This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

A Modest Proposal: Cut 15% Of The Federal Government Workforce, Save $1.4 Trillion In Ten Years

Tyler Durden's picture


While Washington is baffling everyone with male cow manure, presenting 7-slide powerpoints full of talking points and empty of actual actionable cost-cutting proposals, while draping the melodrama in ever more evanescent haute couture of "emperor's clothing" du jour, the one true solution to all our problems is so simple that it is perfectly logical that it would have been avoided like the plague by D.C. In a nutshell: do to the government, what the privates sector has done to itself in the past 3 years, and fire 15% of the federal government workforce. After all everyone, even the government, complains about the bloat in the system. Here is the chance to fix it. And the benefits, unlike the back-end loaded and extremely loose "bipartisan plan", which happens to invoke such pseudo-totalitarian constructs as the "Super Congress", can be quantified immediately, with the applicable savings made abundantly clear to all from day one. In this case - slimming the US government ever so modestly, by just 15%, would generate savings of $117.4 billion a year, of $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years. And no, these are not reductions in future spendings: these are real actionable cuts from the day they are enacted, with fungible cash able to be used for any other, much more needed purposes, up to and including economically stimulative projects, which actually generate jobs for the private sector.

John Poehling explains in more detail:

It appears from the Congressional Research Service ( that the Federal Govt has 2.9 million employees with an average all in wage & benefit package that averages $146,100. 


This includes $140.4 billion in retirees costs allocated to the 2.9 mm active workers (adds about $49,500 to the all in cost per employee).


If we cut the size of the federal govt workforce by 15% (as most companies did) & reduced the all in cost per employee by 15% we could save $117.4 billion per year (a reduction from $423.2 bn to $305.7 bn).


Over the next 10 years, this would save $1.4 trillion (assuming an annual COLA of 3%).

Obviously, since this is a sensible, logical proposal, it will never succeed, as it entails actual, real sacrifices from the government sector. And that is impossible -  after all they don't call it a Kabuki for nothing. DC doing something to cut costs, even if it does not impair the private sector, instead of promising to do so in the future, would make a mockery out of all those who made a mockery of the past several weeks on the Hill. Which is impossible.

Last but not least, we should never forget that Congress gets its primary modus operandi from the immortal advice of the Simpsons' Troy McClure: "And now that you know how it's done... don't do it" (except when Fluffy Bunny happens to be America's middle class of course).


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:33 | 1515602 oogs66
oogs66's picture

can you make sure all of obama's czar's make it to the fired list?

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:40 | 1515625 rcintc
rcintc's picture

Sounds good!

Let's get started!

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:57 | 1515656 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Or they could all just take a 15% pay cut and everyone keep their job.  But hey, where's the fun in that?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:09 | 1515699 dlmaniac
dlmaniac's picture

If 1.4 T saving over 10 years is barely enough to fill 1 year budget hole you know the outcome of this mess could only be sth in the Modern Day Rome Empire Collapse territory.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:41 | 1515757 CrashisOptimistic
CrashisOptimistic's picture

Worse still, the calculation is incompetent.

You don't get all those savings because the people dismissed pay income tax on that money.  The net is lower than the quoted number for savings.

They also pay into the retirement system.  And Social Security.

Yes, cutting them saves money, but the calculation is incompetent.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:21 | 1515820 Clay Hill
Clay Hill's picture

My first thought was the UE benefits x 99 weeks.

Then again, some departments should be cut by 85%, leaving only 15% still employed by Uncle Scam.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:25 | 1515956 Popo
Popo's picture

$146k average salary?   What's the average salary for a non-government worker in the USA?

$146k average for government employees is more than *double* what private-sector workers make on average.   (Hell, it might even be triple!)  How about fire them *all* and hire them back at wages commensurate with private sector wages.   That'll save you trillions....  and it would be the right thing to do.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:36 | 1516445 snowball777
snowball777's picture

How many short-order cooks are employed by the government? Take the millions upon millions of unskilled workers in the private sector out of that average and try again.

Apple, kiwis, kumquats...

Makes a great talking point for the utterly innumerate to froth over though.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 10:13 | 1516558 brandy night rocks
brandy night rocks's picture

Oh, stop acting like the ubelievable qualifications of the gov't workforce means their salaries should just naturally be high.  Anyone who has ever worked in government knows that it is stuffed to the fucking gills with secretaries.

Those who aren't are generally fatasses who sit around doing nothing.  And despite your derision, just about every single short order cook individually outproduces entire federal bureaus in terms of adding actual value to the economy.  The fact that lower-skill workers completely shame "highly-skilled" federal workers when it comes to production actually supports the argument that fed chair warmers are exorbitantly overpaid.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:20 | 1515961 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

I read this entire thread, left, and then felt compelled to return and point out something that everyone seems to be overlooking, which is that this is not only about numbers. Namely, there seems to be this underlying acceptance that if it was just that simple (viz., that if all we had to do to right this country was just fire 15% of the Federal Government employees, or keep 'em all but lower their pay and benefits by 15%), well, there's the answer and we should just do so.

Problem solved.

Well, I disagree. I disagree because it is just plain wrong and immoral that the public employees (whether they number one or ten million) should continue to get away with using the police power of the state to take by threat of force money from hardworking people to stuff into their already engorged wallets, especially when their contracts were all acquired through bribery and fraud.

I mean, that's everyone's answer? Instead of having 10000000 pampered, grossly overpaid and underworked, perfumed and powdered rulers/masters/aristocrats/supreme overlords and ladies sucking this nation dry, we should have only 8500000? I mean, the United States, as presently constituted, is starting to make 18th century France look positively egalitarian by comparison.

Jorge Santayana was right: Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. (Actually, if he were writing today, he would probably write: Those who never learned history are doomed to repeat it.) Or have we all forgotten these lines from the Declaration of Independence:

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

I'll bet dollars to donuts that the officials referred to in the above were not nearly so well paid or plentiful as our present 'public servants'.

Some wag (I forget who) recently suggested that we all eat as many hamburgers and drink as many beers as humanly possible this last Fourth of July because ... "next year we may not be celebrating our independence, but instead fighting for it again." Or words to that effect.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:23 | 1515991 Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

Actually +1000.  They could get rid of 75% of them and there would still be too many pampered, grossly overpaid and underworked, perfumed and powdered rulers/masters/aristocrats/supreme overlords and ladies.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:45 | 1516004 Popo
Popo's picture

Well said.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 05:42 | 1516027 Clay Hill
Clay Hill's picture

Bravo, Mr.Mouse.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 07:12 | 1516076 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"I disagree because it is just plain wrong and immoral that the public employees (whether they number one or ten million) should continue to get away with using the police power of the state to take by threat of force money from hardworking people to stuff into their already engorged wallets, especially when their contracts were all acquired through bribery and fraud."

