*****I Want to Discuss Actual Budget Numbers*****

[Copperhed51]

I know we could all recite Dr. Paul's policies pretty much verbatim, but I want to get to the dirty part. I want to talk about real numbers and see how feasible his policies are. So, from Wikipedia, here's the budget info I've been able to get.

First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government

For FY 2008, the President has requested the following: The Defense Department Base Budget - $481 billion. War on Terror(non-DoD) Base Budget - $73 billion. Supplemental Funding for WoT - $145 billion. Total requested Dod/WoT spending is $699 billion, or 65% of total net Discretionary spending.

Alright, so right off the bat, we're already spending $320.3 billion more than we bring in. Cut out the personal federal income tax, we'll be down to $1.4041 trillion in revenues.

So, to balance the budget (and not pay off any of the debt), we need to cut spending by $1.4833 trillion.

Ok, now we have to choose how much to cut from what area. I'll leave that up to everybody here to see what we can come up with. The point is, it's time to stop talking in generalities and use real numbers. So let's keep this thread number oriented.

Have at it...

[NYgs23]

Ugh! This alone just proves how insane the globalist-coporatist-CFR-Rockefeller-stooge Oligarchy lording over us is! Look how much of our hard-earned money they waste on these cradle-to-grave entitlement programs! $600,000,000,000 for FDR's wheeler deal? And they still can't pay for it all! And the biggest "pork-busters" among talk about "oh, we'll shave a few earmarks off of agriculture." Why haven't the American people thrown out these thieving, incompetant wastrels out a long time ago? Bunch of zombies! And then we all suffer. Democracy, yay.

Surely we could cull at least 400 billion from this phony War on Terra (boo!) That would be enough to pay off interest the Federal Reserve banking cabal and Red China. That leaves about $156 to prop up some of these entitlement programs. But Congress had BETTER start phasing out those damned entitlement programs soon! No one said this would be easy. But what can we do? Either we make the big changes or welcome back to 6th century Europe.

[NYgs23]

P.S. Cutting the income tax is one of the last things on Ron Paul's agenda. He'd have to get rid of so much of the domestic spending first. If we could totally get rid of SS, Medicare, and Medicaid ALONE, we'd save over 1.5 trillion. More than enough. But that would take a generation and require Congress's help. These are long, long-term things you're thinking about and would require A LOT of Ron Paul Republicans (and Democrats) inflitrating our institutions of power over decades AND RETAKING THEM FROM THE SCOUNDRELS WHO STOLE THEM FROM US!

[Copperhed51]

P.S. Cutting the income tax is one of the last things on Ron Paul's agenda. He'd have to get rid of so much of the domestic spending first. If we could totally get rid of SS, Medicare, and Medicaid ALONE, we'd save over 1.5 trillion. More than enough. But that would take a generation and require Congress's help. These are long, long-term things you're thinking about and would require A LOT of Ron Paul Republicans (and Democrats) inflitrating our institutions of power over decades AND RETAKING THEM FROM THE SCOUNDRELS WHO STOLE THEM FROM US!

I agree. I've been arguing with people about the budget and keep telling them that bringing the troops home is something the President will have the power to do. Abolishing the IRS and cutting domestic spending is something that is going to take a whole lot longer.

The ridiculous thing to me is that we can't manage to cut spending by just $350 billion to at least balance the damn budget. I mean, come on. This war is destroying us. We could easily cut the deficit down to nothing if the government would just come to it's senses. Frustrating.

[AceNZ]

OK, I'll bite.

Let's look at this from a strict constitutional perspective. How many of the expenses listed are really authorized by the constitution? Also, keep in mind that Dr Paul has made it clear that he doesn't want to put anyone out on the street who is currently depending on government aid.

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] --> cut this by 90%
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training --> cut
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation --> cut
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment --> cut
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs --> cut
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture --> cut
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development --> cut
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology --> cut
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy --> cut
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government --> cut by 50%

So that's $812B savings in the first pass. That leaves:

* $586.1 billion - Social Security
* $54.8 billion - Defense
* $394.5 billion - Medicare
* $367.0 billion - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion - Interest on debt
* $72.6 billion - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion - Administration of justice
* $10 billion - General government

Dr Paul has said that people don't have a right to health care; that in a prosperous society, charities would be willing to step-in and help the poor and others who couldn't otherwise afford care, as they did in the 1960's. So let's make that the next target (over a transition period), which brings the savings to $1483B. By some amazing luck, that's exactly the number you suggested below that would need to be saved.... Here's what's left:

* $586.1 billion - Social Security
* $54.8 billion - Defense
* $367.0 billion - Unemployment and welfare
* $243.7 billion - Interest on debt
* $72.6 billion - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion - Administration of justice
* $10 billion - General government

Additional savings would still be possible, since even what's left is bloated over what it used to be as recently as 10 years ago.

