved!
not really, there would still be what, maybe ~$13T of nodoubtaboutit debt and another ~$20T in backstops... cutting programs doesn't pay for debt... granted, it's a step in the right direction (and one that will ultimately have to be made), but we cannot bleed ourselves into prosperity... eventually we end up like the black knight on monty python. Somewhere along the way, we need organic growth... (difficult since we're on the back side of the credit bubble).
Better for it all to unwind if that means we get to reset the role of government, and more importantly remove its hand from the pockets of our entrepreneurs. Hell, even with the tax rates as they are (In california no less) I've been holding a new business for going on a year now because who the hell knows what the government is going to do next - Not worth the risk.
It's all moot until the government stops restraining small business, cause we're fucked til then.
It's not that simple. The exact point in time is unknown, but it is completely obvious that the government and principal actors in the fraud against common america are one and the same. You want the government out of the lives of the productive, but fail to admit it is the productive who call the government to help them create barriers to entry and impedements to competition or, worst of all, bailouts.
The issue is... incredibly complicated... and I'm guessing that, in the end, we'll find that the FED/credit issuing authorities are more or less just cancer cells planted to throw off the nonproductive from the productives' coattails. The tell will be what happens on the back side of our credit collapse. Hope you learn to love the whip.
I want Government to go back to its role as defined by the constitution, no more no less. Show me any problem government has attempted to "solve" that is outside that role, and I'll show you a problem created by actions within our very same government.
Frankly, this issue really isn't that complicated, and it's played out over and over again through the last few thousand years. I strongly recommend The Creature from Jekyll Island as it covers that history in-depth.
http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal-Reserve/dp/0912986212/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289866481&sr=8-1
Which constitution are you referring to? The original? As amended? As interpreted? What do we keep? What do we discard?
War drawback and farm subsidy draw-down....
Oh and audit the "Black" budget.
All three skew the fabric, distort it, impeding the efficient exchange of "Capital".
ORI
http://aadivaahanl.wordpress.com
Good luck winning the Iowa caucuses.
The system demands farm subsidies.
I know Dowwnwith. Probably the entire mid-west actually.
But this is clearly a Utopia-ic exercise eh?
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Rush had a good idea the other day. Rather than pick and choose, simply reduce every department by 10%. Settle on the percentage of cuts across the board rather than how much from separate departments.
Not to mention that decimation is great for morale!
Thats the political way out. Rather than cut the real waste projects and fund the few useful projects, just kill them all, but only a little? Politcal solutions are not solutions.
Try 30% or even 40% plus tax increases. And that assumes interest rates on the continuously rolled (as well as new issue) debit stay in the basement for the next 30 years.
You're being too generous CD... as parts of the government are cut back, the negative multiplier is going to be severe... the feedback loop substantial. Changes in the government will cause even greater decreases in our ability to repay our debts...
It's Monday. I'm allowed self delusions on Monday. It's in my contract.
http://www.nightattheopera.net/contract.html
It's the governments debt, not the peoples used for the benefit of the government to further its expansion, power and reach at the expense of the people.
In situations like that, all it takes is the removal of the government to facilitate the removal of the debt.
Of course, default is always an option. Or war with China, which would negate the debt to them at least (And of course the Federal Reserve will be less of a concern when surrounded by torch wielding city-dwellers just a little upset about the 2,000,000% year-over-year inflation that QE2 (and subsequent generations of QE) has so lovingly delivered us to.
With friends like these...
I guess I missed the clause in each treasury that says "if the people get fed up and elect a new administration and congress, then this bond is null and void."
We remove the debt through repudiation... and, in our case, that will also spark a power struggle not easily settled. I sincerely hope that there is a government to newly elect upon repudiation... but I have my doubts.
Don't worry too hard on it, that's Ben's plan! Destroy the USD then pay off all treasuries with the USD! It's foolproof!
