American Austerity, What could it look like?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 16 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


Any weaning that is done off the government teat now will be beneficial.

You can't rely on the GOP, the democrats are hawking government services like SPF 50 on Spring break, so in the end, it'll be up to indviduals to either see the coming storm or ignore it until it's too late.




posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
I know what American Austerity should look like:

Reduction in military spending
Reduction in Presidential and Congressional pensions and salaries
Elimination of government bureaucracies
  1. Department of Homeland Security
  2. Internal Revenue Service
  3. Drug Enforcement Administration
  4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
  5. European Command
  6. Federal Reserve System
  7. Minority Business Development Agency
  8. National Drug Intelligence Center
  9. Office of National Drug Control Policy
  10. Overseas Private Investment Corporation
  11. Selective Service System
  12. Women's Bureau

That's just a start. If anyone has anything to add, feel free.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


But that's what I'm saying----it took a hell of a lot longer than a few months for Clinton and the GOP to craft and agree on welfare reform, there's no way that's happening in this political climate on any scale. If we delay those actions until the election, facing a new debt ceiling, tax cut expirations, etc, there's no way to wean anything. Action doesn't happen that quickly in this country; we're all screwed. It will all hit at once, and "suddenly" there will be another financial crisis to sweep up along with a few more liberties, if the whole thing doesn't come crashing down.

We have automatic budget slashes coming at the end of the year that will either stand and be a hard hit yet still not enough to dig us out, or they will wiggle their way out of them and even less will be done. Then comes the new debt ceiling, and the fight over that, and the downgrading again, and the panic, etc. The contagion is just starting to spread from Greece to who knows where else in Europe, and we can try to keep it at bay across the pond as long as we can, but we're all connected and it will come to our shores. Delay those budget cuts even further, and we just solidify the certainty of our own default.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by N3k9Ni
 


I don't see a single entitlement program in there, which makes up the vast majority of our budget along with defense. Those programs may be a start, but a very small one.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


First off, it's an election year. All politicians will weasel out of any type of austerity for now.

Wht we, as americans, need to do is self-wean NOW. Before cuts actually take place.

That way, we can at least prepare ourselves.

For example; I'm 49. And I know I'm not going to see one dime of social security that they forcibly took from me. So the wife and I are planning our funds, our retirement with the understanding that we WON'T see it.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by AnIntellectualRedneck
 



 By not having their houses condemned and seized by the government because they couldn't afford electricity or plumbing, which was actually my point. Because in the age of bureaucracy we live in, that's going to happen. Which, again, is my original point: we won't have government help, and a lot of people won't have the freedom to help themselves.


Do you have an example of this happening? Don't get me wrong, I know the government is out of control and is far too involved in our lives but that's because we've allowed it. By relying on the government we're inviting it.

What's wrong with moving to an apartment or getting a roommate to offset your expenses? Responsibility begins and ends with the individual. People survived for thousands of years without the nanny state. 



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by N3k9Ni
 


A little something which we could add would be to stop our warring adventures and let the rest of the world learn to stand on their own feet for a change.

This would entail closing all our over seas bases and brining these people home. Stop all foriegn aid, especially to those countries and governments who refuse to be our "true" allies, and let the world police it's self for a while.

This may seem to some to place us in danger, but I argue it would only bring more respect and trust from those who know us and fear from any adversary. ( you don't kick a sleeping lion - ask the Japanese)

At the same time, and for the same reason, we should cut back or cut out large military contracts. We just won't need any new hardware for a while.

Take the money we gain and save from these and rebuild the American infrastructure. Most politicians do not want to admit it, but the interstate highway program was the biggest economic engine this country has ever created. It not only provide jobs for it's building; it made our current transportation system possible.

This is the manner in which we should be working in order to bring the U S A back to it's rightful place in the world. If done properly, by putting America and the American people first, the current crop of politicians could turn the economy around on a dime.

Saddly, it just won't happen. Far too many of them have sold themselves out to special interests and are too busy padding their friends pockets to remember where all the money they want to spend comes from.