[NYgs23]

This war is destroying us. We could easily cut the deficit down to nothing if the government would just come to it's senses.

But we must retain our "honor". BARF!

[jasonoliver]

OK, I'll bite.


* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] --> cut this by 90%



That is RETARTED! Maybe we can cut up to 50% of the military, but we still need billion dollar F-22 Raptors, Aircraft Carriers, etc, etc, etc....

It is RETARTED to think that we should go to spend half of what China is spending on military expendatures.

This is where pinko pacifists and non-interventionists part ways. We need to preserve the American military superiority. Non-Interventionism will only work if our enemies know WE HAVE THE ABILITY to bomb them into the stone age if they attack us.

[idiom]

As spending is cut and taxes come down, revenues go up as the economy picks up.

Plus he want to jack up a flat border tariff. Dropping income tax and increasing tariffs will have really strong protectionist effects.

[Copperhed51]

I took kind of a different approach and cut things less drastically, which I think initially is a program more people could get on board with in order to phase things out. Here's how mine comes out (just cutting somewhat randomly):

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $200 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]...........................................saves $348.8 billion
* $225 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare.......................................... ...saves $169.5 billion
* $150 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare..................saves $217 billion
* $150 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related........saves $126.4 billion
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt..............................saves $0.00
* $20 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training............................saves $69.9 billion
* $45 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation.................................... ....saves $31.9 billion
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits................................saves $0.00
* $25 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice..........................saves $18.5 billion
* $15 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment........saves $18.1 billion
* $10 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs.......................................save s $22.5 billion
* $15 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture....................................... ........saves $12 billion
* $15 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development..saves $11.8 billion
* $20 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology...........................saves $5 billion
* $10 billion (+0.0%) - Energy............................................ .........saves $13.5 billion
* $10 billion (+11.4%) - General government..............................saves $10.1 billion
__________________________________________________ _______________

Total expenditures: $1.8124 trillion.......................................... saves $1.075 trillion

I left social security alone just to see what we could do even after leaving in that huge expense (and since I don't know how long it would take to cut those expenditures). Everything else I cut down to a more reasonable size and didn't even cut any entire departments. This is just an example of a start to domestic cutting and how we could still spend tons of money on these departments and save over a trillion dollars each year. Constitutionally speaking, my budget is still way too fat.

[Copperhed51]

That is RETARTED! Maybe we can cut up to 50% of the military, but we still need billion dollar F-22 Raptors, Aircraft Carriers, etc, etc, etc....

It is RETARTED to think that we should go to spend half of what China is spending on military expendatures.

This is where pinko pacifists and non-interventionists part ways. We need to preserve the American military superiority. Non-Interventionism will only work if our enemies know WE HAVE THE ABILITY to bomb them into the stone age if they attack us.

I agree here. We can cut the defense budget, but still need a very strong military.

[AceNZ]

Wow, such hostility. Are you sure you're a Ron Paul supporter? I'm picking up a pro-war vibe here...



That is RETARTED! Maybe we can cut up to 50% of the military, but we still need billion dollar F-22 Raptors, Aircraft Carriers, etc, etc, etc....

I think you mean retarded.

The only reason to spend so much on the military is in order to maintain an offensive capability. If we go into a defense-only mode, it can be done for a small fraction of the price.



It is RETARTED to think that we should go to spend half of what China is spending on military expendatures.

China is a country of 1.3B people that maintains an offensive military.



This is where pinko pacifists and non-interventionists part ways. We need to preserve the American military superiority. Non-Interventionism will only work if our enemies know WE HAVE THE ABILITY to bomb them into the stone age if they attack us.

I share Ron Paul's views that the US should have a strong defensive military. I'll even admit to being a pacifist. I'm about as far from a pinko as you can get, though.

I worked in the defense industry for years (well, at least I *thought* it was "defense"). Believe me, even with a military budget of 10% of current levels, we would still be able to bomb any adversary into the stone age. Defensively, of course. It doesn't take fancy bombers and aircraft carriers. A few strategic ballistic missiles with MIRVed warheads will work just fine.