Actually, he's just batting cleanup. The FED is simply a temporary vehicle of pillage and plunder. There is no intention to pay back the debt... never was... by the time we finally wise up enough to figure out we're fucked, well... we're already fucked... ultimately though, it's deflation that they're after... the argument for inflation is simply one of induction... history and traditional patterns are generally good at predicting behavior... up until the pattern changes and you don't get the memo ahead of time.
Austerity is the new game in town... and people are diving into it like it wasn't the plan all along...
Well, we almost agree. My proposal is pretty simple: Out of Iraq and Afghanistan, cut defense by 30%, eliminate the Dept of education, reduce all federal payrolls by 20% and headcount by 15% (suck it up, dudes), gradually kill SS and Medicare (get the insurance companies out of the health care system); cut taxes to 8% under $500,000; 10% for 500K to $2 million, 12% after that. Hell, with me in charge we'd be running a surplus every year and probably pay off the debt by 2050.
OK, that clinches it, I'm running for President.
Here's what I did on the NY Times. It wasn't perfect, but it was pretty easy.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=7mxthl51
It wasn't too hard since controlling the questions always controls the answers. Since the NYT tells us these are the options, that line of questioning is over. I love how the Bush tax cuts were near the end. Hell, if you were aggressive enough with SS and Medicare as well as other things near the top, you were done before you ever got to the Bush cuts.
Mission accomplished!
This "entertaining interactive feature" reads more like an advertisement for several "progressive" reforms that further regulate and distort the economy. A lot of the options are not spending *cuts*, but further regulations that are supposed to refine existing systems (e.g. healthcare) according to "estimated savings". You know how much value to place on CBO estimates of savings: exactly none.
Actually, these estimates can serve some value - if you multiply any cost estimate by 10, or any savings estimate by 1/10, you will get either the minimum cost or the maximum savings to be expected.
Exactly... The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the new Health care bill will reduce budget deficits by $132 billion over 10 years. Problem solved! ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibV8WJtNYJY
QE2 Movie
hunting me some squid...
Balance the budget? Ron Paul!
Funny... I've been over the 'action list' several times and can't seem to find the 'Million Man March on Wall Street' to take our money back option!
What I sent to them:
You people are economically inept. The US is bankrupt. The ONLY way out is to re-value the dollar and wipe the 128 trillion of debt away. The debt double, income from revenue doesn't.
WTF did you people learn math or economics?
This exercise/article is so pathetic it isn't even amusing.
wait 'till you ponder what with specificity the government will do and indeed "you will find this absolutely hilarious." Call it "the duality of government work if you wish." Pathetic? You talking "economics" vis a vis government is pathetic.
Well, come on now, it is from the New York Times, after all, the official organ of the People's Republic of the What Me Worry Party, who are the very same people absolutely and rightly terrified that they're going to be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR races by the new Fascists controlling the House of Representatives.
The Voice of the People has Spoken; take your picks from my jury rigged choices.
Absolutely elegant example of the Propagandization of information and preordained conclusion masked as free, unlimited choice.
This was easy, and I barely touched Social Security or Medicare.
The Rule of 51: if we already have 50 of an agency from the states, we don't need a 51st in the Feds. So goodbye dept of education, highway dept, agriculture dept, etc.
Nice one!
What about the military?
Each state has a National Guard. And last I looked, they were already doing a lot of the grunt fighting anyway.
Absolutely! Central planning redundancy is neither efficient nor effective... just bloats the federal payroll. The states have been and always will be capable of handling much of this. Federal payroll needs to be cut immediately.
1 in 5 private sector employees are out of a job, time to "pay" back the public sector in kind. 1 in 5 across the board, military too if you insist. Public sector unemployment, welcome to the party... you're 2 years late!
BEN, you forgot to renew your NFLX membership!
that's because "bringing the boyz home" aint done "on the cheap" either. When you "step into the sandbox" there's no such thing as an "exit strategy." Medals of Honor on the other hand...
In the meantime the focus on "The Trade" vis a vis "the belly of the curve" is spot on. The fact that "you can't short it" doesn't mean the price can only move in one direction. Needless to say "reduce liquidity by raising margin requirements at your own peril." Having only now finished "the Big Short"--plugging this thesis directly into "government" yields some REAL hair-raisers.
