2.57 trillion comes out to about $9000 dollars per person, taking away children probably puts it around $15,000 that goes to the Federal government. This isn't counting state or county taxes that we all pay too. This is pure tyranny. And all these press reports like the WP editorial worrying about the 'poor' etc..
The best way to help the poor is to increase economic growth and thats done by getting government off our back.
I'd like to use a weight loss analogy. If your current consumption of calories results in weight gain, a "maintenance" diet won't work. You must first get back to an ideal weight before going on maintenance. The question is whether the federal budget is at an ideal weight.(At this point the picture of Ted Kennedy in a bathing suit that has appeared in many recent posts comes to mind.)
If you look at recent budget spending figures you will find that the spending restraint of the mid 90's led to the surplus.
Once that surplus was achieved Washington went on an eating binge(both parties). Spending increases went from ~3% to around ~9%.
Cutting vet benefits is a bad thing. Especially medical care for vets.
Its also the largest budget ever, so much for this Ap writers sanity
Dear liberals,
Is two-and-a-half trillion enough yet?
Does MSM officially wait for these boilplate claims, or do they carte blanche to publish them without asking first....
You can't scream about the spending and then complain about spending cuts.
Someplace in some honest universe that's a disconnect.
You've got to love that headline and lead sentence.
A) Bush is a big spender who wastes trillions of dollars and runs up huge deficits.
B) Bush is a savage cutter of government support to our widows, orphans, farmers, sick people, and veterans.
When will he stop committing such heartless atrocities? He is mortaging our future while he savages the weak and the helpless!
Hmmm, are we going in the right direction or not?
Okay, what's the annual rate of inflation. What's the annual rate of population increase. Now, add the two numbers together. Is the sum greater than 3.5% or less than 3.5%?
So many informed opinions here -- what's the answer, anybody?
For the record, I detest the AP.
Please tell me the "Corporation" for Public Broadcasting is being defunded. Taxpayer-funded left wing propaganda on NPR and PBS must stop.
Except for demanding a form of co-pay from our vets (in the interest of fairness I am one) I like the idea of less spending. Cutting out so many of the programs is probably what I would have to call "a good start"
Eliminate the hundreds of millions for arab and muslim terrorists.
When Bush took office, his following year budget for 2002 was $2.011 trillion. Today, he demands $2.57 trillion. How is that fiscal responsibility, much less responible at all?
That is a $500 billion increase, or $100 billion each year. That is responsible???
Even as President Bush proposes deep cuts in healthcare, farm subsidies and other domestic programs, his new budget makes one thing clear about the legacy of his first term in the White House: The era of big government is back.
Bush's $2.6-trillion budget for 2006, if approved by Congress, would be more than one-third bigger than the budget he inherited four years ago.
And how much more will we be spending on pills for the elderly? For that matter, while Social Security reform is a good thing, lets not pretend that doesn't mean more spending. As any money taken out of the pot to invest in the stock market means more deficit spending, since this is a pay as you go reality.
Well, I'll make my standard plea that when y'all look at your taxes for 2004, and see that you're getting a big refund back, raise your deductions (M-0, M-1, M-2, etc.) and KEEP YOUR MONEY IN YOUR POCKET for 2005. (Just estimate your upcoming income for 2005, and check the schedules in the handy-dandy tax booklet.)
Help me cut off the blood supply to the government. Pay what you owe, but not a penny more! The money in that budget belongs to us you know!
Oops! Gotta go! Black Helicopters circling, LOL!