Plus a million.

When we granted them the power of legal lethal force it came with the expectation that that power would be used in a moral & ethical manner.

Key words..."we granted them" and an expectation of them not using it to enslave any portion of the population. They have done just that with it.

They have bastardized the "commerce clause" of fair trade between individual states beyond recognition and now have "legal highwaymen" roaming the countryside in search of honest tradesmen, merchants and commuters.

There is no end to their meddling.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 08:12 | 1516162 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Thats one way to look at it.

I say keep every single one of them. let them keep thier salaries, but under my plan there are only 3 types of federal employees.

1. Enforcers of the federal criminal code. These are the folks who catch kidnappers and prosecute + adjudicate crooked state and local governments.

2. Tax collectors. But here is the trick. you throw out the tax code. flat income, 1% national retail sales tax. you send IRS agents into collect money from shadow economy and you would see a gradual end to some of the major inequities in this country caused by corruption, drugs abuse and greed.

3. The military. Border enforcement.

Thats it. no other job roles or career paths in the federal government. The politicians can use ZH blog threads for legislative research instead of "aides" or czars or paid staffers.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:37 | 1516449 I did it by Occident
I did it by Occident's picture

Also, they forgot about the federal support contractors.  That's a much bigger piece of the pie.  there is like 4 contractors for every fed employee, but they don't show up in the "Public sector worker" numbers as they are counted as "private sector".  Yeah right, but they still are getting paid by Uncle Sugar.  And then there are the supplier contracts which is for buying things such as billion dollar airplanes. 

Anyways, cutting the federal workforce (11% of the budget) by 15% is a Red Herring, about a 1.6% real cut which is not nearly enough.  The real money is in the contract spending which I believe is 1/3 of the budget, the other gorillas being Social Security and Medicare. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:07 | 1515691 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

I've been proposing this for 3 years now.

Many have been proposing it longer.

I've actually said that I think that it's at least possible that the cuts can be extended to the 20% range, across the board, and when this forces the government to adopt productivity boosting measures similar to what the private sector has employed, that 20% may look conservative (i.e. 25% to 30% across the board cuts will seem very plausible).

I went even further, saying the I doubt that 95%+ of Americans would notice no significant difference in any aspect of their life resulting from such cuts.

The government is bloated beyond recognition. It's a basket case and a drain on the private sector.

If car makers can produce entire vehicles at 12 to 14 total units (1 unit = 1 hour) of human labor, when that rate was 55 units back in the 70s, and if major multinationals can produce 30% to 100% more goods and services with literally 50% fewer workers, isn't it time that we expected at least some progress along these lines from the federal government?

If the 30% reduction came into fruition, that would produce 3 trillion dollars in real savings over the next decade, and far more from there, with even more efficiency/productivity gains over time.

Federal Workers Making Over $180,000 Increase By 2,000% In Past Five Years


Federal Government Workers Make Twice That of Private-Sector Counterparts


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:25 | 1515728 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

They will tell you that government workers all have PhD's and masters degrees. I will tell you that they are fucking liars. I've worked in the government and private sector. I will tell you that the private sector will get rid of the deadwood every few years. The government absolutely cannot or will not fire anyone after 5 years of employment unless they commit some sort of felony. Fifty percent of government workers are dumber than doorknobs and they make $100K just because they've been there for decades. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:34 | 1515840 redpill
redpill's picture

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:19 | 1515984 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

In fact, federal public employees now make twice the salaries of their private sector counterparts—annual earnings that top $123,000. The median US household income, by comparison, is $52,000 annually.

Patriots need to make a lot of money. Being a patriot is a costly thing! You have to buy a flag to hang on your doorstep... you know, expenses.

And than there's inflation, even patriots are confronted by that so a little more on their paycheck helps them get by.


It worked for Greece for over a decade, so why not for the US...


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:02 | 1515791 Paul Bogdanich
Paul Bogdanich's picture

More BS.  Why not treat government agancies like a business and increase productivity?  Herinafter the SEC budget will be not less than the dollar amount they collect in fines and settlements.  Oh no not that!  Same for the EPA same for the FDA.  If you did that Government would become productive by ENFORCING THE DAMN LAW which is just what the ruling classes do not want nor can they tolerate so they sell all you plebian idiots (useful idiots I believe they called you in the periodic literature) this line of horse poo that government can do nothing.  Just sickening how inculcated with propaganda everyone is.   

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:53 | 1515862 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Ever hear of speedtraps? The federal government can fine you a dozen times a day because there are over 300,000 pages of federal laws and regulations.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:42 | 1515895 Michael
Michael's picture

This is sector warfare. Private sector vs public sector.

The public sector will never suffer the pain of layoffs as the private sector does. And why should they?

I just thank God the complete and total economic collapse trajectory has not been altered.

I need to have the amount, of catastrophic economic destruction in it's final phase, maximized for my own entertainment thrills down the road. Got It?

I sure hope the Bernank starts QE3 soon.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:07 | 1515687 fuu
fuu's picture

Could we start by getting rid of all the paid shills in the comments section?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:19 | 1515718 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

How do I get paid for posting here?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:22 | 1515723 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Please send $9.99 in a self addressed stamped envelope and I will gladly show you how. Don't forget to invite your friends and loved ones to join you in this limited time special offer.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:38 | 1516454 snowball777
snowball777's picture

You already are, Koch-sucker.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:43 | 1515944 Popo
Popo's picture

The AVERAGE federal government salary is $146,000 ?!?????       HELLO?!???         WTF?  No wonder we're in such deep shit.


Give me one reason that the average government salary should be higher than the average private sector salary.   $146k average is absurd.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 05:02 | 1516009 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Average cop in Vallejo ... $120,000 (plus) as of about six years ago. And, they only have to work until age 50. And, they get to game their retirement (like 80% of $120,000 isn't enough to live on).

Average lifeguard in Newport Beach ... $150,000 (plus) as of about six months ago. And, they only have to work until age 50. And, they get to game their retirement (like 80% of $120,000 isn't enough to live on).

You would be astounded, literally flabbergasted, to know what that nice lady working at the counter at the city who takes your money makes. (And her boss? Fugedaboudit.)

