America: Here is your tax dollars.

[CIVPhilzilla]

We need to INCREASE taxes, not decrease them.

We need to DECREASE spending, not increase it.

 

[Prince_Imrahil]

We need to INCREASE taxes, not decrease them.

As long as those taxes are going to the right places!

 

[downtown]

Income, sales, gas, estate, local, state, federal, excise, tariffs, social security, FICA, medicade, capital gains, duties, corporate, alternate minimum tax, property taxes, and school tax.
.

Those aren't all federal taxes. If you're going to slash federal spending, unless you change the programs, you're going to have to pay more at the state or local level. Thats federalism.

Example: Lets say that the department of Education disapears. No more federal funding for public school districts. Only the uber-rich school districts are 100% (or could be) self-suffient. That means that you'll see more Property Taxes or School taxes, unless you can think of a magic way to create income without taxation.

When people talk about taxes, they tend to just focus on the federal budget....you pay taxes to a hell of a lot of different places too, so you'll have to examine your budget and spending for every level of your government.

 

[Whomp]

Of all those expenditures, can anyone figure out which ones qualify as investments, which would show a net return to the economy?

Transportation and education could be construed as investment. Obviously anything that stimulates the economy could also be construed as investment. IE keep avocado farmers in business when their crops froze.

I just thought I'd throw some more numbers out for those who are interested in such things.

For perspective:

Federal government spending in 2006 amounted to $2.691 trillion. Federal receipts amounted to $2.538 trillion. Defense spending was approximately $550 billion. (Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis)

US GDP from 2006 was $13.2 trillion. (BEA)
Integral

Welcome to CFC Integral.

I think something to bear in mind with these numbers is all of them are record level. There needs to be internal incentive to cut cost. There's a great desire to spend whatever is allocated to a department's budget because they're not sure the same funding will happen in the future. We need to incent departments that run efficiently.

THE biggest issue we face as a country will and continues to be medicare. Unlike, social security which is an entitlement people can live without medical care is not. The facts are the boomers are headed into retirement and people over 60 require 4x the amount of medical attention as the rest of the population. This is not something we can band aid.

 

[ParkCungHee]

As for the military reenlistment bonuses, freeze the increases and work to scale them back to eventually eliminate them.

And how do you propose we maintain our military standing that we have now?

 

[Cuivienen]

I am a budget hawk. I can just look at that and cry. Interest on the national debt! If we could just get that damn thing lower we could slash taxes by 10%

This is exactly why we need to abolish the Bush tax cuts. Ultimately, by increasing the national debt, they make us pay more in taxes by running up the interest on the debt. Clinton put the US on track to be a debt-free nation within a couple of decades, and there was no need to tamper with that. Once the US is debt-free, then we can cut taxes.

The military is paid 5x's what Health & Education is.

The military is grossly overfunded. We spend money on things like creating more nuclear warheads when, even if you believe in nuclear warheads as deterrents, we already have so many nuclear warheads that we could obliterate the entire world about five times. Having enough to do it six times is not a deterrent, it's a waste.

I know states mainly take care of education, no need to tell me that, but imagine if the Fed could kick in some more aid to students.

Exactly.

Medicare and Social Security is 36% of the total budget!

Social security, at least, is deceptive, since all of its funding comes strictly from the SS tax. In reality, it shouldn't be included in estimates of the federal budget because it does not interact with the rest of budget.

If we instituted universal health care, we could lower government spending per person on health care to levels equivalent to those in Canada and abolish Medicare, saving the government huge quantities of money. By having instead using a "subsidized insurance" policy, the US gives money to health insurance companies that then charge far in excess of what medical procedures actually need to cost in order to turn a signficant profit and not disappoint their shareholders. The US government spends more money per person on health care than any country in the world, even those with universal health coverage, and the fact that insurance is corporate is precisely the reason. With universal health care, we could ditch such subsidies and programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

 

[Shylock]

So to you, what needs to be cut? What needs to be increased?

All of it needs to be cut. Everything it does it fails at unless it's extortion or killing.

 

[Stylesjl]

Military spending needs to be cut, the US grossly overspends on building weapons and hiring people to kill. Just build a giant arsenal of nukes (wait, you already got one!) and cut all other military spending out

 

[Integral]

So to you, what needs to be cut? What needs to be increased?

We could cut some military pork projects (like the Future Combat Systems project, the F-22, and some others), and use that money to invest in education...Nondefense pork, while being a relatively small budget item, would give the appearance of fiscal discipline and perhaps open dialouge on across-the-board spending cuts...and I'd like to see what, exactly, qualifies as "aid to the needy," as surely some of that is waste.

Cutting social programs, agricultural subsidies and welfare may help, but is impossible for political reasons. No one wants to be known as the Senator who slashed entitlements, do they? Similarly, each budget item has its own special interest groups backing it, making real reform difficult.

