Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

You're a loon.
Thats why I take almost nothing seriously you post in this forum.

So tell me, how many terrorist activities have they stopped here in the US? Then tell me how many billions we've spent.


I'll be awaiting those numbers.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

So tell me, how many terrorist activities have they stopped here in the US? Then tell me how many billions we've spent.


I'll be awaiting those numbers.

I doubt we'll ever be able to tell how many were stopped, its made it awful hard for the sundry list of bad guys to even attempt anything becuse its so expensive and complicated to pull something off like that now.

And to name a few - The Coast Guard, The Secret Service, TSA, Immigration are all part of HS.
Why do you want to do away with them?

[Giantone]

Where Did Our Debt Come From?Please watch.


Where Did the Debt Come From? - YouTube

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Where Did Our Debt Come From?Please watch.


Where Did the Debt Come From? - YouTube

Nothing like a bias source.

Center for American Progress's Director of Tax and Budget Policy

Its President and chief executive officer is Neera Tanden, who worked for the Obama and Clinton administrations and for Hillary Clinton’s campaigns.[5] Its first President and chief executive officer

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Nothing like a bias source.

Center for American Progress's Director of Tax and Budget Policy

Its President and chief executive officer is Neera Tanden, who worked for the Obama and Clinton administrations and for Hillary Clinton’s campaigns.[5] Its first President and chief executive officer

SO is any of the information wrong? If so, please point out where and detail it.

It doesn't take a genius to see that starting 2 separate wars while cutting taxes was going to lead to a huge debt hole.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Nothing like a bias source.

Center for American Progress's Director of Tax and Budget Policy

Its President and chief executive officer is Neera Tanden, who worked for the Obama and Clinton administrations and for Hillary Clinton’s campaigns.[5] Its first President and chief executive officer

Facts are still facts.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

And this thread is why I overall support sequestration and any other mandatory reductions that don't listen to every grievance. Just in this thread we can see a lobby for the military, the people making the most, and those who support the poor. We can't even come together and accept the simple fact that our government is way overspending in every area, and instead throw out graphs, articles and "national pride" to plead the case for whichever group you support.

In fact, I would say sequestration didn't go far enough, and that we ought to mandate 3% baseline cuts and 3% tax increases across the board, every year until either:
a) legislatively binding financial plans are developed that bring the budget at or near balance and a fund for debt repayment is established

or

b) an amendment to the constitution is passed that mandates fiscal sanity (however that would be worded). It ought to be easy enough for the population of 2/3rds of the states to push for a straight forward amendment which says that unfettered debt is dangerous to our national health, and therefore, the Constitution is amended to require that the national debt can never exceed x% (i am sure there is a healthy percentage of debt).

I agree a flat reduction in spending would have been a better plan along with a tax increase that reduces our dept.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I agree a flat reduction in spending would have been a better plan along with a tax increase that reduces our dept.

Isn't this the sticking point? The left wants to have cuts, but also add new taxes. The right refuses to allow any new taxes?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Isn't this the sticking point? The left wants to have cuts, but also add new taxes. The right refuses to allow any new taxes?

The left only wants to cut defense spending and add new taxes. The right says it would look at raising taxes along with spending cuts across the board. Remember we just had a tax increase in January and defense has also had pther cuts in spending. I think all spending should be on the table.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The left only wants to cut defense spending and add new taxes. The right says it would look at raising taxes along with spending cuts across the board. Remember we just had a tax increase in January and defense has also had pther cuts in spending. I think all spending should be on the table.

I agree, smart cuts to defense and everything else along with some increased taxes.

[Chico23231]

keep the sequester and tax policey seperate. Big mistake

we need to attack our government's spending with substanial cuts and enforce budget control there after.

tax reforms should happen, but our government shouldnt do both at once, we are too stupid politically.

[CRedskinsRule]

So Alvin still hasn't answered any thoughts on what defense spending he would cut, and NC_Skins, I might ask you if you had any part of the Welfare 10% you could see as being cut.

We all get so caught up in our own belief of what this country needs, but in order to make it work, everyone has to be willing to put something on the table. and I generally mean something more substantial than a 4 million reduction.

If we can't all do that, I mean go more than halfway, then there isn't anyway this country is going to avoid a massive impasse a la France.

And so everyone understands, I am an extremist. I would take government spending down to the bones in a lot of areas. I would let states set up their own welfare systems, and not have anything more than bare bones oversight, to make sure no gross abuses occur, but if Montana wants to set up minimal WIC, and maximize efforts to get people off, and NY wants to maximize length, let those states constituents pay. As for the rich and taxes, If you want to live here, and put your corporations here, we are going to tax a rate on par with the rest of the world, not grossly over, and not grossly under. For some of the capital flight takes place, some will come back. Defense, I would nearly gut the standing Army and have a strong reserve force uses 18-21 year olds as a mainstay, with a reserve officer corp that maintains some level of consistent training, (yes I was in it, I know that the soldiers in there are for the most part patriots and overall good guys). I would maintain our Navy and AirForce/Space services at current funding for 3 years, placing all leading tech purchases on hold for 1 1/2 years, based on a reasonable assumption that we aren't in grave danger (is there any other kind). I would mandate Military or Community Service for 3 years for EVERYONE when turning 18. Once that service at Minimum wage, with housing benefits like the military has been completed, you have the opportunity to re-up, or move on. Discretionary expenditures would be frozen at 2012 levels and re-visited every 18 months.

None of this will happen, and in my humble opinion, no faction in US politics is going to give up enough to even make a dent.

c'est la vie

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Facts are still facts.

From you? ROLF!

[CRedskinsRule]

NC_Skins I agree on the Homeland Security funding. While there may be some slight gain in the consolidation, the bureaucracy created is just ridiculous.

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

NC_Skins I agree on the Homeland Security funding. While there may be some slight gain in the consolidation, the bureaucracy created is just ridiculous.

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

One thing I don't gat is that the National Flood Insurance Program now falls under Home Land Security.