Posted on 07/18/2011 2:59:59 PM PDT by shove_it
WASHINGTON (AP) — One of the Senate's staunchest budget-cutters unveiled Monday a massive plan to cut the nation's deficit by $9 trillion over the coming decade.
The plan by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., is laced with politically perilous proposals like raising to 70 the age at which people can claim their full Social Security benefits. It would cut farm subsidies, Medicare, student aid, housing subsidies for the poor, and funding for community development grants. Coburn even takes on the powerful veterans' lobby by proposing that some veterans pay more for medical care and prescription drugs.
Coburn was a member of President Barack Obama's fiscal commission and voted for its plan to cut the budget by about $4 trillion over a decade. He recently dropped out of the closely watched "Gang of Six" senators seeking a bipartisan agreement to rein in deficits and break through the partisanship engulfing official Washington over the deficit.
[..]
"I have no doubt that both parties will criticize portions of this plan, and I welcome that debate," Coburn told reporters. "But it's not a legitimate criticism until you have a plan of your own."
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Not any good unless the cuts are for this year and next, not kick the can down the road as usual.
Now we’re talking. But it’s just a start.
The politicians of both parties will kill this, but good for Coburn for saying it.
Every Fed agency, including WH staff and Congressional staff, needs a 33% cut in budget across the board, just for starters.
Its a 'legitimate criticism' if you have the right to vote, Senator.
I happen to think this is a good start. But only a start.
And it will be as welcomed as if he had proposed turning loose a thousand rattlesnakes in every baby nursery, retirement home and VA Hospital in the country -- not very popular.
People, by and large, will not support cutting "entitlements" across the board. The cuts will, of course, eventually come, but it will be borne of chaos and collapse, not by measured intellectual choice. The liberal entitlement mentality is staked too deep in this country's heart for that.
It’s a start, but too many voting blocs will be squealing!
Deport illegals when found, no goodies from the public trough if you are illegal
Phase out all welfare programs over 5 year period.
No more food “credit cards”. You get rice, beans, cheese, powdered milk. Want more? Get a job!
Dept of Energy: gone!
Dept. of Education: gone!
HUD: gone!
Ag subsidies: gone!
and many more.
Sounds better than anything else that has been floated so far, but still needlessly complex. The House can solve the deficit problem TODAY with a simple statement, and doesn’t even require a single vote or approval of either the Senate or President.
It’s a two-sentence statement: “We will not increase the debt limit. All departments will immediately see a 42% budget cut as the government will now have to limit expenditures to revenue.”
Once that line has been drawn, they can play games with redividing the finite revenue pie as the nation sees fit.
**This is exactly the type of serious plan that must be implemented.**
BTTT!
Come fricking on! How hard can this be? We all do this every payday!
I don’t think you fully understand the effect of those two sentences. I don’t think anyone does. Cutting spending that much that fast will cause the economy to shrink. when the economy shrinks, revenue shrinks. When revenue shrinks, spending will shrink even more. When revenue shrinks even more, expenditures will shrink even more.
When all the shrinks and cuts are finally finished cutting and shrinking, we could be in the worst great depression the world has ever seen. But the alternative isn’t preferable.
That's about the only good thing in this news.
The only relevant cuts are cuts in absolute spending and they don't mean very much until those cuts decrease the year's spending to a level that begins to reduce the Debt. No deal in Congress that provides for an increase in the debt is cutting anything real. Any deal that includes a rise of the debt ceiling is fraudulent.
I doubt seriously the plan does the one symbolic but very important thing necessary to make it fair for all: for every 1% haircut imposed on social security recipients, the same 1% haircut must be imposed on every current congresscritter, the president and vice-president, every current federal judge, every federal employee, and every federal retiree including retired elected officeholders. I expect I’ll be taking a hit - been planning on it for many years; Wiener and all his crooked colleagues past and present who contributed to this unholy mess and failed to do anything to stop it must share equally in the sacrifice.
I know. Never happen. Drinks will still be being served in first class while those of us in steerage sink beneath the waves.
Oh, I fully understand the meaning completely. I also fully understand that anything less only makes the problem worse, thus making the eventual, inevitable correction even worse.
The GDP number is ALREADY a sham, since ~10% is faked via government deficit spending.
Being treated for cancer sucks. Do you want to do it now, before it metastasizes, or later, once it’s in your bones and liver?
that depends. Am I going to die anyway? if so then I choose no treatment. We may already be past the point where the economy is no longer curable.
Well that's a completely different position from that of your previous reply. So, what then? Just keep deficit spending until our entire economy and government utterly collapses? Yeah I have to agree, that's probably what is going to happen because we simply lack the will to take our yucky medicine.
I see enough drunks, drug addicts, smokers, and obesity in my daily work to know that in general, most people would rather just die than do something difficult or not fun. We are a fatally flawed species.
...$9 trillion over the coming decade... raising to 70 the age at which people can claim their full Social Security benefits... cut farm subsidies, Medicare, student aid, housing subsidies for the poor, and funding for community development grants... proposing that some veterans pay more for medical care and prescription drugs. Coburn was a member of President Barack Obama's fiscal commission and voted for its plan to cut the budget by about $4 trillion over a decade. He recently dropped out of the closely watched "Gang of Six" senators seeking a bipartisan agreement to rein in deficits and break through the partisanship engulfing official Washington over the deficit.Somehow I don't think this will fly -- but it makes an acceptable middle ground the compromise position between Zero's do-nothing approach and Coburn's plan.
I don’t think you understand my comment.
If we are beyond the point of no return, then the final collapse will come quicker if we cut spending.
Having the will to cut is no longer important at that point.
Just raise it to 90 and be done with the whole thing. Why not? After all, it's a very progressive thing to do.
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.