Bullshit leading excerise. A bunch of "either or" questions is not the way to handle this.
Reduce foreign troop levels and all you got is Iraq and Afgahnistan? Are you f'ing kidding? Reduce ALL foreign troop levels, close down 95% of our overseas bases and bring them home, open up new bases and keep the income that we are streaming out of our nation here to help local economies.
Increase Air Force Space based research so that we will be in a position to move away from our naval obligations. More money into one area now will equal massive amounts of money saved in other areas down the line.
Medicare program doesn't need to be capped, it needs to be almost completely redesigned if not scrapped entirely. Same goes for Social Security.
Health Care, no option to remove the multi-trillion dollar budget hole that is ObamaCare? Yeah, shit doesn't work the best for everyone right now, but that plan is just going to make it worse for everyone and better for no one on top of costing many multiples more than anyone could dream.
We need the military to steal resources and labor-power from places who wouldn't otherwise let us have them.
Uncle Sam is a lackey for global capital: always was, always will be.
Where is the option to 'steal' everyone's 401k plus force them to buy 'Save America Patriot Bonds' via a forced confiscation of 2% of their pre-tax earnings? It is also missing cutting the hundreds of billions of dollars given to Israel and other countries as bribes.
Yes, that resolves the public debt interest (now what % of our deficit?) paid to private entities. But - you then STILL have to clean up the deficit by cutting the oligarch's corporate welfare from government purchasing. If not, you debase the greenback. If so, you're better off than with Fed Res notes.
Then, we're done.
The stock market takes a hit because these large government dependent corporations (Pharma) are overweighted, then the small caps RISE and KEEP RISING.....
United States Notes vs Federal Reserve Notes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tr5BbH6X8s
There you go, fixed.
whoops, meant to post the above right here.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-grap...
that was easy, next. lol
Neocon-NY Times presentation of the question is expectedly misleading, pro-war, and pro-oligarchy.
Want to balance the budget?
Since most of the government $$, overpaying and waste goes to corporations, reducing the deficit by instituting price sensitivity (free market capitalism) between government and corporations will crash the stock market.
That's their gun to our heads. The entire market is rigged by relationships. K-Street rules.
What if you gave people 1.5% tax credit for every Dollar they sent to the Government toward the National Debt. So send the Government $100,000. to reduce the Debt you get $150,000. back in tax credits over a 10 year period.
What is your motivation for even paying it off? And make no mistake, there is no possibility of paying it off so best to make plans accordingly.
EDIT: your math is wrong. 1.5% of 100K is 15,000 over 10 years (no compound). Do you work for the government??? Tyler, did this recruit stay on the porch for 3 days?
You are right my math was not very good. My example explained my thoughts.
So, if you gave people a 50% additional tax credit over 10 years that would work out to about 5% a year in a tax credit. More than you can make in to days market. Many would consider it because it could lower their tax bracket in addition to the 5% on their Money over 10 years.
We're way past the point of actually paying the debt.
Blah blah blah. Yes the thing is flawed. It sets up false choices. But the NYT did something foolish: if you select all the budget cuts, you get to a balanced budget number. Raising taxes never gets you there. So if you want to get their sooner, cut even more than what's "reasonable".
They say every American owes about $65,000. in National Debt. What if you could pay down your share of the National Debt and as you did it would reduce the % of Income Tax you would owe. Kind of like a Credit Card as you pay the balance down you have lower payments and lower interest charges.
We need to think of ways that the American would want to pay off the Naitonal Debt but they have to have an incentive to do it.
The whole system is Built on debt, you CANT pay it off, if you did the system would self implode
Why pay interest on this debt owned to private creditors after we just bailed-out the same creditors to the tune of 15T risk?
That's why we're doing QE2. It's the gov's turn to get some.