There is a list online of Illinois public employees and their remuneration. Believe it or not, there is a high school teacher in Illinois making almost $650,000 a year:

Name: Bouman, Timothy
Salary: $632,000
Position: High School Teacher
Full/Part Time: Fulltime
Percent Time Employed: 100%
Assignment: English (Grades 9-12 Only)
Years Teaching: 12
Degree: Master’s
School Name: Noble Street Charter High School
District Name: City of Chicago SD 299

And let's not forget about:

Name: Ancelet, Barbara
Salary: $609,300
Position: Psychologist
Full/Part Time: Fulltime
Percent Time Employed: 100%
Assignment: Psychologist
Years Teaching: 20
Degree: Master's
School Name: Spec Educ Assoc of Adams County
District Name: Spec Educ Assoc of Adams County

Name: Ballough, Tiffany
Salary: $379,600
Position: Speech/Language Pathologist
Full/Part Time: Fulltime
Percent Time Employed: 100%
Assignment: Speech and Language Impaired
Years Teaching: 1
Degree: Master's
School Name: Spec Educ Assoc of Adams County
District Name: Spec Educ Assoc of Adams County

If you care, you can go see for yourself … name, school, etc. And there are just thousands of others just like them. THOUSANDS. Maybe millions. In every state, county, city, and who knows what Redevelopment Agency throughout the country. Not to mention the Feds. Not to mention pensions and medical benefits. Three months off each year. Etc. Etc.

A lot of this information is public record, and can even be found online. For example, the online sister of the San Francisco Chronicle published such a list for California a few years ago. Of state employees making over $100,000 a year. (Well, about half of them, anyway.) It was thirteen hundred freakin' pages long with name after name after name on each page. Not including pensions, medical, housing allowances, car allowance, cellphones, private chefs, and personal watercraft.

This is freakin’ crazy, and if you don't think that that adds up ... with 20 or 30 million such?

Look, folks. This isn’t politics. Or economics. It’s math.

One last thing, too. The averages for 'private sector' include such as nurses and the like. If you think a nurse is 'private sector', well, then you must think that Blackwater employees and UAW workers are 'private sector', too.

Actual private sector pay is a mere fraction of what we are told. $50k? Huh. I'll bet it's more like $30 or 35k.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:38 | 1515611 Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Chop At The Top
Can 30% of the idiot management and all of the B(L)S...

I plan to fire Obama Bin Lyin' by placing my voting foot right square in Barry Soetoro's ass...

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:20 | 1515816 Drag Racer
Drag Racer's picture

they can do without the TSA, FDA, USDA, SSS, SSI, PBS, OTS, OSHA, NRC, FSIS, HUD, FHA, DOC, BLM, CBO, etc.


how about all of it and we have a do over....

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:38 | 1515612 LRC Fan
LRC Fan's picture

So...let's get this straight.  We would "save" 1.4 trillion over 10 years but we currently spend about 1.5 trillion more than we bring in every year.  So this gives us one year's worth of savings, and then the rest all gets piled on top of the 14.5 or whatever trillion in debt we already have...sounds about right.  As long as rates stay where they are we might be able to "grow" our way out of this sometime near 2050 when the Singularity finally arrives. 


Can anyone coherently argue that we should have any government, let alone one that is even 85% as big as this one??

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:43 | 1515630 Cdad
Cdad's picture

Can anyone coherently argue that we should have any government,

I could...were it not for the fact that this would be a very bad time to make that argument...and because I am currently blowing Coca Cola out of my nose after your comment about the Singularity finally arriving...ya bastage...lolololol.

Lol lol lol lol...

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:40 | 1515847 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

  Cdad I'll probably lose out of sheer wisdom... I will debate with you any day or night... I respect you.   Yen.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:02 | 1515669 traderjoe
traderjoe's picture

+1 - just let the f*cker collapse already.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:38 | 1515614 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

Why stop at 15%? Why not lay off all the non-essential government employees?  That would mean about 15% would be left.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:43 | 1515615 oldmanagain
oldmanagain's picture

Cut the military.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:49 | 1515642 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Get rid of most of the EPA, all of the Dept of Education, Homeland Security and a dozen other useless departments. Then end the wars and cut the Pentagon budget by 10% per year until it's back down to prewar levels.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:58 | 1515662 cynicalskeptic
cynicalskeptic's picture

cut the military to pre WORLD WAR II levels.........   our Founding Fathers abhorred a standing military and would be horrified at this nation's 'foreign entanglements'

Ike was right about the power of the military industrial complex - permanent military contractors - and would be horrified at the growth of the CIA, NSA and countless other 'Intelligence Agencies' that have done more to undermine democracy in the world than promote it.  

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:03 | 1515672 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

I agree but it has to be done gradually so all these weapons and engineers don't end up in the wrong hands. The military needs to be very small, especially the army. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:03 | 1515871 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Military is already half the size it was in the 90s.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:07 | 1515875 Debtless
Debtless's picture

Are you talking number of troops or spending? Seems hard to believe - any support for your claim?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 08:01 | 1516145 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Bring the troops home, set them up along the border to interdict drug smuggling, thus decreasing competition to legal domestic pot growers who will prosper any pay more taxes and fees, etc.  Dude...


Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:39 | 1515616 caerus
caerus's picture

"super congress" is faster than a Chinese bullet train

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:19 | 1515720 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Perhaps it will crash like a hastily built chinese bullet train too?


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:29 | 1515735 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

I want you to be right. I want your Indian mysticism to be proven true. I want to believe.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:00 | 1515782 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

:-) Welcome to the party Spastica R, I do too! By the way, have you ever heard anyone from the Bob Dobbs gang speak?

Mindblowing stuff. 


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 07:47 | 1516126 Miss Expectations
Miss Expectations's picture

In closed door session, they call it  the Super Con, enjoy their catered lunch and laugh at our expense. 

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:39 | 1515621 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

Sweet, great idea, we'll just add 434,000 people to the unemployed. Way to think it through.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:44 | 1515631 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

They don't work now...they just get paid. Cut the fat. Put the fuckers on the street.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:57 | 1515654 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

I bet your one of those overpaid (making more than a Chinese wage) people making an honest living. Maybe one of those unemployed gov'ment workers can take your job then we can talk about unemployed people as "fuckers". Before you get all high and mighty about government workers (I have several freinds/fam in the military and in other areas), remember that those "fuckers" are people too, and it's not their fault that they chose well paying jobs that serve your country.

I agree the wages are way too high in the public sector and the fat should be trimmed, but I hardly see using pure economics how reducing money velocity churners by 500,000 is really gonna help float all boats.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:04 | 1515678 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

What exactly is an "honest" living in your opinion? 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:40 | 1515758 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

I was being ironic, honest work is anything that adds value to society. My point is that people use "government" as this faceless entity that can be slayed and there are no repercussions. Not all people that work for the government are the lazy stereotype. Some work hard to make stuff work right for the rest of us. Build your roads, man your air traffic towers, clean your sewers, kill terrorists, etc.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 07:16 | 1516081 Medea
Medea's picture

Kill terrorists. Now that's funny.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:02 | 1515668 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Doesn't anyone around here see roads and bridges falling apart? Doesn't anyone care that airtraffic control systems, powergrids and subways are all running on their last legs?

