Should we make great cuts or greatest cuts?

[JollyRoger]

You gotta feel for Michael Bloomberg. He is only the 10th richest man in America and there are 6 trust fund babies ahead of him. He only owns 88% of his company, so his report card carries that ugly B+ on it.

Here is a recent poll question & results from his outfit:

To reduce the federal deficit, the Federal government should make:

Deep Cuts, risk shut down 20%
Cuts, compromise 77%
Not sure 3%

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/67453332/

So, for those doing the math at home, Revenue - Spending = Surplus or Deficit.

I'm assuming by cuts, the poll refers to spending, not tax cuts, since tax cuts would move revenues in the wrong direction. So we have two choices for cuts - deep cuts or cuts/compromise. The only other option is "not sure" - though someone could be sure that the government should take a look at the revenue side of the equation.

One interesting result is where most people are willing to see spending cuts:

Defense 49%
Medicare 19%
Social Security 22%
Not Sure 10%

 

[Perfection]

We need to spend more to make the economy better.

 

[Lillefix]

As a preventive measure, I think we need incentives for politicians to think in longer terms than their next election. When people don't care about the long term consequences, it's no wonder so many countries end up in debt crisis.

 

[Cutlass]

Doesn't look like Congress is in touch with the public. So what else is new?

 

[Scratch]

Where's the cut taxes option? Why isn't that in there?

 

[Oerdin]

I'm assuming by cuts, the poll refers to spending, not tax cuts, since tax cuts would move revenues in the wrong direction.

In this case you're right but all too often Republicans are prone to the fantasy that tax cuts pay for themselves.

 

[bhsup]

We need to spend more to make the economy better.

I agree. Draft everyone who has ever applied for unemployment and increase our military spending. If they are going to be paid by the government, it might as well at least be for serving to protect our nation rather than for not having a job.

 

[Integral]

I have this vague opinion that the government should get back on the spending path it was on pre-recession within the next...two to three years. That's the neighborhood of 21% of GDP, as opposed to around 26%.

I have this equally vague opinion that if you look at the underlying growth rates, you find that fixing Federal health expenditures will fix most of the long-term exploding debt problem.

 

[Narz]

I agree. Draft everyone who has ever applied for unemployment and increase our military spending. If they are going to be paid by the government, it might as well at least be for serving to protect our nation rather than for not having a job.

I assume you're trying to sound funny/silly but I'd imagine a solider costs about 10-100x as much as a man on the dole.

 

[Perfection]

I agree. Draft everyone who has ever applied for unemployment and increase our military spending. If they are going to be paid by the government, it might as well at least be for serving to protect our nation rather than for not having a job.

I'd feel safer and more protected if they weren't in the military.

 

[Disgustipated]

I agree. Draft everyone who has ever applied for unemployment and increase our military spending. If they are going to be paid by the government, it might as well at least be for serving to protect our nation rather than for not having a job.

most unemployed people are probably fat, lazy people, so do we really want them in our military defending our nation? We want the best, and the brightest.

I'm exaggerating on the fat comment, don't get your panties in a wad for that comment.

 

[Cutlass]

I assume you're trying to sound funny/silly but I'd imagine a solider costs about 10-100x as much as a man on the dole.

They do. The Army does not want them. Does not have any purpose for them. And a really hefty part of the population has been on unemployment at one time or another during their life.

 

[Perfection]

Maybe we can pay 'em to dig a really big hole.

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe we can pay 'em to dig a really big hole.

They already have - in our budget.

 

[Perfection]

We should have a physical one too!

 

[Archbob]

Cut Defense spending by 20%, cut entitlements by some amount. And cut some other stuff. Cut congress's all you can eat sea buffet each month.... etc

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I agree. Draft everyone who has ever applied for unemployment and increase our military spending. If they are going to be paid by the government, it might as well at least be for serving to protect our nation rather than for not having a job.

Or we could put them to work on any of the thousands of public works projects for which we are long overdue. There are bridges to be replaced, power lines to be buried, train tracks to be laid. Even though Obama and the Democrats (future band name?) have tried ever so hard to make this stimulus look like New Deal Mk. II, its really not. Its trumped up and poorly executed. Almost a waste of time.

 

[Oerdin]

most unemployed people are probably fat, lazy people, so do we really want them in our military defending our nation? We want the best, and the brightest.

I'm exaggerating on the fat comment, don't get your panties in a wad for that comment.

I'm glad you added that second part because the first part sounded extremely harsh especially since there are a lot of good people just down on their luck right now.

 

[Perfection]

Or we could put them to work on any of the thousands of public works projects for which we are long overdue.

How about a big hole?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

How about a big hole?

We already have one of those.