[Oliver]

Alright, so right off the bat, we're already spending $320.3 billion more than we bring in. Cut out the personal federal income tax, we'll be down to $1.4041 trillion in revenues.


I wonder what the Democrats Universal Health Care
plans would cost per year in contrast to the current
social spending.

[Copperhed51]

I wonder what the Democrats Universal Health Care
plans would cost per year in contrast to the current
social spending.

I was just trying to find that actually. Honestly, after reading up as much as I can about how Canada's health care system is working compared to ours, universal health care doesn't scare me as much as it used to. This half and half thing has to stop though.

The only number I've found so far was like $40billion extra for universal healthcare and I think whoever put that number out is pretty much a moron. Maybe I read their study wrong or something.

Also, I read something Obama wrote that says we're paying $2.2 trillion/year for health care in this country. I suppose that might be a real number but I think people like Obama like to throw it out there without explaining anything about where the money is coming from and who's paying it, etc.

I'd love to sit in on some congressional budget hearings just to see how insanely irresponsible our representatives are.

[newbitech]

Here is what I come up with based on these numbers. First, let me just say that the only way we are getting rid of income tax is by changing the role of government. Next, the government needs to go ahead and let the banks fail. Propping up this fiat currency is really killing us. However, before letting the money system fail, we need to legalize a replacement.

None of that has to be done (or can be done) in the first year of this budget below. So here is a brief. First year out of the gate we are cutting income tax by 25% across the board. We are also cutting corporate tax by 10% to stimulate reinvestment.

Money that directly supports and sustains peoples survivability has not been touched. Everything else is cut in half. We must STOP PRINTING MONEY!

Revenue (TAX)

$872.25 Reduced by 25% Personal Income
$869.60 Untouched - Social Security and Payroll
$370.20 Reduced by 10% - Corporate Income
$65.10 Untouched - Excise
$26.00 Untouched - Customs Duties
$26.00 Untouched - Estate and Gift
$47.20 Untouced - Other
$2,239.33 Total Revenue (TAX)

Expenses (Gov't Spending)

$586.10 Untouched - Social Security Payments
$274.40 Cut 50% - Defense
$394.50 Untouched - Medicare
$183.50 Cut 50% - Unemployment / Welfare
$276.40 Untouched - Medicaid
$243.70 Untouched - Interest
$44.95 Cut 50% - Education
$38.45 Cut 50% - Transportation
$72.60 Untouched - Veterans Benefits
$21.75 Cut 50% - Justice Administration
$16.55 Cut 50% - Natural Resources / Environment
$16.25 Cut 50% - Foreign Affairs
$13.50 Cut 50% - Agriculture
$13.40 Cut 50% - Community & Regional Development
$12.50 Cut 50% - Science and Technology
$11.75 Cut 50% - Energy
$10.05 Cut 50% - General Government
$2,230.35 (Total Gov't Spending)

Balance + $8.98 Billion.

[Duckman]

The problem is, alot of Ron Paul supporters think Ron Paul is going to get rid of the IRS "immediately," like he said in the first debate. I know several people in my meetup group believe he will get rid of it right away.

Honestly, I doubt the income tax could be removed even if Ron Paul spent 2 terms in office. This doesn't reduce my support for Ron Paul, I think it is just reality, unfortunately, that it will take a while to cut the spending so that it can be done. However, I think we could see dramatic reductions in the income tax during Ron Paul's Presidency.

[AceNZ]

The problem is, alot of Ron Paul supporters think Ron Paul is going to get rid of the IRS "immediately," like he said in the first debate. I know several people in my meetup group believe he will get rid of it right away.

Didn't he say he would immediately start working to eliminate it? That's a lot different than immediately eliminating it. He knows, and has said, that it would require working with congress and changing the role of government.



Honestly, I doubt the income tax could be removed even if Ron Paul spent 2 terms in office. This doesn't reduce my support for Ron Paul, I think it is just reality, unfortunately, that it will take a while to cut the spending so that it can be done. However, I think we could see dramatic reductions in the income tax during Ron Paul's Presidency.

You can bet that as President, RP would veto any budget that wasn't balanced. I also can't imagine him signing any income tax increases. That's a start. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the "departments" ended up being easy to kill with veto power alone.

Congress could anticipate that sort of thing, and work around it to some degree -- at least for two terms, in which case, yes, I agree that he might not get very far with the IRS issue. But he could also play hard-ball if he wanted to. For example, he could direct the Justice Department to not enforce the tax law. If he believes it's unconstitutional (I'm not sure that he does), then that's a reasonable response. Coming into office with that sort of mandate would give him tremendous leverage with congress. It's likely that in 2010, quite a few congresspeople would be elected on his coat-tails, which would also help.