That was easy I balanced the budget without increasing taxes and largely only by rolling back recent missmanagement lol
1. abolish the US federal reserve bank
2. return the power to create currency to the US congress as is laid out in the US constitution.
3. this will immediately eliminate the "interest due at inception" for our currency saving about $600 billion annually.
4. problem solved
of course... now our currency is in the hands of the US congress... and i really don't trust that bunch of knuckleheads either...
I trust the knuckleheads more. If we go down, I want it to be with our own hands, not the hands of int'l capital.
Plus....perhaps with the real responsibility comes the dialog and great leaders again. Our former great leaders understood, wrote about and were often obsessed with banking, money, and currency. Today, our leaders are nitwits easily fooled by the likes of Summers, Rubin, and Greenspan. Look at Clinton. Smart guy. When he grew up, the great conversations of the 1700's and 1800's weren't happening. That was delegated to dark rooms full of bankers. As a result, he heard one-side.
Let's start the conversation and take the risk. Can it be that much worse than THIS?
Spread the pain evenly. Fixed percentage cut for ALL departments!
Steve Bridges, a guy who impersonates Obama, has some thoughts. Pretty funny.
http://www.stevebridges.com/obamavideos-promo-jan2010-lg.html
Step 1: End both wars. Withdraw as quickly as can be done safely.
Step 2: Dismantle military empire. Close all foreign military bases. Return carrier groups to port. Double the deployment of nuclear subs to maintain nuclear deterrent. Develop hypersonic nuke delivery system, allowing the Air Force budget to be mostly eliminated.
Step 3: Begin pruning of government agencies. Start with the Start with A and end with Z.
Step 4: Implement phase out of all entitlement programs over the next thirty years. Those currently dependent on SS, etc, will receive benefits as scheduled, and those preparing to retire will have to work another year. Retirement ages will be bumped up until they hit, say, 120, before the entitlement is completely eliminated.
Step 5: Eliminate the IRS. Remove the income tax completely. Federal government spending is now around 2% of GDP, which can be funded with a 5% corporate income tax based entirely off of net income. No loopholes, no writeoffs. Corporations that don't like it can change into companies within five years of implementation.
Step 6: Continue strangulation of government funds by not allowing new corporations to be formed, and punishing ANY unethical behavior by de-incorporation.
Step 7: The Federal (or state) government declares a new role as a monopoly on initiation of aggressive force (including theft and fraud). Those tasked with enforcement of this monopoly are only allowed to use force for that sole reason. Other roles traditionally delegated to the government are taken over by panels of private citizens as per Rothbard (http://mises.org/daily/2511).
The formerly free United States made it to Step five and stayed there for some 100 years, with some slips, and saw a previously unimagined level of prosperity because of it. Take it to Step 7, and you will see that prosperity amplified by an unknown factor. Given the rapid progress seen in the US versus Europe, I would say that factor is probably exponential.
Federal government spending is now around 2% of GDP
Sorry, dude, you're off by a magnitude of 10, which would put that corporate tax at 50%. Ouchie!
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=3521&type=0
No. After the steps above the point where I said that were taken, spending would be 2% of GDP.
I did not say that spending is 2% of GDP right now in 2010.
Federal government spending is now around 2% of GDP
Sorry, dude, you're off by a magnitude of 10, which would put that corporate tax at 50%. Ouchie!
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=3521&type=0
OK, tmosley, you wrote the most detailed and credible steps, so allow me to comment:
Step 1: Check.
Step 2: I would keep a part (small) of the overseas bases. Agree re bringing much of the carrier fleet home. I like your ideas re the subs and new hypersonic missile delivery systems.
Step 3: Check.
Step 4: I would be more aggressive cutting the entitlements, even cutting a little NOW. Yes, re raising retirement age.
Step 5: YES re eliminating the IRS and income tax, we do not need .gov spying on our private financial affairs. I'm OK with lower corporate taxes, but I would look at a National Sales Tax, say 5% - 10%. A Sales Tax would also make it easier and clearer to Americans how much they are being taxed.
Step 6: I do not understand what you are proposing here.