Work needs to be done, there is plenty of excess labour around to do it, sort it out and make some jobs, WPA style!

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515696 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Remember Obama talked about "shovel ready" projects?  That really got rid of a lot of money real fast.  The projects are still there.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:25 | 1515729 sasebo
sasebo's picture

Yeah, lets let the guvmunt run the whole show.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:37 | 1515751 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Better idea than letting the banksters, health insurance companies, big oil and the Koch Brothers run guvmunt.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:13 | 1515882 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Seems above you are complaining about the things government already runs.

Do you really want them to screw up even more?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:26 | 1515892 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Trade a small aud short... I'm always looking out for friends...   Yen

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 05:09 | 1516017 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

What does that even mean? Do you not want roads, bridges, power grids, subways, air traffic control systems sorted out? Upgraded, renewed?

Neither the private sector nor laissez faire government can do it.

Gubmunt has to get serious about rebuilding the US, road by road, bridge by bridge.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 05:13 | 1516019 steveo
steveo's picture

only within means, and at levels that make sense.


In some sense, we have to get by with less

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 06:45 | 1516064 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Who's "we"?

I don't see any oil majors, big banks or billionaires in America "getting by with less". Just every one else in the bottom 99%.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 07:20 | 1516088 Medea
Medea's picture

Yup. Nail on the head. Much of this comments section is dealing in muddled logic and faulty assumptions.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:48 | 1515639 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Let them eat peas.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:49 | 1515641 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Actually no. With the money routed to IRR >0 projects (after all that's what a government does, right, per the Current Account formula: they allocate capital? otherwise what's the point of government...), the jobs generated in the private sector would more than offset the lost jobs in the public one. So no, you would not add gross numbers unemployed: you would add x unemployed to government rolls and remove >x from private (you know, the place where profit margins matter) unemployed rolls.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:06 | 1515682 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Is that Fed money saved from payroll cuts which will get routed to private sector IRR>0 projects?

Because if it is, there's no actual Federal savings.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:07 | 1515689 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

Yeah, but you have to have capital first to apply to whichever project has greater IRR, if you eliminate those jobs (and the money that goes with it) then capital shrinks and is not applied to the private sector.

I think the x, >x formula works under "normal" circumstances, but with no aggregate demand in the market I think x just gets added. Government employees in this case are just another form of money helicopters. Right?

I agree that the gov'ment is wayyy too big but I think cutting government capital (prop, plant, and equipment) is a better route than personnel.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:28 | 1515828 Aductor
Aductor's picture

Assuming a perfectly elastic system, which I doubt it is. Over time maybe, but then you would not have immediate net savings anyway.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:55 | 1515917 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Respect is earned  TYLER...  You have mine...   Don't go POMO on me,`.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 07:23 | 1516096 Medea
Medea's picture

Whichever Tyler this is, it's one of the weak ones. Has the Tyler vetting process been a victim of cost cutting?

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:58 | 1515659 Rick Blaine
Rick Blaine's picture

I see your point.

However, SOMETHIING needs to be cut.  I don't know if this is the best solution...but the problem is that NOTHING EVER gets REALLY cut the way things are going now...because our politicians have no balls whatsoever.

I realize that cutting spending is going to hurt the economy in the short term.  In fact, most people probably underestimate just how much the $1.5T of current deficit spending (artificially) boosts the economy.

However, the simple truth is that we can't afford what we are doing now.

So, let's raise taxes to help reduce the deficit...

OK, fine - I'm willing to give it a shot actually.

However, every extra dollar brought in in taxes will come out of the economy I'm sure how much it can help...

The bottom line is that AT SOME POINT, we will live within our means, regardless of the nonsense currently going on in D.C.

We have two choices: first, we REALLY cut spending now, take the shot of whiskey, bite the stick, and take the pain...or second, we keep kicking the can down the road...and eventually right off the approaching that landing is going to hurt a whole lot more.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:23 | 1515724 MacGruber
MacGruber's picture

Totally with you, the government HAS to be cut.

Here is where I would start:

- Across the board cut in wages, depending on the grade between 20 - 30%. Give employees a 6 month lead time so they can make living adjustments.

- Cancel all the "next generation" battlefield bullshit. We don't need autonomous gear carrying robots for instance.

-Mothball at least one carrier group

-Close bases and general reduce our world footprint in embassies and what not

-Allow Medicare to use collective bargaining to lower the cost of treatments, but especially pharmaceuticals where Medicare isn't allowed to do any negotiation (by law)

This is just a start but I think this is what you have to do, pick through all the programs and eliminate waste line by line.

Of course on the practical side this will never happen because all politicians are owned by the oligarcy. Everyone has a pet base, a pet defense contractor, a pet bridge project, etc. No one wants to leave the bacon in Washington. I think a real revolution will be the only way to really clean house, we are past the event horizon.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:43 | 1515763 Bolweevil
Bolweevil's picture

You should run for office.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:44 | 1515909 Rick Blaine
Rick Blaine's picture

Sounds good to least as a "start."

In fact, I THINK most people here would agree with what you suggested in that last least in general.

I think the earlier "tension" in the thread was a result of some people (including myself) interpreting your first comment as something like "No, we can't cut government jobs!  How else will those people make a living?!?"

...but your suggestions above sound pretty damn reasonable to me.

IF government employees are willing to take a 20-30% pay cut, obviously, that would reduce any "necessity" to "lay them off" or whatever.  The only thing I would add to that is to also cut benefits (e.g, pensions) in a similar manner.

Military?  Don't get me started.  The U.S. literally spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined.  God bless our troops, but the simple fact of the matter is we can't afford to play policeman for the entire world.

Medicare? Over my head, but I'm pretty damn sure Obamacare only made/is making things worse.

Politicians being owned, pet projects, etc., etc.?  I'm all but positive that 99.9% of the people who read ZH agree with you on that one.

Revolution, past event horizon, etc.?  I'm not sure whether or not it will be a "revolution" per se, but as I've said before, "we" WILL NOT fix our problems (e.g., overspending) until we really, really, really HAVE to.

That is, we will continue to live beyond our means UNTIL the market forces us to do otherwise.

Things will get much uglier before they get better in anything remotely resembling a sustainable manner.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:54 | 1515916 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture

...we'll need the MIC for the big one coming soon to an empire near you.

