Panetta: Cuts Must Come from Entitlements !!

page: 1
6

log in

join

posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Panetta: Cuts Must Come from Entitlements


Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta is acknowledging that cuts in the federal budget should come from entitlements, not the defense budget.

Asked about sequestration, which the White House proposed in order to play chicken with the Republicans over tax cuts, Panetta said:

The fact is that, you know, we have addressed the discretionary area, we’ve taken almost a trillion dollars out of discretionary area and out of defense alone, almost a half a trillion dollars just out of defense. I think the responsibility now, both Republicans and Democrats, has to be to look at the entitlement area, what savings can be achieved on entitlements and what additional revenues need to be on the table as well. .......

Panetta: Cuts Must Come from Entitlements


A bit ironic to say the least ?

I wonder why Panetta is rocking the boat about "entitlements" ??

Very strange comments by the Secretary of Defense.

As PPACA (aka ObamaCare) kicks in, and {if} the unemployment rate soars again, the "entitlement" costs will probably skyrocket.

Hmmmm.

What was his point anyway ?




posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Yeah, because killing poor people in other countries is much more important than taking care of the poor people in our own country.
I guess he sees it as killing 2 birds with one stone, take away the money from our own poor and let them die while using that money to kill poor people in other countries.



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 

Dear xuenchen,

I assume your OP is humorous, because it seems Secretary Pannetta's message is pretty clear. If we want to have anything that looks like a functional military, that can do most of what the country asks it to do, you can't take away any more money.

Defense gets about 19% of the budget, entitlements get about 62%. He's saying that if you want to get money, go where the money is. I believe he's also recommending that we get some kind of handle on entitlements because they're getting larger each year with no end in sight.

I wish the solution was as easy as saying "Just take a few unneeded dollars from the military and help the poor of this country," unfortunately the numbers don't work that way, it is a foolish fantasy.

With respect.
Charles1952



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
How about we cut the drone program, do we need 30,000 drones over the US?
Since when should the Secretary of Defense make political comments like that?
Seems pretty unusual to say the least specifying where to take the cuts from.
You'd think the heroin sales alone could support the Defense budget.


Or we could reduce his $200,000 a year salary.
What say you America?
edit on 14-11-2012 by Asktheanimals because: added comment



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
I wonder why Panetta is rocking the boat about "entitlements" ??

Very strange comments by the Secretary of Defense.
You find it Strange, that the Sec of Defense, doesnt want more Defense Cuts?
I would find it Strange if he did.

Some things are just Common Sense.



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
When are they going to do away with the word 'minority' and all that they're entitled to?
Here are a couple of entitlement groups that are being shown favoritism and it should end.
1. Female owned businesses getting bid preference.
I think this needs to end. I used to work for a company that made bids on government contracts. The owner was a man, but he had the business in his wife's name so they could get the best contracts. It would be different if his wife came into the office and did work or attended meetings, but I never once even met her. She never once came into the office. In fact, she lived in New York, while the business was in Virginia.
Besides, let's face it. Women have come a long way and can hardly be considered a minority.
2. Let's stop considering African Americans minorities.
We have a black (who's also white) president for goodness sakes! This goes to prove that anyone of this race can accomplish anything they want as long as they apply themselves and know the right people. Besides, their numbers are too many to be considered to be anywhere near the definition of a minority.
Hispanics should also not be considered minorities.

Honestly, the true minorities are American Indians and albinos.

I also believe that businesses who employ the disabled should get a break, I've been to a couple bakeries that employ only disabled individuals. These people are doing a great service for these unfortuneate people and should be given a break by our government through loan forgiveness and less taxes.

In regards to the military, they need to start spending more money and attention to our returning vets who need help readjusting to civilian life and probably need counseling services, which our government is not providing and should be. Shame on them for not standing up and helping these men and women are trying to overcome the pains of war.
edit on 14-11-2012 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-11-2012 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


His point? "keep your hands off my and my criminal friends in the military industrial complex's money!"

He would let a soldier starve and die homeless so the CEO of General Dynamics can buy a new yacht. This is a fact...



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
The "entitlements" slice of the pie is so very misleading. It's sad that many do not understand all of the things that are included in those dollars. The fact of the matter is that if we cut those funds, unilaterally, it wouldn't take a month before even the staunchest right wing ideologue would be begging to have the funds restored.

The deficit is a huge problem that is not going to get fixed in a year, or four, or even eight. It is going to require a game plan and one that does not gut any particular spending area... but rather trims the fat from them all.

~Heff



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Panetta sex scandal coming in 3....2....1



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   
That is brilliant!!