[Copperhed51]

Yeah, though his policies wouldn't become effective immediately, it's pretty plain to see that this budget should not be such a hard thing to reduce. We spend like crazy people right now.

[ErikBlack]

There is one aspect being overlooked here. All of the federal government employees who will lose their jobs when these programs are cut. In the long run such cuts will likely stimulate the economy and create new positions and opportunities for them, but in the short run what will be the consequence of hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of middle-class ex-government employees becoming instantly unemployed?

Our faux economy is like a house of cards. If you yank out one card out of order the entire thing can collapse.

[Thomas Paine]

What pisses me off the most is that the Republicans had control of Congress for 10 years and they blew! They f-ing blew it! They could have eliminated the national debt. They could have reduced government entitlements. They could have reduced the size of the federal government. Instead, the RINOs in Congress, led by that arch traitor, Tom Delay, betrayed every single conservative principle and engaged on a spending spree that would embarrass any group of sailors on shore leave at a New Orleans whore house. I curse Tom Delay and all the other establishment Republicans in Congress who were too gutless and too cowardly to carry out the conservative agenda bequeathed to them by Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater.

[jupiter]

Not to mention all the defense contractor jobs and army personnel who would be out on the street.

I think the cuts can definitely work, but they would have to be phased in over a 4-year term.

The goal should be that on the final year of the Paul presidency, the budget is balanced and there is no income tax.

[zakkubin]

As far as the military budget goes Keep in mind if we close down the majority of over seas bases we won't need to spend as much to maintain what we have now.

The numbers I read stated we spend 70% of our military budget over seas.
Also because our bases are so spread out it takes millions of dollars to simply maintain them.
So what I'm getting at is that by pulling our military back to our country 30% of our current military budget would probably end up being a surplus...

Also remember we currently spend more on our "defense" than the entire world combined...
So 30% is very practical.

[therealjjj77]

I know we could all recite Dr. Paul's policies pretty much verbatim, but I want to get to the dirty part. I want to talk about real numbers and see how feasible his policies are. So, from Wikipedia, here's the budget info I've been able to get.

First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government

For FY 2008, the President has requested the following: The Defense Department Base Budget - $481 billion. War on Terror(non-DoD) Base Budget - $73 billion. Supplemental Funding for WoT - $145 billion. Total requested Dod/WoT spending is $699 billion, or 65% of total net Discretionary spending.

Alright, so right off the bat, we're already spending $320.3 billion more than we bring in. Cut out the personal federal income tax, we'll be down to $1.4041 trillion in revenues.

So, to balance the budget (and not pay off any of the debt), we need to cut spending by $1.4833 trillion.

Ok, now we have to choose how much to cut from what area. I'll leave that up to everybody here to see what we can come up with. The point is, it's time to stop talking in generalities and use real numbers. So let's keep this thread number oriented.

Have at it...

First, cut military spending down to 35 billion defending our own borders ONLY.

Second, redo medicare and medicaid so there is incentive for users NOT to spend it.

Third, take out the FDA completely. This way the cost of researching new medicine drops by close to 10000% decreasing the costs of pharmaceuticals and allowing competition to keep the costs low. This will drastically cut the medicare bill.

Fourth, get rid of the Dept. of Energy, dept. of education, and the whole list of departments. There is no authority for them in the constitution.

What is this "Transportation" expense? That can go. If that is building roads, sell them to the private sector for an additional income boost to address the soc. security issues and let the private sector manage and toll them.

Most of these programs can be cut out. Put those workers to real work in the private sector. Let the private sector take back control of those responsibilities.

This leaves us with a surplus and we can pay down the federal debt. On top of this, allow competition to the Federal Reserve dollar. This way people can choose which is better.

[newbitech]

There is one aspect being overlooked here. All of the federal government employees who will lose their jobs when these programs are cut. In the long run such cuts will likely stimulate the economy and create new positions and opportunities for them, but in the short run what will be the consequence of hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of middle-class ex-government employees becoming instantly unemployed?

Our faux economy is like a house of cards. If you yank out one card out of order the entire thing can collapse.