You see, regardless of how it is spent or not spent, all the money the government has is from taxes and fees paid into the treasury by the working public.You can yell about the "job creators" all you want, if they do not produce something which the working public wants to buy, they are useless. Just to illustrate my point; how many buggy wipe makers are doing big business now days. Oh, no market you say. That is exactly my point.

It also seems strange that we should be worried about the tax rates for those who make big salaries. Most of the fortune 500 companies were built in the 50's and 60's when taxes were much higher. How could this be, you ask???

Taxes are paid on "profits". If you have a company selling a large amount of goods and making big profits, hire more people to work and cut down the profit margine. Of course, this will mean more people can afford to buy your products so your profits go back up. This is what Henry Ford knew years ago. The more he paid his workers, the more cars they bought. This has held true ever since.

By the same token; if no body buys anything, before long no body will have the money to buy anything.

If no body spends the money they don't have the government gets no tax money. Then you get large deficets and are forced to cut back on expenditures. Does this sound familiar ?????





edit on 16-5-2012 by hdutton because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


In other words, utter chaos.

No thanks.

No need for austerity when you can simply remove the Fed and bankrupt the Rothschilds. It can be done.

After all, money is paper.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by beezzer
 


In other words, utter chaos.

No thanks.

No need for austerity when you can simply remove the Fed and bankrupt the Rothschilds. It can be done.

After all, money is paper.


No, just back to a time where people didn't rely on government for a handout.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by 00nunya00
 


First off, it's an election year. All politicians will weasel out of any type of austerity for now.

Wht we, as americans, need to do is self-wean NOW. Before cuts actually take place.

That way, we can at least prepare ourselves.

For example; I'm 49. And I know I'm not going to see one dime of social security that they forcibly took from me. So the wife and I are planning our funds, our retirement with the understanding that we WON'T see it.


But you and I aren't the ones that need weaning----I don't take sh** from the government, never have. Those who *are* living off the gov won't be weaning themselves of anything any time soon, you know? It will crash, and they will fall hard. On us.

Plus, we can prepare for life without SS, but how about life without the 401k or IRA? What happens when those disappear? I've done the best you can, we took the full amount available for a "loan" from our 401k and are using it for medical expenses while we can. If everything stays fine, great, we pay it back in 5 years. If everything collapses, great, we got our money back before they could steal it all and make it go "poof".

There's a lot harder crash coming than loss of social security benefits.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by 00nunya00
 

I believe austerity measures should begin within the government. Here are some figures for you to work with. Forgive me for not supplying all sources, but I wanted to keep this within one post.

Department of Homeland Security $42.7 billion
Internal Revenue Service $12.3 billion
Drug Enforcement Administration $2.415 billion
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission $385 million
Department of Defense $707.5 billion (for calculation, I'm cutting half or $353.75 billion)
Minority Business Development Agency $35 million
Overseas Private Investment Corporation $57.89 million
Selective Service System $23.9 million
Women's Bureau $106.7 million

Current President's salary $400,000
Current Presidential pension $191,300
Current Vice President's salary $230,700
Current Congressional salary $174,000
Average Congressional pension (includes Vice President)

wikipedia.org

The Vice President does not automatically receive a pension based on that office, but instead receives the same pension as other members of Congress based on his position as president of the Senate.[28] The Vice President must serve a minimum of five years to qualify for a pension.

wikipedia.org

The pension amount is determined by a formula that takes into account the years served and the average pay for the top three years in terms of payment. In 2002, the average pension payment ranged from $41,000 to $55,000. For example, a member of Congress who worked for 22 years and had a top three-year average salary of $153,900 would be eligible for a pension payment of $84,645 per year.


Living Presidents 5
Total annual pensions $956,500
Congressional members 535
Total Congressional salaries $93,090,000

Total salaries and pensions $94,677,200
Cutting that amount in half yields $47,338,600

Adding it all together comes out with a budget reduction of $415,820,890,000 per year or about 30% of the federal budget for fy 2012. I consider this a conservative proposal. I'm sure more investigation could produce a higher percentage.

