The following link is for an interactive budget game. I realize it’s a bit out of date, but the basic premises remain valid. The biggest change since the publication of this game is that the deficit is now bigger and balancing it is harder. I was quite surprised to see that cutting military by 50% Welfare by 20% and many other departments by 20% still left me with a deficit. Try it and let us know what it took for you to balance the budget. You may be surprised.


http://www.nathannewman.org/nbs/shortbudget06.html

Damn Dave. Now you've gone and done it. Something at least close to facts to use in an argument.

Thanks for the link.

Hankster:

Please list the programs you transfered to the states. Also please tell us where the states will get the money for those programs.

Also please speculate as to weather any congress would make the changes you suggested.

I have an 800 billion surplus! I cut corporate tax breaks, and got the government out of running businesses. Transportation, space, etc can be privatized. Welfare can be eliminated, when faced with hunger, you'll get off your ass and work. No welfare for corporAtions or people. Forget international affairs, we can't afford to take care of ourselves. Finish the wars and get out. Forget separation of church and state, let's have separation of business and state.

That should be a snap to implement.

BTW, when faced with hunger, many will turn savage...

I predict your new policy would end in a military coup in less than 24 hours.

When you raise the cost of doing business, then you raise the cost of goods. When you offer a wage that won't put food on the table, you have unemployment anyway.

Plenty of vicious circles out there...

There won't be any cuts of that magnitude. Congress, and it doesn't matter which party is in control, doesn't have the stones to do it.



For once we agree on something. Can't imagine though why you see no need to cut military when we spend more than next eight big spenders combined. No fat there?

Also wonder how you justify eliminating federal pensions. No concern about keeping our promises to those who worked all thier lives?

They do!! Like most others, federal employees pay a set percentage of their salary towards retirement. They can also put aside up to 5% of their salary into a 401K, but unlike many employers, the government does NOT match employee contribution. And unlike most retirement systems, the government did NOT invest employee contributions. Instead they spend them as they come in.

But even if your mistaken impression was right, and I can assure you it is not, the question remains, do you think employers should pay the pensions they promised to their employees?


We promised our military they could recieve a retirement after 20 years. Should we break that promise?

got the deficit down to 50 billion by eliminating the Bush tax cuts and reducing war expenditures by 50%.

5.4 billion in surplus by ending Bush tax cuts and ending the 2 wars.

We are facing a fiscal crisis and I cannot believe how greedy and selfish many are when it comes to paying all of our fair share. We cannot cut our way out of the fiscal mess without creating far more pain than a small tax increase would.

The idea that we cannot pay 3-4% more in taxes but we can have old people and veterans eating dog food is despicable.

"You see, the growing surplus exists because taxes are too high and government is charging more than it needs. The people of America have been overcharged, and on their behalf, I am here asking for a refund."
George W Bush - 2/27/2001

Hey fawker change that avatar back.....

Go ahead and pay your 3-4% more. I'm gonna hold out. I pay plenty already. 3% of $70,000 is 2,100. That doesn't figure in the rise in Medical costs, gasoline, food, increased taxes on some food items.

You do realize that the "stimulus plan" cost more than 10 years of war spending. It is pretty easy to be free and easy with other peoples money.

Soooo Hanks. Your "solution" is to keep us spending more than 5 times as much as any other nation for our military, eliminate future Federal pensions, which helps not one bit now, keep the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and transfer most domestic programs to the states. I really thought you could do better.

The good news is the link I posted does make some folks see the immensity of the problem and makes some think about the issue in a rational way.

Trillion dollar stimulus...cough cough....

You do realize that the "stimulus plan" cost more than 10 years of war spending. It is pretty easy to be free and easy with other peoples money.



The war costs are also paid with other peoples money money. Diffrence is the money goes out of this country and the cost keep on mounting!

I would much rather spend my tax dollars on improving our infrastructure and creating jobs, than on a war that kills our youth.


http://costofwar.com/

Bailing out the Banks, and the Stimulus Plan, were both thinly disguised robbery.

Part of the solution is probably going to be motivating the American People, clearly there is a need for Hope...a yet unfilled need for many. What do you do with a population who expect hope to be provided...along with almost everything else ?

What was so different about the People in colonial times ? Possibly the answer isn't politically correct...?

The game is too incomplete. Besides cuts I would also try to raise inflation slightly to around 4% rather than being flat. I would also think about raising the military retirement for new comers one year every other year until it hits 25 years of service, along with other 20 year retirement programs such as fireman and policeman. No promises broken. Long term savings but it will help eventually. Also would pass immigration reform in which immigrants in the US can get instant citizenship if they purchase a new home and pay a penalty. Also would require all home loans to be restructed with a cap of 6% fixed, all credit cards to no higher than 12%. Lower the foreclosures and you lower the tarp money need. Taxes on each home sale in Washington run 2% in just excise tax and 8.2% on improvments in sales tax on new homes. Brings in millions directly and much more indirectly. Inflationary prices in the housing market are what provided the funds for rampant consumer spending and high revenue for the government to spend. We now are seeing the exact opposite. A stabilization of the market could provide the opportunity for refinances and for more resales, providing both jobs and government taxes. Right now the banks are driving down prices by restriction financing and dumping foreclosures. We need the opposite. Easy, even ridiculous, restructuring would delay the onslaught of low priced housing and would work to give more consumer confidence. How hard would you work to save your home if every 3rd home was in foreclosure, you could rent for 25% less, and your home is 25% upside down. Many people see no need. Add the money to the top of the loan, give them a 1% interest for 5 years and let the market have time to work itself out. Even let them rent it. In the long term we all would be much better off.
I would look at a short term further reduction on social security and medicare benefits for people with high income or assets, which we have had in the past. It is no more unfair than telling me I need to retire at 67 instead of the 65 I was promised.