I don't know if its being overlooked so much as we can't afford them. I agree that its a house of cards. it has to start somewhere. take a look at some facts.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs041.htm

Significant Points

* With more than 1.8 million civilian employees, the Federal Government, excluding the Postal Service is the Nation’s largest employer.
* About 9 out of 10 Federal employees work outside the Washington, DC metropolitan area.
* Job growth generated by increased homeland security needs will be offset by projected declines in other Federal sectors; however, many job openings should arise from the need to replace workers who retire or leave the Federal Government for other reasons.
* Competition is expected for many Federal positions, especially during times of economic uncertainty, when workers seek the stability of Federal employment

I can tell you that the part that I highlighted in red is very true. I know several people who work for the postal service and if the USPS is run like the rest of the FED Govt, they keep people around until they can't stand up. Those folks are going to be retiring soon and sucking up all that Social Security money that we don't have.

I think we'd do them a favor by letting them find other sources of income now before they (and the US economy) collapse. It's going to be painful, we have been saying this for YEARS. The longer we put it off, the worse it will be.

[zakkubin]

Paul obviously is not going to just eliminate the income tax but I believe he would immediately make the entire tax system much simpler.

Whether it's a fair tax or a flat tax I believe that we would actually collect more taxes than ever even though it's a lower % relative to the people.

Also crunch the numbers on how much of a burden 12 million illegals is on our country.
Hospitals,schools,welfare... That all adds up.

Rudy said he had 70,000 illegal kids in his city alone! Thats a ton of money.

[fez2008]

I know we could all recite Dr. Paul's policies pretty much verbatim, but I want to get to the dirty part. I want to talk about real numbers and see how feasible his policies are. So, from Wikipedia, here's the budget info I've been able to get.

First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government

For FY 2008, the President has requested the following: The Defense Department Base Budget - $481 billion. War on Terror(non-DoD) Base Budget - $73 billion. Supplemental Funding for WoT - $145 billion. Total requested Dod/WoT spending is $699 billion, or 65% of total net Discretionary spending.

Alright, so right off the bat, we're already spending $320.3 billion more than we bring in. Cut out the personal federal income tax, we'll be down to $1.4041 trillion in revenues.

So, to balance the budget (and not pay off any of the debt), we need to cut spending by $1.4833 trillion.

Ok, now we have to choose how much to cut from what area. I'll leave that up to everybody here to see what we can come up with. The point is, it's time to stop talking in generalities and use real numbers. So let's keep this thread number oriented.

Have at it...

Drastic measures are not practical because the congress will not vote for them.
Start with the goal of reducing income tax by 10% every year over 8 years.
Primary goal must be to balance the budget.

1st year:
reduce income tax by 10% and corporate tax by 10% ($116 + $37 = $163 billion loss in revenue + 320 bill deficit).
double excise and custom duties (nearly 100B in revenue).
So $383 B must be cut.
cut 280B in defense (120 B by ending the war)
cut 50B from education and training
cut 10B from dept. of transportation
cut 10B from department of energy
cut 10B from earmarks
cut 20B from housing dept.
cut 3B from health and human services

Balanced budget + 10% income tax + 10% less corporate tax = more wealth and more jobs and more options to cut spending and more revenue in income tax and corporate tax even at lower rates (because there will be more companies and people will be earning more).

[therealjjj77]

Drastic measures are not practical because the congress will not vote for them.
Start with the goal of reducing income tax by 10% every year over 8 years.
Primary goal must be to balance the budget.

1st year:
reduce income tax by 10% and corporate tax by 10% ($116 + $37 = $163 billion loss in revenue + 320 bill deficit).
double excise and custom duties (nearly 100B in revenue).
So $383 B must be cut.
cut 280B in defense (120 B by ending the war)
cut 50B from education and training
cut 10B from dept. of transportation
cut 10B from department of energy
cut 10B from earmarks
cut 20B from housing dept.
cut 3B from health and human services

Balanced budget + 10% income tax + 10% less corporate tax = more wealth and more jobs and more options to cut spending and more revenue in income tax and corporate tax even at lower rates (because there will be more companies and people will be earning more).

The federal reserve pulls out the stops every time we try to pay down the federal debt. It is very important to allow alternatives to them so they only put themselves out of business instead of the entire country.

Also, the question comes down to which is worse:

Cut the jobs of federal employees and having a redistribution of wealth while they shift in the job sectors

OR

leave things in the current situation we are in and have inflation kick the elderly out of their homes, send all of our jobs overseas, and force our country toward an Amero.

I pick option A.

