Okay, so what other programs which are going to reduce the deficit you wish to cut?
In California, if we restored school and university funding to the level relative to other states it was 25 years ago I’d be very happy. The problem is not a massive increasing in spending, it is a massive decrease in revenue thanks to the recession.
In the real world it is exactly the opposite of your right wing fantasy. Both sides agree that some cuts are needed. Only the Republicans object to any tax increase, even back to levels they were a few years ago. Who are the inflexible ones again?
And the Libertarians, thank you very much.
And exactly what programs do you consider to be “outright wastes if taxpayers money”? Be specific.
Did you not see Simplico’s comment that Obamacare reduces the deficit?
Can we also roll back tax rates to 25 years ago? If a 70% tax rate on millionaires was okay then, what is wrong with it now?
I think the OP is on to something, but we need to go a little bit farther back. If we can go back to 1979, we can prevent Reagan from getting elected so he can’t triple the gap between what the government takes in and what it spends, we can also help little George W. Bush get into a nice trade school so we won’t have to invade Iraq and explode the national debt again.
Leaving aside the fact that “Obamacare” doesn’t even kick in fully until 2014, so eliminating it wouldn’t have any effect whatsoever on the current deficit, let’s take a look at some of the other “entitlements and other outright wastes of taxpayers money.”
Social Security. In 1985, 38 million people received SS. In 2010 it was 51 million. Medicare numbers will be substantially the same.
So, the first thing we need to do is knock 13 million old people off the rolls. Then we can worry about adjusting the benefits.
Defense budget in 1985, $287 billion. Base defense budget in 2010 $534 billion, plus $160 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Interest on the national debt during 2010 $414 billion. In 1985 it was about $166 billion.
So all we need to do is cut our base defense budget in half, kill off 13 million old people and tell the world we’re only going to to pay them back 1/3 of what we owe this year and we’ll be in good shape.
Moving thread from IMHO to Great Debates.
So I’m 16 again and have a chance to make different decisions…
Well, I was referring to a party with actual seats in the legislature. I’m really not sure of the position of the Monarchist Labor party on this issue either.
Decide to invade someplace else and send the old people. You kill two old birds with one stone.
When the old men do the fighting
And the young men just look on.
Jagger, Memo from Turner
A major increase in taxes on the rich, chopping subsidies to the wealthy and corporations, legalize “soft” drugs (so we can shrink the prisons and tax the drugs), and cut the military budget down to, say, a tenth of what it is now. And single payer UHC.
Oh, let me guess - the military budget is sacred, and any cuts made and any taxes raised should be targeted at everyone but the rich? Right?
BTW, I read that House Republicans have already zeroed in on a major money waster to defund: environmental protection.
Wow! Numbers can be boring, but I hope Dopers do themselves a service and stare at these numbers for comprehension. Wow!
Oh. So this is an objective discussion for high-IQ’s with advanced econ degrees. In that case, may I suggest a move to BBQ Pit? We’ll have to wait till it’s moved beofre I suggest a title.
If I plug $287 billion into my handy dandy inflation calculator, it comes to $564 billion in 2009 dollars. It seems that defense spending has been kept in check. Do we want to crunch the same numbers on social programs?
You have my vote. Wait! I’m not one of the 13 million am I?
Did the Soviet Union come back into existence without me knowing? AFAICT there is no longer any Evil Empire to justify massive military spending, just pathetic tin pot dictators and trade partners.
I’m looking forward to the top tax rate going up to 50%. The OP was planning to do that too, right?
Well, you can if you want, but my napkin calculations suggest that we have tons more old people than we did in 1985, but 1 fewer superpower.
You are correct that I didn’t adjust any numbers for inflation. While you’re adjusting social programs for inflation, be sure to account for the growth change in the total U.S. population from 238 million in 1985 to 308 million in 2010. Also, do you think the institutions to whom we owe $414 billion interest in current dollars on the national debt will accept $336.4 billion in 1985 dollars, or will they expect to be paid in current dollars?
WE obviously need to increase education. The US is the only industrialized country that does not have UHC. It spends more on healthcare per-capita than any other industrialized country. The closest, Germany, spends only 60% as much. And that covers everyone in the country, not just some like we do in the US. Health, measured in terms such as longevity and child mortality is better in those other countries. Furthermore, healthcare costs make the US less competitive in manufacturing and make it more difficult to start up new businesses or be self-employed.
I know you have a political agenda here, don’t pretend it has anything to do with cutting costs. The number one thing we should cut is the cost of servicing the debt we have. This is a direct result of the inane tax policies of the last Republican president.
Oh snap, this will be easy then!
We simply stop paying the interest!