Entitlements make up about 50% of the federal budget. Here is a list:

Home Mortgage Interest Deduction
Hope or Lifetime Learning Tax Credit
Student Loans
Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit
Earned Income Tax Credit
Social Security--Retirement & Survivors
Pell Grants
Unemployment Insurance
Veterans Benefits
G.I. Bill
Medicare
Head Start
Social Security Disability
SSI--Supplemental Security Income
Medicaid
Welfare/Public Assistance
Government Subsidized Housing
Food Stamps

Which of these would you cut and by how much?
edit on 16-5-2012 by N3k9Ni because: typo



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Errr....I pay taxes. If I need to, I should be able to use some of the taxes I paid for something I need. I don't need bombs, thanks.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Some of your cuts are a bit questionable, and arriving at your end figure by adding them all up as if you could cut them completely is a fallacy.


Originally posted by N3k9Ni
Department of Homeland Security $42.7 billion


This now encompasses many, many departments, including things like FEMA which, for all the moaning and conspiracies about it, still cleans up a lot of messes that would ruin entire towns or states without it. Which departments under DHS would you cut?


Internal Revenue Service $12.3 billion


And what is the offset for how much the IRS brings in in federal taxes? That's a losing cut.


Drug Enforcement Administration $2.415 billion
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission $385 million
[snip]
Minority Business Development Agency $35 million
Overseas Private Investment Corporation $57.89 million
Selective Service System $23.9 million
Women's Bureau $106.7 million


Fine, great, go for it. But that's only about 3 billion out of trillions of dollars in the budget.


Current President's salary $400,000
Current Presidential pension $191,300
Current Vice President's salary $230,700
Current Congressional salary $174,000
Average Congressional pension (includes Vice President)
[...]
Total salaries and pensions $94,677,200
Cutting that amount in half yields $47,338,600


Again, only 47 million out of trillions. Not big cuts.



Which of these would you cut and by how much?
edit on 16-5-2012 by N3k9Ni because: typo


That's the point, we can't just go through and cut out stuff without it hurting----it's all going to hurt! Slash entitlements across the board 50% and see where that gets us. Just as crashed as we will be if they get slashed by 100% because we default and the dollar becomes worthless.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Whatever happened to the mindset that American had during WWII with Victory Gardens and War Bonds? Americans scrimped and saved all they could to help their country during a war...but now the Govt. wants to squash gardens, raise taxes and whatever else they're doing to make life harder than it needs to be. The only way I can understand this modern mindset is that our Govt. is a totalitarian one and we are headed the way of absolute and total Socialism and Communism.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


Ding Ding Ding !!! We have a winner.

Very well said, especially the part about road construction.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Whenever I think about how bad it could get if we were to be thrown into a civil war due to austerity and class warfare, it reminds me of the book, "Cold Mountain" by Charles Frazier. The story is based on true civil war letters about survival taken down to its most fundemental level. The people of that time had skills and knowledge that has been lost to the average American and hardly anyone today would manage to stay alive in similar circumstances. Its something to think about.

I know a lot of people think they'll just be poorer than they now are, but it won't stay that way for long because there will always be predators on two legs.

www.wutheringbites.com...



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I'm confused. Do or do you not think entitlements spending should be reduced?

You first pointed out that I did not include entitlements in my budget cutting proposal. Now you seem to be saying that cutting entitlements would be disastrous. You're also saying that the budget cuts I proposed would be insignificant. I understand it's easier to throw out a dismissive post with no real reasoning behind it than it is to actually support your premise. The point of this thread is what measures the government should take toward reducing our current budget deficit. Are you proposing they do nothing?



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by N3k9Ni
 


Shoulda, coulda, woulda. It doesnt matter what anybody thinks, they will be cut. Maybe not next week or even next year, but we're b r o k e and the more money they print, the broker we get ~ even if people can't figure out how inflation works.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


They didn't have to. The system has been strategically manipulated by a collusion of government stooges and their corporitist benefactors to prevent any competition from arising to their own power through a combination of contra-education and regulation, designed to protect those who already have power, at the expense of those who have none. This has been going on for 30+ years and is only now coming to a head. The plan was always to raise the bar high enough that fewer and fewer boats could rise to meet it, and it worked perfectly.



posted on May, 16 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


The only solution that makes any sense.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join