Also, one thing people are not factoring are the increased revenues from corporate taxes by eliminating the personal income tax. Let's say you make 40,000 per year and now you keep all the fruits of your labor so you basically keep 10,000 more to spend as you please. This causes more spending and more demand for jobs immediately in sectors ranging from manufacturing to retail employing a great many of those who have been laid off from the government. This increased spending means more profits which means more competition which means more choices and cheaper prices for consumers. These profits being taxed will yield a greater amount then they currently yield. That is why it is hard to predict exactly what will happen. But I know it will be good. :p

[pacelli]

That is RETARTED! Maybe we can cut up to 50% of the military, but we still need billion dollar F-22 Raptors, Aircraft Carriers, etc, etc, etc....

It is RETARTED to think that we should go to spend half of what China is spending on military expendatures.

This is where pinko pacifists and non-interventionists part ways. We need to preserve the American military superiority. Non-Interventionism will only work if our enemies know WE HAVE THE ABILITY to bomb them into the stone age if they attack us.

Nice job with the name-calling. For the record, the next time you decide to insult someone's intelligence, learn how to spell:



RETARDED
re·tard·ed /rɪˈtɑrdɪd/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-tahr-did] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. characterized by retardation: a retarded child.
–noun
2. (used with a plural verb) mentally retarded persons collectively (usually prec. by the): new schools for the retarded.
[Origin: 1800–10; retard + -ed2]

—Synonyms backward, disabled, handicapped.

As for the rest of your post-- I agree, I think Ron Paul would support armed neutrality.

[lnieves]

but in the short run what will be the consequence of hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of middle-class ex-government employees becoming instantly unemployed?



A counter-revolution :eek:

[bkreigh]

copperhed,

do you have a link as to where you got the revenue and expenditure figures. I got into a debate with a guy at work about our income tax. He is a huckabee supporter and he loves his tax idea. He also believes that we should have military bases in all the countries we do now incase another Hitler comes to power so we can go in and exterminate them then and there. Its hard to debate this person because he needs statistics from a reliable source more or less. Id appreciate the link so i can provide him with this info as to where we get our revenues other than the Income Tax and how much we spend on our military and foreign policy issues.

[bkreigh]

Crap nevermind i see you got the numbers from wikpedia. Ill search there!

[Leslie Webb]

I like the proposal in post #5 best. I would like to see the campaign come out with a paper on the budget, with concrete figures. Post #5 seems closest to the large reductions in spending that Ron wants to make.

[electronicmaji]

$586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security --> Privatize this, Cut to 550 Billion
$548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] --> Cut this to 90 - 150 Billion Spent locally
$394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare --> Cut drug play plan/Keep Raise Ratio same
$367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare - 20 Billion Limit on Welfare/Raise Unemployment
$276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related -->Provide a new Voucher Program that replaced Medicaid pays with Full Insurance Vouchers.
$243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
$89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training --> Reform the Education department and raise spending by 15%
$76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation --> Cut Spending to 5 Billion
$72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits-> Raise Spending by 20 Billion
$43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice - Cut 10 Billion
$33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment --> Cut by 15 Billion
$32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs --> Get Rid of This Completely
$27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture --> Get Rid of This Completely
$26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development --> Cut to 10 Billion
$25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology --> Remove Completely
$23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy --> Cut to 5 Billion
$20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government --> Cut to 5 Billion
__________________________________________________ ____
36.1 Billion Cut in Social Security
448 Billion Cut in Millitary
80.4 Billion Cut according to total costs of Medicare Part D up until 2015 averaged
150 Billion Welfare/Unemployment Cut (assumed)
76.4 Billion Meidcaid Cut
10.1 Billion RAISE in Educational Spending
71.9 Billion Cut in Transportation
20 Billion RAISE in Veteran Benefits Spending
10 Billion Cut in Administration of Justice (NO drug War and DEA effect)
15 Billion Cut in Natural resources and Environment
32.5 Billion Cut in Foreign Affairs
27.0 Billion Cut in Agriculture
10 Billion Cut in Community and Regional Development
25.0 Billion Cut in Science and Technology
18.5 Billion Cut in Energy
15.1 Billion Cut in General Goverment
1015.9 Cut
__________________________________________________ _____________
985.8 Cut with Education and Veterans Affair Raises

So at that point we can negate the Debt interest. Leave that budget for the first 4 years with minor tuneups. Once relected I'd do major replanning of some uneccesary departments based on what I had prepared for the past 4 years especially to make sure the poor are provided for the minute these services were cut off. Then id cut them off. I'd leave that budget for 2 years to further decrease the national debt and the interest then I would cut out the IRS and the Income tax and if it didn't balance I would look at alternate sources of revenue.