I mean really as if 50 million on SS,50 million on medicare, 50 million on medicaid and 47 on welfare that account for over 2 trillion a year in federal spending.

No not don't cut those!!

Cut defense that seemingly goes to war every 4 years and has since pretty much since WW2, and then all those jobs created by those corporations who sell those products to those evil defense contractors,.

Who are also aerospace,and other technology sectors that employ millions of people because those materials are used to make civilian goods.

Gut defense and those people end up where?

Oh unemployment,welfare.and ever other program this country has.

Too many mouths to feed.

There are those "intellectual elite in Washington thinking with their heads".
edit on 14-11-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

The "entitlements" slice of the pie is so very misleading. It's sad that many do not understand all of the things that are included in those dollars. The fact of the matter is that if we cut those funds, unilaterally, it wouldn't take a month before even the staunchest right wing ideologue would be begging to have the funds restored.

The deficit is a huge problem that is not going to get fixed in a year, or four, or even eight. It is going to require a game plan and one that does not gut any particular spending area... but rather trims the fat from them all.

~Heff


Taxing the rich, (+$250,000/yr) is a ridiculous fix to the problem. The government could take every penny they make and it would fund the government for 2.5 MONTHS.



posted on Nov, 14 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
We're talking about cutting this, and raising that, but do we even have a clue what the results would be? Allow me to put in a shameless (is there any other kind?) plug for a new thread. www.abovetopsecret.com...

It leads you to a budget simulator based on government numbers and projections. You can see what happens if you cut something. (At least in the financial sense.) The current projection, keeping everything as it is now, shows the country as broke in 2033. (Check simulation for definition of broke.)

Seriously, give this a try, please.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Well they sure as christ ar'nt going to come from corporate welfare are they?? Nor are they going to come from the rich or the war industry are they?? .



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by learnatic
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Well they sure as christ ar'nt going to come from corporate welfare are they?? Nor are they going to come from the rich or the war industry are they?? .


Corporate "welfare" amounts to how much in tax breaks ?

Maybe you are on to something....

The pre-Bush tax rates on the "rich" will bring in only $42 billion a year......

not enough to curb a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 05:53 AM
link   
i agree Leon, so let's start with legislators retirement and health benefit's packages.


who's charging us interest on our debt? let's start with trimming the FED and i think our worries would be over, i mean once you get rid of the loan shark your debt becomes a thing of the past.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Panneta being moved from CIA to Defense was a strategic move in a political chessgame...

now Panetta makes this 'entitlement cut speech' right when his replacement at CIA is battered by a sex scandal


this is more a ploy to cloud issues and ingrain in the public consciousness that 'everyone' thinks entitlements need cut first

it is not so much that Panetts is 'protecting' his slice of the pie at Defense, but that angle will be played by some puppetmasters


the thought of Austerity is being embraced here, entitlement cuts are already in place by the way...
(look at the 1.7% cap on COLAs regardless of inflation & rising CPI)



the rioting going on in Spain right now is all about the slashing of 'entitlements'
see:investmentwatchblog.com... nter-of-madrid-is-a-war-area-right-now/#comment-321283




heres a paraphrase of my reply in the comments:



StUdio
November 15th, 2012 at 6:21 am · Reply

instead of giving the bankers 100% of the debt payment…
how about only paying a prorata share and keep the peoples share of 'entitlements' at a level above mere subsistance living…
the lack of money to pay the bankers will eventually reverse and the greedy bankers will eventually be made whole


there is no need to roughly displace and denigrate the masses so the banker caste can remain affluent and strip the dignity from their prey
Read more at investmentwatchblog.com... -of-madrid-is-a-war-area-right-now/#oxr3MOXIpebQSgjH.99





see, the fight isn't between Defense and 'Entitlements' (aka; social safety net)
the real menace is the blood sucking banker cult that has a stranglehold on the public purse and is acting the Vampire role...


in times of National Emergency... all sectors have to contribute to aid the common good...
banker payment must be reduced as much as Entitlements are reduced
in fact in my thinking the massive debt the banker elites haveskillfully coerced from the public over the generations are way in excess of ordinary profit....the credit expansion model had reached a saturation point of debt owed to the banker elites that 'they' deliberately shelved that economic model so they could thrive splendidly for generations without being a part of the economic engine at all... the banker elites had attained demigod status


the current noise that Panetta is uttering...is just that - Noise to distract the serfs



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 06:09 AM
link   
Why is it that when people think we need to make some cuts in spending, we must first attack the programs that actually work and help people?

It is nothing more than political self-preservation for Panetta to make these comments and I would not consider Panetta the go-to guy for economic advise.



  exclusive video


new topics
 
6

log in

join