Long term debt can be quickly erased if we have a low interest rate on it and a good inflation rate with sustained growth. Look what happened in the past. I am less worried about the debt than the fact that our government appears to be more and more for big money and less regulation of corporations and the stock market,which is funded largely by 401 k's. Anotther problem seems to be the Chinese control of our debt which is forcing the governments hand in relation to inflation.

The answer isn't easy and it won't come just by reductions in spending or increases in taxes. Both could be the exact wrong thing in the short term.

I increased funding for death panels 5000%.

It made a budget surplus of 7852387012356780521367825167890520.

The best part was all those spoiled bitchy whiny baby boomers were finally out of the picture and no longer whining about "'Nam."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Budget Totals
Old budget was $3747.36 billion
($2672.527 billion in spending, $1074.833 billion in tax expenditures and cuts).
New budget is $3350.54 billion
($2275.71 billion in spending, $1074.83 billion in tax expenditures and cuts).

You have cut the deficit by $396.82 billion.
Your new deficit is $4.18 billion.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Spending
Military Spending
Veterans & Retired Military Pensions and Services
Science, Space and Technology
Natural Resources and Environment
Agriculture
Transportation
Community and Regional Development
Education
Training, Labor and Unemployment Programs
Non-Medicare Health Spending
Medicare
Civilian Retirement (Social Security excluded)
Aid to Low-Income Families
General Family Support
Social Security
Administration of Justice
General Government Administration
Net Interest

Tax Expenditures and Tax Cuts
2001 and 2003 Tax Cuts
Corporate Tax Breaks
Personal Business and Investment Benefits
Pension and Retirement Tax Benefits
Health Insurance Tax Benefits
Housing Tax Benefits



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spending ($2275.71 billion: cut $396.81 billion)
$356.88 billion .... Military Spending
Cut $89.22 bil. from base of $446.105 bil.(-20%)
$0 billion ......... Iraq War and Afghanistan Operations
Cut $111.84 bil. from base of $111.851 bil.(-100%)
$115.48 billion .... Veterans & Retired Military Pensions and Services (No Change)
$0 billion ......... International Affairs
Cut $31.58 bil. from base of $31.590 bil.(-100%)
$23.97 billion ..... General Science, Space, and Technology (No Change)
$2.12 billion ...... Non-Defense Energy Spending (No Change)
$31.16 billion ..... Natural Resources and Environment (No Change)
$26.02 billion ..... Agriculture (No Change)
$70.67 billion ..... Transportation (No Change)
$19.1 billion ...... Community and Regional Development (No Change)
$38.44 billion ..... Education
Cut $25.62 bil. from base of $64.068 bil.(-40%)
$47.81 billion ..... Training, Labor and Unemployment Programs (No Change)
$126.66 billion .... Non-Medicare Health Spending
Cut $126.65 bil. from base of $253.320 bil.(-50%)
$345.75 billion .... Medicare (No Change)
$71.94 billion ..... Civilian Retirement (Social Security excluded) (No Change)
$206.77 billion .... Aid to Low-Income Families (No Change)
$25.62 billion ..... General Family Support (No Change)
$2.04 billion ...... Commerce and Housing Loan Programs
Cut $4.77 bil. from base of $6.816 bil.(-70%)
$544.82 billion .... Social Security (No Change)
$43.1 billion ...... Administration of Justice (No Change)
$10.65 billion ..... General Government Administration
Cut $7.09 bil. from base of $17.754 bil.(-40%)
$211.08 billion .... Net Interest (No Change)
$-44.37 billion .... Undistributed Offsetting Receipts and Allowance (No Change)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tax Expenditures ($1074.83 billion)
$294.6 billion ..... 2001 and 2003 Tax Cuts (No Change)
$60.36 billion ..... Corporate Tax Breaks (No Change)
$86.71 billion ..... Personal Business and Investment Benefits (No Change)
$168.47 billion .... Pension and Retirement Tax Benefits (No Change)
$140.99 billion .... Health Insurance Tax Benefits (No Change)
$163.71 billion .... Housing Tax Benefits (No Change)
$159.99 billion .... Other Individual Deductions and Expenditures (No Change)

that's a fair question. honestly, everyone has a different version of what is fair. it seems more and more see that number as somewhere near zero.

i think the clinton era taxes were fair. we balanced the budget and the economy didn't crumble prior to bush's tax cuts.

we can all find government programs we don't like or think should be cut. the fact is that many of these programs are well liked by the recipients, be they liberals, conservatives, or moderates on the political spectrum. what we seem to have right now in this country is a feeling like we are entitled to government programs but not entitled to pay for them. we cannot have both.