The biggest problem is that while Congress as a whole has an incentive to cut spending and improve its credibility, each individual Representative and Senator has an incentive to bring the most in pork/contracts/investments to his or her own district, so little is actually done to reduce spending.

As to what should be increased, it's hard to say no to more spending on education and scientific research, as long as the money is properly managed.

Integral

 

[ParkCungHee]

We could cut some military pork projects (like the Future Combat Systems project, the F-22, and some others)

The F-22 thats already in service? The F-22 thats neccessary to stay ahead of the PAK FA and the J-XX?

 

[Godwynn]

the national debt has not been eradicated since Andrew Jackson's Presidency.

Welcome to the board!

Andrew Jackson had the debt down to around $33,000. I wish he would have gotten rid of it! Then try to push for a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget, unless during times of declared war.

 

[Perfection]

You could set a cut off saying all those after a certain age will retain their benefits, use the savings from the other cuts to offset the cost, and tell the rest of the populace they will be returned all their money and then some with generous tax breaks.

Wouldn't that not give any benefits in the near term and just cause further budget problems as we stop collecting social security taxes?

 

[Cuivienen]

Wouldn't that not give any benefits in the near term and just cause further budget problems as we stop collecting social security taxes?

Yes, it would, especially since SS still turns a profit.

 

[CCA]

Increase Taxes to 100% untill the debt problem is solved.

It should only take 1 year.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Increase Taxes to 100% untill the debt problem is solved.

It should only take 1 year.

You'd get an awful lot of angry creditors.

 

[aussieboy]

Those aren't all federal taxes. If you're going to slash federal spending, unless you change the programs, you're going to have to pay more at the state or local level. Thats federalism.

Example: Lets say that the department of Education disapears. No more federal funding for public school districts. Only the uber-rich school districts are 100% (or could be) self-suffient. That means that you'll see more Property Taxes or School taxes, unless you can think of a magic way to create income without taxation.

When people talk about taxes, they tend to just focus on the federal budget....you pay taxes to a hell of a lot of different places too, so you'll have to examine your budget and spending for every level of your government.

Well, the cost could be offset by even partially privatizing the school system. I mean, if the private schools are spending more money on a student, that would mean that any property tax increase would not be as high as if more schools were state-run.

Of course, that plan is political suicide, given the stranglehold of teachers unions who keep incompetent teachers in sinecures (and believe me, they do exsist... one of my old teachers was the most incompetent employee of any government organization I have ever seen)

 

[Bill3000]

Well, the cost could be offset by even partially privatizing the school system. I mean, if the private schools are spending more money on a student, that would mean that any property tax increase would not be as high as if more schools were state-run.

Of course, that plan is political suicide, given the stranglehold of teachers unions who keep incompetent teachers in sinecures (and believe me, they do exsist... one of my old teachers was the most incompetent employee of any government organization I have ever seen)

Out of all the ideas for privatization, privitazation of public education is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen - tuition would be extremely expensive and ultimately only serve to make those who need education the most an inability to get education in the first place.

Not including the fact that by allowing privitization, you'd remove fundamental principles of modern day education, such as the freedom from religious indoctrination, by not requiring education to be a government service.

 

[aussieboy]

Out of all the ideas for privatization, privitazation of public education is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen - tuition would be extremely expensive and ultimately only serve to make those who need education the most an inability to get education in the first place.

Not including the fact that by allowing privitization, you'd remove fundamental principles of modern day education, such as the freedom from religious indoctrination.

Perhaps at first, the tuition would be high. But as private organizations get into the business of education, the competition would lower prices, as parents would naturally select the buisiness, in this case the school, that offers the best education at a relatively cheap price.

And on the second point, there is no freedom from religious indoctrination in the school system - why else would there be parochial schools? Besides, the free market would be certain to cater to the non-religious constituency - after all, they are customers.

Note that I don't adovcate full privatization. The government should have its 'share', and the free market would encourage competition from the government sector to make the schools better. And if it does, praise be to God, 'cause that means they're doing their job.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Out of all the ideas for privatization, privitazation of public education is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen - tuition would be extremely expensive and ultimately only serve to make those who need education the most an inability to get education in the first place.

Not including the fact that by allowing privitization, you'd remove fundamental principles of modern day education, such as the freedom from religious indoctrination, by not requiring education to be a government service.

Not to mention it would be a shot in the foot for those complaining about their tax costs. Paying for kids to go to school tends to offset the costs involved with an illiterate work force.

Perhaps at first, the tuition would be high. But as private organizations get into the business of education, the competition would lower prices, as parents would naturally select the buisiness, in this case the school, that offers the best education at a relatively cheap price.

\
Then why didn't this happen when we had privatized education?

 

[FriendlyFire]

10% just to service interest on debt.
Must have grown it was around 8% not that long ago.

Thats 50% of military spending so its pretty hefy chunk of the budget.