[Iwantchange]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-16u9x3tfE

It's worse than that...

[LandonCook]

I know we could all recite Dr. Paul's policies pretty much verbatim, but I want to get to the dirty part. I want to talk about real numbers and see how feasible his policies are. So, from Wikipedia, here's the budget info I've been able to get.


First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion ($1.4041 trillion)

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

NEW- State apropriated relief fund- 650 Billion dollars
(Let me explain this: apropriating a tax to the states is not only legal, but forces state government to downsize as well!)

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security (Can't get rid of overnight)
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] (Cut by half and use the money on actual defence)
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare (Cut by half)
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training (Dept. Edu)
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment (cut by half)
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs (or at least bases)
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology (who are they to say what is good science) (I say only fund nasa!)
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government (Take out 5 million for excess)



Goal Cut: 1.2833 Trillion
New goal cut of: 633 Billion
Actual Cut: 780.5 Billion

There you go!

[pacelli]

Goal Cut: 1.2833 Trillion
Actual Cut: 775.5 Billion

Shit! I couldn't do it!

Yeah, but this is per year, right? Paul would presumably be in office for 4 years in the least.

[LandonCook]

My Plan>>>


I know we could all recite Dr. Paul's policies pretty much verbatim, but I want to get to the dirty part. I want to talk about real numbers and see how feasible his policies are. So, from Wikipedia, here's the budget info I've been able to get.


First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion ($1.4041 trillion)

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

NEW- State apropriated relief fund- 650 Billion dollars
(Let me explain this: apropriating a tax to the states is not only legal, but forces state government to downsize as well!)

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security (Can't get rid of overnight)
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] (Cut by half and use the money on actual defence)
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare (Cut by half)
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training (Dept. Edu)
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment (cut by half)
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs (or at least bases)
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology (who are they to say what is good science) (I say only fund nasa!)
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government (Take out 5 million for excess)



Goal Cut: 1.2833 Trillion
New goal cut of: 633 Billion
Actual Cut: 780.5 Billion
---------------------------------------
Surplus of: 136 billion (to go to paying off the debt) (after the debt is paid of, both the state tax and the surplus disapear)

There you go!

Also, ending the drug war and taxing Weed would help as well...

[Ron LOL]

Defense is one place we shouldn't cut a single red cent, actually. Just, we shouldn't be wasting money deploying shit all over the world. Defense spending should be maintaining the armed forces (bases, food, clothing, salaries, whatever) and R&D. We're untouchable only because of our technological edge. This must be maintained. It's absolutely an issue of national security.

Full disclosure: I'm an engineer, but I don't work for a defense contractor.

Edit: along those lines, I don't know if I can stomach killing NSF and NASA. Frankly, there's little motivation for industry to do basic science research -- and I say this as an R&D engineer -- just because it takes so damn long to see a return.

[Ron LOL]

Oh what the hell, I'll play this game too. And I'm going to play it a bit differently.



First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes
* $47.2 billion - Other

Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2]
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training. $10e9
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation. $10e9
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice. $10e9
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment. $1e9
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs. $1e9
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture. $1e9
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development. $5e9
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology. $10e9
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy. $10e9
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government. Gone. (Seriously, WTF is this anyway).


Total cut: $342.3e9

That's enough to give every man, woman and child in the US a $1,000 check (in the form of not taking it away in the first place ;)). A good beginning towards shrinking government.

If you can't run even a large national program with a billion fucking dollars, you can't possibly be working very hard.

[cjhowe]

How come nobody is touching Medicaid? That's a state program. It is run 10x better than is Medicare when the states don't have to jump through the hoops that the Federal government mandates to receive that 1/4 Trillion funding.

[stewie3128]

I agree here. We can cut the defense budget, but still need a very strong military.

Indeed - but what's the actual dollar figure for an effective national defense force?

We should close the overseas bases, but we also need to be well-defended enough that our enemies know that if they attack us, they're screwed.

[jglapski]

The actual costs of defense are hidden in many other areas, with estimates of roughly $1 trillion (which includes most of the interest expense).

The next to highest spender on defense is China, with $56B spent, according to:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_dol_fig-military-expenditures-dollar-figure

If you cut to $100 billion, that saves roughly $600 billion (including eliminating things like Homeland Security).

I would eliminate the following departments:
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training.
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation.
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment.
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture.
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development.
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology.
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy.

And severely cut these:
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice.
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs.