Fri, 08/05/2011 - 00:34 | 1519418 ElTerco
ElTerco's picture

"Across the board cut in wages, depending on the grade between 20 - 30%. Give employees a 6 month lead time so they can make living adjustments."

It's even easier than this.  Freeze government worker wages, pensions, and benefits until their median compensation matches the median compensation of the non-government workers in comparative positions with similar responsibilities.  It's so easy, a child could do it.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:39 | 1515622 sgorem
sgorem's picture


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:00 | 1515665 cynicalskeptic
cynicalskeptic's picture

A hell of a lot of those I met on a recent cruise ship trip were FEDERAL retirees.....   while this was a 'once in a lifetime' trip for us, it was a regular annual vacation for them - and they were in the really GOOD staterooms not our cheap small size one.


Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:44 | 1515626 PulauHantu29
PulauHantu29's picture

They are too busy suing States:


So how much does this cost us? Why not let Alabama decide what's best for Alabama?


Might as well take a look at this New Medication they are passing out:

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:47 | 1515637 chump666
chump666's picture

feels doomy.  S&P will drop the big one, finally downgrade the AAA.  Europe is doomed, US is a fiscal write off.  After Tuedays rally it's puts on

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:51 | 1515648 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Why not cut the budget back to the pre-Bush era? Can anyone honestly say that the government was too small under Clinton? I'd even be willing to repeal the Bush tax cuts if 0bamacare was repealed. End the damn wars already

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:46 | 1516478 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Why stop there? Set the wayback machine to the 70s, Mr. Peabody.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:52 | 1515650 cynicalskeptic
cynicalskeptic's picture

You could save even more by ending the US Empire before it ends the US (and it IS doing just that... Republic to Empire to collapse - like Rome in fast-forward).  

Bring all our troops home and stop intervening in the rest of the world.  Stop paying billions to mercenaries and propping up dictators.  Iraq alone cost us a few trillion... and all those fresh new $100 bils loaded on pallets that went WHERE?  Nevermind the war profiteering....   and then there's new aircraft, carriers, subs, missles, nevermind a 10fold incresse in the 'Intelligence gathering apparatus' 

All to fight a few hundred disgruntled arabs who could NEVER bring this nation down.  Oops... we did it to ourselves.....   All BinLaden hoped for came true.  We got suckered into being full time targets in Afghanistan (AND Bush enraged the whole Islamic world by going into Iraq).  Deregulation and financial excesses - propping up Wall Street - bankrupted us.

9/11 was a Godsend for the military-industrial complex.... FINALLY... an enemy we can justify spending all this money on.... Seroiusly, after the russians who was left?  China?  bwahaaaaa.... we owe them a fortune and they produce everything we use... can't go to war with them... they'd foreclose on us.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:05 | 1515680 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Dont forget the three new kinetic military actions on Libya, Yemen, and Pakistan. Those have cost tens of billions already and we're killing thousands of innocent people, making America safer LOL. End all the damn wars and make everyone on welfare do community service. End all foreign aid. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:52 | 1515915 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture

Hey, on the bright side, we obliterated one of Israel's enemies. Isn't that worth bankrupting our country?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 06:44 | 1516063 schizo321437
schizo321437's picture

"and all those fresh new $100 bils loaded on pallets that went WHERE?"


Ben Bernanke would be so proud...

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:57 | 1515657 Gromit
Gromit's picture

Cut government pensions 15% across the board and we're beginning to make a difference.

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:58 | 1515660 XitSam
XitSam's picture

They (government employees) will complain that there aren't enough of them to handle the workload, so cut 15% of the government regulations too. (Not that I would be opposed to a larger reduction.)

Mon, 08/01/2011 - 23:57 | 1515661 Fantasy Planet
Fantasy Planet's picture

Don't touch the precious!  

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:03 | 1515670 Bansters-in-my-...
Bansters-in-my- feces's picture

Pssst.... I bet ya's forgot already that the Banks ripped yous off for trillions....

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:07 | 1515684 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

Clawback their bonuses and throw a few hundred of them in jail too. Then cut 15% of the federal workforce.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:06 | 1515671 Manthong
Manthong's picture

That is way too sensible a corrective action for this government enact and we couldn't possibly allow the federal bureaucracy as well as the D.C. environment and economy to align with the rest of the nation.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:04 | 1515676 cynicalskeptic
cynicalskeptic's picture

Remember the Repub's 'Contract With America' - where Congress and government employees would be treated like the rest of us taxpayers.... same level of benefits, health care, retirement, etc?      BWAHAAAAAA...........

We'd have saved a few trillion if THAT had been implemented (not tht Newt ever would have done so.... Repubs are big on promises, bad on follow-through, especially if it hurts them financially)

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515695 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

The problem with government spending is that it only goes one direction. If there was an ETF for US government spending, I'd be richer than Warren Buffett

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:06 | 1515681 Derpin USA
Derpin USA's picture

OK. Raise the capital gains tax on investments back to 25% and cut it for small busineses.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515692 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Corporates will never allow anything which allows small and medium businesses to get ahead at their expense. So, its fair, but what are the chances.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:07 | 1515688 MobBarley
MobBarley's picture

This will happen a few more times before the final solution











to liquidate old people and other non producers in society, the 'burden' class.


By that time you will have been emotionally blunted and beaten with a tire iron

into thinking it might be ok after all.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515690 MobBarley
MobBarley's picture

This will happen a few more times before the final solution











to liquidate old people and other non producers in society, the 'burden' class.


By that time you will have been emotionally blunted and beaten with a tire iron

into thinking it might be ok after all.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:49 | 1515914 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture

...always said one day there'd be a bounty on us boomers.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515693 user2011
user2011's picture

Cutting government work force ?  Sure, no problem.   When that happens, then all of a sudden, there will be a bunch of "contractors" showing up.  And their salary and compensation will not be counted into the typical government spending.      It is the same as how they deploy troops in the middle east.   Yes,  pentagon is cutting troops but then adding more "contractors".    The casualties of the "contractors" never counted into the military causalties.  And any bad stuff those contractors do do not count as war crimes.       Of course, those contractors won't be cheap either.   Don't we all know how the government runs now ?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:08 | 1515694 dogismyth
dogismyth's picture

what's the big deal?  This is their final looting of the treasury!!  They'll be done after this 2+ trillion.  And once they distribute these digital dollars and the recipients convert them to hard assets...its a done deal!!  Then they can cave in the dollar, and Amerika can finally fall flat on its face.  But no need to worry, ZH probably has a trust fund set up to keep the site going during hard times so we can continue to complain to people we will never know or see.  Does it really matter?  Does anyone really give a shit enough to make a difference?  These blogs have become a black hole of blathering crybabies that represent the attitudel there is nothing to do but cry.  Your actions speak louder than your words.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:11 | 1515704 sun tzu
sun tzu's picture

What are you going to do now, toughguy?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:19 | 1515719 kito
kito's picture

And yet dog, here you are......

