The scariest picture you'll ever see.

[draggar]

Seriously, this really scares me.



.. and yet the feds just announced they want to pump another $600B into our economy.

[Greenday]

Except America can just say, "Just try and get your money back."

[AdminAssistant]

We have to get money from somewhere, and heaven forbid we cut back on military spending or raise taxes, even if it's just against the top 2%.

[guywithashovel]

People from all parts of the political spectrum gripe and moan about the deficit and the debt, but no one wants to cut any of the programs, departments, etc. that benefit them in any way.

To me, it seems that every single entity within the budget (the military, the various departments and programs, etc.) should get maybe 5% or 10% of their funding reduced. If we did that, we could probably reduce the deficit and bring down the debt.

[HYHYBT]

Just stopping the automatic increases (any reduction of which is mislabeled a "cut" anyway) would go a long way...

While the total debt is scary, I see no reason its distribution should particularly be.

[joe hx]

One thing you'll never see to reduce debt is for congress to significantly reduce their income. I mean, how many people have the power to give themselves raises?

It's just like CEOs who won't take a paycut when their company is in financial trouble. Yeah, the CEO or the congressman might actually be worth what they're being paid, but sometimes you have to sacrifice things for your company or country.

[draco664]

Except America can just say, "Just try and get your money back."

Well, America *could* say that I suppose.

But borrowing money after that may be a problem...

[Greenday]

Well, America *could* say that I suppose.

But borrowing money after that may be a problem...

Which is why we'll wait to say that until after we don't need money.

[Tanasi]

People from all parts of the political spectrum gripe and moan about the deficit and the debt, but no one wants to cut any of the programs, departments, etc. that benefit them in any way.

To me, it seems that every single entity within the budget (the military, the various departments and programs, etc.) should get maybe 5% or 10% of their funding reduced. If we did that, we could probably reduce the deficit and bring down the debt.

You can't reduce the debt until the deficit is eliminated. Otherwise you'd be creating new debt to pay off old debt. If the interest rate on the new debt was less than the old debt then that is a tiny step in the correct direction.

[KitterCat]

What’s really amusing is how many of these countries we give financial aid to. One would think we could at the very least ask the country if we could just write off the amount of aid given from the debt we’ve amassed.

[Hyena Dandy]

One thing you'll never see to reduce debt is for congress to significantly reduce their income. I mean, how many people have the power to give themselves raises?

It's just like CEOs who won't take a paycut when their company is in financial trouble. Yeah, the CEO or the congressman might actually be worth what they're being paid, but sometimes you have to sacrifice things for your company or country.

I say we should cut entitlements, which yes, includes medicare and social security. Cut discretionary spending. Cut defense, hell, cut the defense by about a quarter or more. We may be something like 24th in proportional defense spending, but there's only one other first world country ahead of us, and that's Israel, a nation who is literally surrounded by people who want it blown up.


And there's a common misconception about congressmen giving themselves raises. They CAN'T. If a budget passed that raised the amount that Congress gets, then that wouldn't apply until after the next time they're up for election.

[AdminAssistant]

I say we should cut entitlements, which yes, includes medicare and social security.

So, basically, let the elderly starve and/or die from lack of medical treatment?

[Andara Bledin]

So, basically, let the elderly starve and/or die from lack of medical treatment?

Hey, they're only old people. It's not like they still contribute to the economy.

And if they die, then there's more Social Security funds for younger retirees!

^-.-^

[joe hx]

And there's a common misconception about congressmen giving themselves raises. They CAN'T. If a budget passed that raised the amount that Congress gets, then that wouldn't apply until after the next time they're up for election.

So if they pass a budget that increased how much they get, how is that not giving themselves raises?

[Boozy]

So, basically, let the elderly starve and/or die from lack of medical treatment?

I think there's a middle ground to be found somewhere.

Medicare is absurdly expensive and inefficient for what you get out of it, for example. It's nice that the new healthcare bill deals with some small issues, but its the tip of the iceberg, really.

The problem is that every time someone tries to bring up a cost-saving measure, they get accused of hating the elderly. On the flip side, those who consider the health of the elderly to be top priority get accused of being money-blind, even if they aren't.