Eliminating foreign aid probably eliminates 95% of the foreign affairs budget.

Getting rid of persecuting people for victimless crimes probably gets rid of 75% of the administration of justice budget.

I would make severe cuts to unemployment and welfare, aiming to end this within 4 years (I know, dream on).

That's well over $1 trillion.

Paul's approach to ending Medicare and Medicaid gradually would save money as well.

Ending Social Security over a generation would cost additional money, but not initially.

[AceNZ]

Defense is one place we shouldn't cut a single red cent, actually. Just, we shouldn't be wasting money deploying shit all over the world. Defense spending should be maintaining the armed forces (bases, food, clothing, salaries, whatever) and R&D. We're untouchable only because of our technological edge. This must be maintained. It's absolutely an issue of national security.

Why are we "untouchable only because of our technological edge"? I would think that our collection of 1970's-era ballistic missiles by itself would keep us untouchable for a long time to come.



Edit: along those lines, I don't know if I can stomach killing NSF and NASA. Frankly, there's little motivation for industry to do basic science research -- and I say this as an R&D engineer -- just because it takes so damn long to see a return.

Where in the Constitution does it say that the government should support basic R&D or an industry like aerospace?

There might be little motivation today for industry to do basic research -- but that's partly a side-effect of the tax system, and partly because of market-twisting grants issued by the government.



We should close the overseas bases, but we also need to be well-defended enough that our enemies know that if they attack us, they're screwed.

Most of the current "defense" budget is really for offensive weapons. If you truly want just a strong defensive force, it can be done for a small fraction of current costs.

For example, nuclear ballistic missiles are a pretty strong deterrent.

[UziSprayTF]

The plan to eliminate the Income Tax in 10 years


First, the Revenue: $2.5671 trillion

* $1,163 billion - Individual income tax
* $869.6 billion - Social Security and other payroll taxes (up the social security tax by 15%, it needs to be done)
* $370.2 billion - Corporate income tax (cut by 10%)
* $65.1 billion - Excise taxes
* $26.0 billion - Customs duties
* $26.0 billion - Estate and gift taxes (cut the death tax by 100%)
* $47.2 billion - Other (cut capital gains tax, interest tax, etc...)


Now the expenditures: $2.8874 trillion total

* $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security (Can't get rid of overnight)
* $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] (Cut 75%)
* $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare (wtf??! 75% cut)
* $367.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare (Limit to 5 weeks of job finding, say... 80% cut)
* $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related (wtf is this anyways? 75% cut)
* $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt (I'll get to this one)
* $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training (Dept. Edu) (Not only do we cut this one by 100%, we also get money back by selling all those buildings and coffee mugs!!)
* $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation (cut 80%)
* $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits
* $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice (Increase 20%)
* $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment (Cut 15%)
* $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs (cut 40%)
* $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture (over 8 years cut 80%)
* $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development (100% cut)
* $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology (98% cut)
* $23.5 billion (+0.0%) - Energy (Eventual 100% cut)
* $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government (Cut 35% to 85%, wtf is that anyways?)

OTHER KEY CHANGES:
- Allow anyone to practice medicine, as long as you have signed a waiver.
- Allow anyone to limit the amount they can sue someone for something.
- Stop letting illegals use hospitals for free.
- Allow private sector wage garnishments for specific loans, such as medical

Year 01: 1.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 8.5
Year 02: 1.2 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 7.3
Year 03: 1.4 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 6.9
Year 04: 1.6 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 5.3
Year 05: 1.8 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 3.5
Year 06: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at 1.5
Year 07: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -0.5
Year 08: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -2.5
Year 09: 2.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -5.0
Year 10: 2.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -7.5
Year 11: 2.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -10.0
--- Cut Income tax by 50% ---
Year 12: 1.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -11.5
Year 13: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -13.5
Year 14: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -15.0
Year 15: 2.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -17.5
- Cut Income tax Completely -
Year 16: 1.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -19.0
Year 17: 1.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -20.5
Year 18: 1.5 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -22.0
Year 19: 2.0 Trill surplus - Pay off debt - Debt at -24.0
- Cut Corp tax 50% Completely -

Etc... Until you get a government that is constantly growing with wealth and you can eliminate all federal taxes, levies, etc... Hopefully at this point people have their own health savings dollars and retirement incomes :D You might be asking "why does the surplus grow?" That is because the ECONOMY grows while we keep spending down. With the reduced taxes it will grow even faster.

[fez2008]

bump