Posted on 07/30/2011 10:52:22 AM PDT by Rodm
Returning to 2005 Spending Levels Would Match Current Revenues of 2.5 Trillion dollars.
Outlays in 2005 were 2,472.2 Trillion.
This solution would result in no rise the debt limit and we would have a balanced budget. This would also secure our AAA credit rating.
This idea probably has too much common sense for the "Inside the Beltway Crowd."
But I believe that various emergency spending bills, totally hundreds of billions of dollars were also passed in some weird way - only Congress knows how - to finance all the Iraq war expenses, plus Afghanistan, and many other types of War on Terror budgeted items.
So we'd actually have to go back quite a bit farther in time, if we put EVERYTHING on the table right now.
Hopeless - you’d be lucky to get half of the old people on just this site to give up the amount of Social Security and Medicare money necessary to bring spending down to that level. You can only imagine the general public at large...
For starters, interest on the debt is a much larger amount than in 2005. Also, the proPortion of ss recipients vs Payors has gone from black to red. Those two facts alone make the goal unachievable.
Ok, A starting place then. At least we wouldn’t be so far in the hole.
Ok, A starting place then. At least we wouldn’t be so far in the hole.
Dems would say if I don’t pay my credit card with my other credit card I will run out of money.
We say stop borrowing and pay it off.
First, the result would be layoffs from Northern Virginia, D.C., Baltimore up to Wilmington and beyond and severe economic recession for that entire area.
States in financial trouble like California and Illinois and cities such as New York, Chicago, Philly, Boston, and others would also have to institute huge cutbacks and their economies would tank.
That’s all short-term and is the medicine we need, but because so much the political power is concentrated in those areas, your commonsense solution will not happen.
They're more than happy to throw the fortunes of America's grandchildren into the furnace, in order to fuel their reelection chances today.
That philosophy is the enemy. Fix that, and the math will fix itself.
I think everyone should look at the Connie Mack plan. It actually calls for spending cuts and arrives at balance over just a few years. Don’t know why it isn’t getting more attention.
Yes the Mack plan would be a wonderful start to recovery from spending addiction
Yes the Mack plan would be a wonderful start to recovery from spending addiction
What about Porkulus? Wouldn’t we have to roll back Porkulus to get anywhere near 2005 spending levels?
Bill Clinton said that Obama should invoke the 14th amendment and seize new presidential powers to raise the debt ceiling and keep government spending going. I hope we’re not on the verge of a constitutional crisis due to such actions.
THIS WOULD MAKE TOO MUCH SENSE FOR WASHINGTON
What now one has mentioned over the last few weeks is that government spending AUTOMATICALLY goes up 8% per year.
Just by FREEZING IT we could balance the budget in 8 years
I want to study the budget in more detail. For example, how much of the federal budget is on automatic pilot, for things such as Social Security, public assistance, interest on the debt, federal employees payroll, government contracts for purchased services, etc??? And how much is truly discretionary requiring an act of Congress to authorize spending?
And then considering the economic doldrums of the past few years, I’m sure that tax revenue to the government is less than previously forecasted.
The government would be well advised to hire some CPA firms to review the finances of the federal government, without any political agendas, and tell the American people exactly where we stand.
Does anyone think we didn’t have enough government in 2005?
I’ve heard of the idea of a freeze before.
Considering that we’re in a crisis, and Obama thinks that you should not let a crisis go to waste, a good use of this crisis would be to freeze the federal budget, pending a thorough review of where we stand, and what the future holds based on current law.
Yes, it’s telling that an 8% increase in spending is just accepted as a given. That should NOT be a given. But in the ways of Washington, nobody wants to say anything about that fact.
The house should pass a continuing resolution tommorow that funds the govt at 90% of present level and suspends baseline raises in funding. They should not wait until september 25th when Obama comes in with his hair on fire screaming something has to be done by the evil repubs. Pass it tommorow and issue a statement that if the senate doesn’t like it to get off their dead asses and engage in the budget debate.
You are correct obviously.
Unfortunately it would also require cuts in SS and Medicare. It would require a 44% cut in defense. When I bring up cutting SS, I get “well I paid into it and want my money back.” When I bring up cutting Medicare I get accused of wanting death panels. Similarly when talking about cutting defense, people talk as if that is equivalent to surrendering to AQ.
Welcome to the obvious budget cutting club. You have at least one FRiend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.