Step 7: OK, especially if that goes along with shrinking government in general, shrinking the number of roles it plays.
...
Too bad it won't happen. This will just get harder and harder as they keep kicking the can down the road. Your "Seven Step Program" just makes too much sense, but because of our cowards running .gov, we will have to crash before the system changes.
Because we are ruled by such corrupt cowards, the best answer for me is to keep getting Au, Ag, Pt, and be diversified as possible.
EDIT: having read some more comments below, I add:
Step 8: End the Drug War
Diversification will have to include Pb as well.
I would just print money.
Let the chips fall where they may.
trav, that's what will probably happen. Chips will fall!
Prepare...
Baraka Flacka Flames, rap star, impersonates Obama in this music video. Very edgy - but definitely worth worth a watch. I may have posted this before. And I like this video - not making a statement here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ-hPNrKdZI
Fucking DEFAULT....and start all over again.....
It's a trick question to take your mind away from the real issue, which is acceptance of the economy of Tyranny, vs a move forward to the economic model of Freedom. It's impossible to tackle the job they're assigning anyone foolish enough to try because it assumes that everything is going to be status quo. And how stupid is that?
First you've got to level the field and get rid of the parasites who are and have been dragging America down. Only then can you see what you've got to work with and only then can you start jettisoning those components of government that don't work.
This means getting rid of the Federal Reserve Bank and replacing it with a 2/5ths US Govt owned Suffolk Banking System (which can be overlaid upon our current Central Bank, buildings and all). It will be diverse and decisions publicly decided. It will operate in conjunction with a Gold Standard that will replace the fractal reserve system we now suffer under.
Obviously, the 2B2F's will go BK and quite a few of them to jail. The remants will be administered by an RTC type liquidation along the lines of Dodd/Frank. We'll get rid of most new derivatives, CDO's, CDS's, HFTing and Naked Short Sales.
Needless to say, when you level the field your going to get rid of a lot of drift wood in the aforementioned process. Only then you can take a look at what you've got to do.
Simple problem to solve , Military guards borders , step out of the Mid east, Europe and every where else ,Eliminate current tax system ( including SS and Medicad) and set up a flat tax at 10% then set up triage priortys for government starting with Military ,Criminal justice, emergency services and every on else has to survive on the remains .
Well that was easy. What's the problem again?
I would have saved America even more money but I ran out of boxes to check.
You're welcome Barry.
Yes, yes I'll see that you get an 'A' for this per usual. I know the drill.
I would slowly reduce the payments to people on Welfare. If the People on Welfare went to work instead of living on the Government, it would be good for the Country.
I would eliminate Section 8 Housing and open the closed Military Bases where they were given a room, with everything else in community rooms, like the TV, etc. There would be no food stamps as all meals would be served in a Cafeteria three times a day. They would have to work to stay in the complex, or prepare food, clean, or take care of others children while they worked.
If the Welfare people were made less comfortable they would more than likely go back to work. If they went to work they would pay taxes into the system instead of taking out money from the system.
I also would limit the amount of children that they could receive benifits for. I would reduce it to 2 children.
(deleted)
I hope you are being sarcastic.
Otherwise your desire to establish a dictatorship is less attractive than you portray.
The drug war, the deteriorating schools, poor health, those are the primary causes of welfare unemployment.
Your argument assumes employers wish to hire unhealthy, poorly educated individuals, often with a (drug) criminal record, and that the jobs even exist.
The Dictatorship is forcing working people to pay for those who chose not to work and live on the Government Handouts.
In my opinion it is reverse Slavery. Now you go to work to pay the prior workers to sit on their buttox all day and produce children that you also pay for. What do you get in return? Higher taxes.
(deleted)
(deleted)
posts duplicated when ZH website went down
Sure it wasn't caused by a rabbit trying to mate with a clock?
+1 We can no longer afford multi-generational welfare. We have to start somewhere.
I also think for Welfare Benefits to be received for the children the Mothers would have to identify the identity of the Father. If not they do not receive benefits.