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:34 | 1515746 Tejano
Tejano's picture

Don't cry. Prepare.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:47 | 1515913 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:09 | 1515701 gwar5
gwar5's picture


Anything to cut anything is a good start. I'm in.

Just freezing spending at current levels, no cuts, would be scored by the CBO as $9.5 Trillion in savings over ten years because it would eliminate the automatic spending increases. It would cut by attrition.

Getting rid of redundancies and overlap would eliminate another $250-400 billion/yr in real savings, according to Sen Imhofe. (Who could forget Pelosi saving $175 billion/yr, by decree, just by saying she'd eliminate waste fraud and abuse?)

Getting rid of Federal government land, and it's upkeep would save $35 billion/yr with up front revenues through sales.

If we can't even pick the low hanging fruit we can't do anything.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:12 | 1515705 aint no fortuna...
aint no fortunate son's picture

Let's start with DHS and DoJ

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:15 | 1515713 gwar5
gwar5's picture



If Castro can cut 500,000 government workers in a country of 11 million, I'm sure we can cut 15% of our workforce. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:16 | 1515714 kito
kito's picture

Why not have world peace and good will to all of humanity??? Or 3 course meal gum that tastes like tomato soup, roast beef and blueberry pie?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:45 | 1515912 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture

Finally, a sound and workable suggestion.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:49 | 1516492 snowball777
snowball777's picture

You're turning violet, Violet.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:18 | 1515715 user2011
user2011's picture

I would like to add some more comments. 

1)  We should add additional employment tax to companies that makes good profit but not hiring.  For the least, they should be hiring interns from colleges.

2)  We should add a new tax for companies that refuse to hire qualified unemployed applicants.   Tax the shit out of those companies and government should never buy anything from them.

3)  New Tax for anyone who refuse to pay mortgages just because their house value depreciated.

4)  New Tax for companies that outsources the work for printing social securities and unemployment checks handling. specifically the JP Morgan

5)  Audit all the university and colleges that raise fees and cut services.  Turn all colleges and university into non-profit organization.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:20 | 1515721 djcando
djcando's picture

A much easier way to get things back under control is for all taxpayers to simply refuse to pay any future taxes until there is a balanced budget.  In essence, this is a way for taxpayers to take control over the inept, uncommitted politicians.  If you don't pay taxes, it doesn't matter if you withhold or not. No tax payments - no vote on this one.

This could go viral on the internet but it needs an organizer.  How about you and Ron Paul, Tyler?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:42 | 1515747 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

No.  The defecit is how much?  The government is still growing regardless.  Taxes don't fund this government.  Their primary purpose is to enslave the middle class and keep them from rising to challenge the elite. Besides, many people don't pay them even now.

One day this government will find that no one believes it's paper promises anymore.  That's the only thing that will kill it.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:14 | 1515807 djcando
djcando's picture

Actually, taxes do fund the government and the middle class (what's left of it) are mostly taxpayers and would be heard by politicians and others by taking such action.  As for the belief in paper promises of the government, you don't have to wait.  This current fiasco has been doomed to failure before the Senate vote even happens.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:22 | 1515722 Doofer
Doofer's picture

How about a hiring freeze for the next 10 years or so...

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:24 | 1515726 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Yeah right...  That's like asking a cancerous tumor to shrink.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:24 | 1515727 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

they will do just that. you is coming.  they have to. states also.........

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:37 | 1515732 island
island's picture

First lets dump $13 Trillion + into the banksters' gambling black hole, then let's demand austerity on Main Street.

.......begin quote.......

The U.S. Government has spent $13 trillion in financial bailouts since Lehman Bros. failed in September 2008. But Mr. Obama warns that thirty years from now, the Social Security fund may run a $1 trillion deficit. It is to ward it off that he urges dismantling the plans for such payments now.

It seems that the $13 trillion used up all the money the government really has. The banks and Wall Street firms have taken the money and run. There is not enough to pay for Social Security, Medicare or other social spending that the Blue Dog Democrats and Republicans now plan to cut.

Not right away. The plan will be to “paper over” the current crisis by delegating the plans to a “Deficit Reduction Commission #2,” appointed from Congressional members.

Finally, we have “Change we can believe in.”

Real change is always surprising, after all.

........end quote.......

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:29 | 1515734 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Why can't the Govt just build a couple of perpetual motion zero point hopium factories? At least then their would be a Unicorn in every yard and rainbows and lollipops for all of the kiddies.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:29 | 1515737 Caggge
Caggge's picture

Spend more....get more Czars, programs, and entitlements. All the cuts will just prolong it. Put the pedal to the floor and see how fast we can get there. Put the monster out of its misery.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:35 | 1515749 reader2010
reader2010's picture

Great idea. Let em work for Foxconn to churn out ipads  instead. 

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 09:51 | 1516499 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Or they can avoid the waste of oil and just liberate your iToy while you're away.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:38 | 1515753 march52011
march52011's picture

It really pisses me off that the states are doing cuts like this all over the country.

But cutting federal government workers is off limits?

What kind of shit is that?

State workers are getting furloughed, laid-off and treated like scum JUST BECAUSE states don't have a printing press.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 05:15 | 1515930 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Not true. States are not laying off anyone. Now and again, someone retires (for example, lifeguards making six figure salaries/retirements at age 50), and they don't immediately hire a replacement. At the current rate (`25k a year), it will take, literally, one hundred years - a CENTURY - to rid ourselves of 10% of these parasites.

And, oh? Furloughs? Boo fucking hoo. They still make twice as much as the rest of us, but now work even less.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:42 | 1515762 Zapinho
Zapinho's picture

Well, 1.4T of salary savings impact the economy in "just" 1T maybe 0.7T less consumption + 0.3T delinquent debt & decrease in taxes 0.3T

That would represent like 1% decrease in GDP per year...

Whatever is done will have an impact in future GDP growth...there is not such a thing as a free lunch, right ?

Only Productivity, Competitive Advantages, Natural Resources and Intellectual Capacity or Innovations can pay the debt....

Americans must start working again....soon....