With the Father identified then the State can go after the Father for the costs of benefits provided by the Government.
Well, it's still easily possible mathematically, as presented, but the feedback loops caused by lower government expenditures will reduce the take from some of the tax initiatives and also reduce the downstream taxes collected from reduced entitlements, so you probably need to aim for a pretty sizable surplus to actually achieve a balanced budfget. Of course, Americans would have to come way, way down in their material and security expectations. Of course, the same problem is clearly visible in Europe with rallying throngs opposed to any reductions.
I don't get it, did the New York Times really intend to show me that picking just their minor spending cuts and leaving taxes alone would balance the budget? Cause that's the result I got...
The Times is really down on BO. Carved him a new one over the complete meltdown at the summit. Even the all poof-fairy editorial board can't stand him. They must have some sort of bitch fetish for Hillary. Remember the whole Bett Midler thingy?
NYTimes article was garbage of course. Real simple here kids.
-Close the Department of Education, Department of Commerce, Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Transportation
-Close the EPA, Amtrak, Fannie and Freddie, GM, AIG, the SBA, the SEC, the Peace Corps, National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities, PBS, NPR, etc
-Eliminate Social Security and Medicare
Done
Stop paying for anything except the global militarism and payments to the TBTF banks.
Oh wait, you also left Homeland Security, the DEA, and the prisons system.
Your vision of a better world seems to be even worse than the actual one we have.
Hooray for genocide.
Hooray for eugenics.
(1) Institute a new scheme for Soc Sec and Medicare such that, over 50 years or so, both are 100% phased out. The scheme would allow those of retirement age, who contributed fully over the 40 or 50 years of their working lives, to draw full benefits. Those who worked part time and paid in less would enjoy benefits scaled back from the top. Those who have worked fewer years, same thing. A good insurance actuary could fix this in about two weeks. Key is to keep faith and trust with those who paid in their entire lives, but to phase it out so NO ONE who is entering the work force today comes to rely on the benefits. Someone with 15 or 20 years of paying in would expect, under the new scheme, to enjoy reduced benefits at the age of 67 or whatever.
(2) IF existential national security purposes require forces to remain in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I suspect they do, then so be it. But the U.S. will bill the other nations that benefit from our presence there. Japan, Europe, even China--they can all pay their fair shares. Otherwise, just end the damned wars quickly, assume full control of all oil in the Middle East, and start charging the pricks who would not pony up.
(3) Eliminate HHS, DOEducation, NEA, NEH, and so forth. If an agency does not exist to defend the nation or promote its commerce, it is GONE! Scale back Commerce, State, Transportation, etc--really scale them back by about 50% each. Boost DoD so we can protect this nation's borders.
(4) Change Congressional benefits--Congressmen and staffs, present and past, live with what all other fed employees live with. The ridiculous lifetime pension for a few years of bilking the taxpayer--GONE! Medical benefits--same as everyone else.
(5) Eliminate Federal Income tax as it currently exists--maybe institute a 2% or 3% flat tax on individuals and corporations. Eliminate permanently the death tax. Eliminate all Federal taxes on individual capital gains, dividends, and other investment income.
(6) The debt--that is the stinking elephant in the room. All we can do there is keep faith and trust with those who have invested in the United States. Pay it off over time. Continue to reduce the federal government, which will be a boon for the private sector.
This would have to be adjusted, I am sure, but the key is to reduce the federal government to bare minimum, restore power to states, and put the fiscal house in order. Boost private enterprise and private property by getting government out of the way. Promote liberty. Stop tyranny.
I like your #2 "assume full control of all oil in the Middle East, and start charging the pricks who would not pony up". WOW. No shit.
Your fucking imperial mentality gave us Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc., Remember, China was nobody just 5 years ago. In another 5-10 years, with our catastrophic economy, the USA will not afford any military to go around. By then, China and others will just kick America ass so hard that it will be happy to suck Chinese dick saying thank you "yellow master".
Granted, I do not think we will get that far but some fascist society is inevitable. Then, America will have a second renaissance with our own balanced budget, Gulags and Auschwitz "reeducation centers".
Welfare states are dying. It is just a matter of time.
GO ON STRIKE.... from paying private interest and stops working until the creditors can prove sustainability of this private-credit/money system.
Ayn Rand with a big f-ing twist. Capital and credit is no longer a productive force for this nation (it proved it's a negative force, the facts are IN). BUT, this nation is STILL the most productive force for capital via the U.S. military and the managers of the capital system.
Capital, creditors and banks need the U.S. military more than we need them.
That's a fact which can't be denied. The U.S. can print. Capital can't secure the oil lines and shipping lanes.
It's time this country LEVERAGE and MONETIZE its true value vis-a-vis private capital.
deleted
Better than Obama?
If I had a dog as useless as Obama, I would shoot it.
If you had a dog as useless as Obama, it would shoot you (along with a few hundred thousand others).
You see, Obama has a very high negative value.
I stand corrected, and as Mark Twain pointed out, if heaven were based on merit, your dog would go in, and you would remain outside.
ISOLATIONISM is the answer.....bring all the troops home and put on the borders
Anyone who really wants a balanced budget should support a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. Otherwise the most you can expect is a bill with some temporary spending cuts and (probably permanent) tax increases to reduce the deficit somewhat. And in two or three years when public anger dies down, the politicans will go back to their old ways and the deficit will be larger than ever.
The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced budget act of 1985 was supposed to balance the budget. We can see how well that worked.
Any politican who talks about balancing the budget and who doesn't support a balanced budget amendment is just blowing hot air.
Cut federal salaries 5%? Hell's Ker Toot!
I lived in DC for many moons. Allow me to explain.
If you cut federal salaries 5%, they will squeal like stuck pigs.
If you cut federal salaries by 50%, they will squeal like stuck pigs.
See the difference? Me neither. Federal desk sitters are insanely overpaid. They will never leave for a real job. More's the pity, but this is no time for tokenism. Bring the meat axe.
Expell 7 of the 57 states for a 12% budget reduction.
Brilliant. The DC Public Schools and the CBO will be proud of you. I smell a Nobel Prize, or is it just one of those days in New York?
As if balancing the budget is the question to ask. Stupid NYT
The financial parasites (monetarists) just want to know how much more they can steal from you. That's all.
Balancing the gov't budget through public austerity is insane. Especially when the fed is hyperinflating everything to save the bad bets.
The amount going forward in printing will dwarf whatever they can cut.
We're not just robbing peter to pay paul, we're robbing both to pay off the banksters bad loans. The money trickles down from Fed to TBTF, that's it. Whatever leaks out goes straight to commodities and pm's.
Cutting gov't ain't going to do shit except make things worse. Fire the incompetents in gov't, now that is something entirely different.
Like the fascists. Rand Paul, Barack Obama, pitcher-catcher battery in the new fascist British Corporate States of America.
Impeach Obama
Glass/Steagall
NAWAPA
Nuclear/Fusion
American Credit System (would NYT like to revisit the moot point of its 'ask the readers' question under such a system?)
Fixed Exchange rates
This WILL DO what the NYT merely retardly *THINKS* will occur somehow by the magic nut sack waving around AFTER we implement and directly because of a....balance budget.
People that want a balanced budget over everything (or most) else have unbalanced minds.
If these people think this is the cause of our problems, they are FUCKING NUTS.
Amen - surprisingly, Wall Street's house organ didn't include a derivatives tax as an option.
Nor did they suggest lifting the criminal cap on social security tax for social parasites who don't pay.
Do those two things and BOOM!
All solvent again.
You have got to be kidding me. They are projecting a deficit in 2015 that is comparable to the deficit in 2006???? I can see the deficit going down a little bit from the ~$1.5 T wracked up the last two years, but a reduction to 1/3 current deficit rates? These people live in fantasy land. I will be surprised if we ever see budget deficits in the billions again.