Best Regards

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 00:58 | 1515778 Bolweevil
Bolweevil's picture

"'According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,' Rumsfeld admitted. $2.3 trillion — that's $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America."
CBS '02

There's a start.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:01 | 1515786 Hal n back
Hal n back's picture

5 step process:


first determine which departments/agencies provide no real value and eliminate (ie-BLS--data is falsified anyway so who needs it?)


second of the remaining departments --you need to "rightsize"  that entails getting rid of loafers (like congress)


Third: Implement performance appraisal that really works-and each year drop the bottom 10% of performers, and only replace with 80% of the number riffed. This way we don't early retire the good performers and keep the weak performers. We also get a better and smaller workforce,


Eliminate the Fed, oops, end the Fed--lord knows how much this willl save even though its not part of government


Reduce and freeze pay of Congress and White house and office of President-When they show real surpluses restore salary and then when debt is below a certain point and declining restore increases.


Outsource to a different country admin and clerical functions of Congress and White house. (thi si sjust for fun, they should not be paid much anyway-it is a priveledge to serve this country)

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:01 | 1515788 Hal n back
Hal n back's picture

5 step process:


first determine which departments/agencies provide no real value and eliminate (ie-BLS--data is falsified anyway so who needs it?)


second of the remaining departments --you need to "rightsize"  that entails getting rid of loafers (like congress)


Third: Implement performance appraisal that really works-and each year drop the bottom 10% of performers, and only replace with 80% of the number riffed. This way we don't early retire the good performers and keep the weak performers. We also get a better and smaller workforce,


Eliminate the Fed, oops, end the Fed--lord knows how much this willl save even though its not part of government


Reduce and freeze pay of Congress and White house and office of President-When they show real surpluses restore salary and then when debt is below a certain point and declining restore increases.


Outsource to a different country admin and clerical functions of Congress and White house. (thi si sjust for fun, they should not be paid much anyway-it is a priveledge to serve this country)

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:17 | 1515812 Eireann go Brach
Eireann go Brach's picture

They should fire all of Obama's little Helpers that wipe his arse with $100 notes as well as all his Teleprompter writers, that's at least 1000 people there!

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:24 | 1515822 jmc8888
jmc8888's picture

Well the answer isn't blind cuts.  You need to cut waste.  You have to target what's real, not an imaginary general number, set arbitrarily, from looking at a sheet.  As if cutting 10 percent would cut exactly 10 percent of the workforce making 14X,000 dollars. 

Plus you shouldn't have a percentage to meet, otherwise you may destroy something worth being there just to get to an arbitrary number.  Only idiots want to cut something because it sounds good in a bloodlust way to meet an ARBITRARY number. 

If people mean cut ACTUAL waste.  Starting with bogus defense (cold war era) projects, homeland security, the wars...or should we call them engagements..since technically there are NO wars going on right now, the money printing  in the forms of QE, etc. 

You can't settle for inferior plans, that won't achieve anything in the long run, meanwhile the federal reserve is still hyperinflating everything, and wall street banksters are just stealing everything else.

There's also some stuff that's either/or.  There are some things that shouldn't be cut, just cleaned house.  Perhaps it should be larger, Perhaps smaller. But whatever is necessary to do the job.  FCC, SEC, EPA, DOJ, so on and so forth.  All of these have (and more) a real reason for being there.  Are any of them doing it? Hell no.  Some are waxing Lloyd's balls, others are watching Inconveniant Truth on repeat, others are wathcing midget porn, so on and so forth.  Instead of making sure we don't have toxic chemicals in our drinking supply, locking up banksters, going after criminals, pulling media licenses, antitrust, etc, etc. 

But why stop there? Let's Glass-Steagall the fraudulent debt, then you aren't just tackling one side, you're tackling both sides of the ledger. You know the one that has the impetus for all the cuts.  Meaning if there wasn't a problem on ONE side, what's the motivation for the other? Really 99 percent of the problem is on the fraudulent debt side, so cancel it.  Then since there is waste on the other, root it out. 

Why anyone should lose their jobs to pay off fraudulent debt is absolutely insane.  But hey, if we're willing to put the banksters out of business, and stop the outflow of capital from businesses known as Wall Street status quo, that's got to be worth something as well. 

After all Glass-Steagall would destroy more debt immediately, in the span of seconds, legitimately, and only a few banksters are put out of business.  That's the biggest bang for the buck. 

This proposal is just kid's stuff when compared to Glass-Steagall. 

There's plenty of room to cut, but we don't need to put a shotgun in the hand of a blind man and yell pull!

Someone needs to think...if the national debt, backstops, and guarantees were cut by in half roughly for simplistic sake, what would need to be cut on the other side? Answer, nothing because of debt, just waste.

We should start focusing on what we need to do.  We need to cut waste because it's wasteful...not because dogma says so.  We need to build stuff because it's beneficial...not because Krugman says so. 

We need to stop paying off fraud, just because it's been put on the books.

Then with some of the savings...or from straight federal credit emission, initiate a program for mag-lev, bridges, waterways, fusion, dams and levees, machine tools, etc.  Oh yes, cancel the debt and stop the waste, and you can do all of those things (which actually have a benefit) and you are nowhere near the same situation.

But again, we don't need to borrow from banks, congress can coin money without banksters taking a cut just fine. 

No way can you get across the board cuts on everything, it has to be would be stupid to hang in there for 'cut everything across the board' approach, when there are many good targets to begin with.  Seriously, the wars and homeland security would be a huge chunk, probably ~700 percent what this fire gov't workers proposal saves over 10 years.  That's not even getting into the cold era programs we don't need.  You can do this stuff, and you aren't gutting the military.  You just cut it back down to what it needs to be.

So much fraud outside dogma that is ACTUALLY wasteful, there is no need to make it 'sound good' and 'easy'.   The answer isn't to to start behaving as callously and idiotic as the banksters themselves.  But none of it matters as long as the banksters can compensate and offset any savings made by cuts without a change in the structure.  We MUST change the structure.  No flash in the pan idea easily marketed will work.

There is easily a plan to right the ship, people just need to not focus on the easy way out.  Now's not the time to think like a mental midget, lopping stuff off because of impatience and mental sloth.  This sounds good, this 'seems fair' to Forrest Gump.

Get the waste out, not across the board.  We need to do what's right.  Not other shit because we can't force an end to wars, end to bailouts, end to QE, end to all the other bullshit. 

Or otherwise again, they'll just use those savings and ramp up their diversion of monies to their pockets at a faster rate. 

You have to go after what's actually destroying us, not fuck around on the edges in hopes it fills the hole.  It won't. If we can't stop the fraud, why cut? They'll just commit more fraud.


Glass-Steagall, actually cut waste, and embark on productive projects.  It really is that simple.

Cut the fraud, Cut the ACTUAL waste (not the dogmatic bullshit called waste due to ideology), and enact productive projects that actually create wealth and allow private business to piggyback off of to create jobs and wealth

The answer IS simple, it's just not a one liner. 

It all starts with Glass-Steagall, otherwise NO idea will keep the banksters from stealing the gains you make.  NONE. So we'll be cutting for nothing.  They'll just steal it.

Going off this one size fits all sophistry sounds good to mental midgets, but it will never pass the overall test.  Go after what is REALLY the cause.  We don't need to jerkoff in a time like this, and this is merely jerking off. 

As soon as this plan was done if enacted (what the author wants) the banksters would just feel emboldened to steal what was saved.  Any savings through cuts are cash registers going off in the fraudsters head.  Attack them through Glass-Steagall.  Put THEM out of business.  Take away the keys to their cars, and THEN we can cut the waste and actually have an effect.

What good is it to announce savings of 1+ trillion when QE3 for a relatively similar amount is surely going to offset it? It's idiotic.  Glass-Steagall

The only way to stop the bankster greed, is to keep them from doing it  Glass-Steagall does that in so many ways.  Everything else is futile.  We'd cut all those people, QE3 would be enacted and wow, we'd be in the same place because one person is rowing forwards while the other is rowing backwards.  Great plan. 

You need to CUT the things that ARE CAUSING you to CUT.  The FRAUDULENT DEBT. 

Optimal is a very hard goal to achieve.  This plan wouldn't even be 1 pecent of optimal.  It's peanuts.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:32 | 1515936 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

   That was " Breath taking"   Ponzi financed and all!!!   Ya effin Lizard!


     MINUS ~ you couch schounderal....

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:32 | 1515942 Vic Vinegar
Vic Vinegar's picture

I just woke up from a brief nap...I forsee a day on Zero Hedge where you, Yen Cross, runs this town.  

You have a lot of wisdom.  Thanks for kicking it here.

Sorry to those of you who hate this song.  Life's a bitch I suppose.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 03:58 | 1515960 Vic Vinegar
Vic Vinegar's picture

One more for the road and one more because I respect you, Yen.

We live in a world where things are tenuous, to say the least.  Some people have chosen to write articles entitled: Comfortably Numb – Coping, Captured or Total Capitulation - Part 1 of 2 because that helps them get through the night.

No disrespect to Cog Diss; we all interact with the machine for our own reasons.  But at the end of the day, you are either telling people to read books b/c they were recommended by Catherine Austin Fitts and Sting (and pissed off at the world because they won't and because it's a stupid idea to begin with) or you respect human nature.  

I say in either case, you should live the golden rule and trade what you know.

If this is my last post on Zero Hedge, so be it.  At least I didn't go out CPL-style.  

Thanks so much, Tyler.





Tue, 08/02/2011 - 04:58 | 1516008 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

+1 VIC... Your  Thoughts are / Tantamount...  


      Buy the dip...

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:25 | 1515825 mcguire
mcguire's picture

max weber's "iron cage of rationality": bureaucracy can only grow.. 

Weber described the bureaucratization of social order as "the polar night of icy darkness"...

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:25 | 1515826 Lord Koos
Lord Koos's picture

Then that 15% will go on unemployment, food stamps, and medicaid.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:27 | 1515827 insidious
insidious's picture

I don't think there are any more "investigative" reporters.

Did you hear any reporters ask any politician, involved in the debt ceiling debacle, "well, sir, if we adopt your plan how large will the deficit be next year, and the year after (and so forth)?" I didn't hear anyone ask such a question.

If it had been asked, I can imagine a pregnant pause followed by a long drawn out "well...... about the same as this year."

Then the "visibly shaken" reporter might have stammered "but...but...but... i thought this was about cutting the deficit.? I hear everyone whining about how draconian the plan is."

The now "composed" politician, having regained his wits, would probably reply with a "well....the savings will occur in the out years."

The reporter, now a bit flustered, says "oh. What are the out years?"

The politician replies that "well.... its really a bit difficult to say when the out years are but for certain it is not anytime soon and definitely not before the next election."

The reporter, finally getting the message and remembering that this interview is about over and that he may want to interview another politician tomorrow, replies "oh, yea, sure. Why didn't I think of that? Thank you for your time sir and for supporting this incredible legislation which I'm sure will be of great benefit to us all."

In fine politician form the politician gives a big smile to the reporter and a heart felt "you're welcome!"

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:34 | 1515842 billwilson
billwilson's picture

How about cutting 15% of defense! That will save over $1.4 trillion over ten years, and won't hurt real defense at all. Heck you could cut 30-% and not see much cahneg - and get a total saving approaching $3 trillion over 10 years.


The defnse budget is where the savings are to be had. But that would hurt the MIC so ... gotta have corporate welfare, right?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:35 | 1515843 redpill
redpill's picture

Needs more Barry Goldwater, bitchez.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:38 | 1515845 jonjon831983
jonjon831983's picture

Funny how Cuba is doing that government employee cull on their own account.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:43 | 1515850 Peter K
Peter K's picture

Yes, but Cuba is a fair and just system. I.e. Everyone is dirt poor. The game plan is to tax to death all the rich people, driving the country into real poverty. Once that is accomplished, then the cuts to public services will punish everyone equally. Or at least that's what the Bamsters chief economic advisor Van Jones thinks:)

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:40 | 1515846 Peter K
Peter K's picture

15% across the board cut in federal employment? What, are you one of them baby snatching terrorist Tea Partiers? Have you gone over to the dark side? Who would have thunk?

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:50 | 1515858 2bigtoofail
2bigtoofail's picture

The Bears Explain Modern slavery through Government Bonds.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:51 | 1515859 azengrcat
azengrcat's picture

Start "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader: Euthanization Edition USA". It would solve the social security and Medicare problem very quickly.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 01:55 | 1515866 sodbuster
sodbuster's picture

>And no, these are not reductions in future spendings: these are real actionable cuts from the day they are enacted,<

Well then, you can f'n forget it!! Congress doesn't do real cuts. Besides, these are real gov employees, and they most often vote Democrat, and those are REAL votes. The only cuts we do, are the cuts to future spending. Maybe.


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:04 | 1515874 IQ 101
IQ 101's picture

15%? Howabout 50%? Who do we really need?

The FAA and the patent office? the rest of the cunts can go home.

Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:33 | 1515896 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture


Tue, 08/02/2011 - 02:11 | 1515881 Milton Waddams
Milton Waddams's picture

Ron Paul is still dumb.  

Taxes pay for his salary and staff.  

Prove me wrong.  Dude is Yet Anothrt Parasite.  

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!