Vid : Trump demands 5% budget cut from each Dept. head at White House Mtg.

[eleganz]

He's calling it the "Nickel plan". I figured this was coming sometime next year so color me pleasantly surprised.

I guess some here will (stupidly) say its all part of the Swamp plan to cut 5% in government to appease and control the conservative base?? Anybody? Bueller?

I know he gets a lot of crap around here for not being a libertarian (excuse me while I laugh at anybody who expects it) but I also know Trump has the ego bigger than any past president. He doesn't want to be compared to Obama in anyway when he's done. It's not unreasonable to assume he would tackle spending and leave office with less debt than what Obama accrued.

[shakey1]

You would think that's not too much to ask.

[dannno]

Hold on, let me go get some straws for the anti-Trumpers to grasp at..

[AuH20]

They will kick and scream.

[Brian4Liberty]

They will kick and scream.

The left will take it to every leftist court in the nation and every one of them will block it.

[Brian4Liberty]

Hold on, let me go get some straws for the anti-Trumpers to grasp at..

Zippy is busy, let me take a guess...

It doesn’t cover military/defense spending, and it can’t touch entitlement, interest and welfare spending, so it’s only a tiny portion of the the budget. It’s really no cut at all, just a slight decrease in the automatic year over year increases, so the spending will actually increase.

(Insert pie chart here).

[Swordsmyth]

[Swordsmyth]

[nobody's_hero]

The left will take it to every leftist court in the nation and every one of them will block it.

That's why we should follow the commonly proposed strategy of sitting on our asses and groaning while dems retake a majori—oh wait.

[phill4paul]

Zippy is busy, let me take a guess...

It doesn’t cover military/defense spending, and it can’t touch entitlement, interest and welfare spending, so it’s only a tiny portion of the the budget. It’s really no cut at all, just a slight decrease in the automatic year over year increases, so the spending will actually increase.

(Insert pie chart here).

Dayum. That was goooo-ood. +rep.

[r3volution 3.0]

Zippy is busy, let me take a guess...

It doesn’t cover military/defense spending, and it can’t touch entitlement, interest and welfare spending, so it’s only a tiny portion of the the budget. It’s really no cut at all, just a slight decrease in the automatic year over year increases, so the spending will actually increase.

(Insert pie chart here).

Is any of that untrue?

[phill4paul]

Is any of that untrue?

You don't like the idea of a 5 Penny Plan why?

Five Penny Plan

[r3volution 3.0]

You don't like the idea of a 5 Penny Plan why?

Five Penny Plan

If it's intended to apply only to non-defense discretionary spending (which I would assume is the case), it's peanuts.

...not only in terms of the budget as a whole, but in terms of the spending increases which Trump has already signed into law.

So, no, I'm not going to wet myself in excitement.

[phill4paul]

If it's intended to apply only to non-defense discretionary spending (which I would assume is the case), it's peanuts.

...not only in terms of the budget as a whole, but in terms of the spending increases which Trump has already signed into law.

So, no, I'm not going to wet myself in excitement.

You you did like Rand's penny plan though. Right?

[specsaregood]

If it's intended to apply only to non-defense discretionary spending (which I would assume is the case), it's peanuts.

...not only in terms of the budget as a whole, but in terms of the spending increases which Trump has already signed into law.

So, no, I'm not going to wet myself in excitement.

yes, if we cant cut it all now, we should not bother cutting anything at all.

[phill4paul]

yes, if we cant cut it all now, we should not bother cutting anything at all.

Absolutely, it'd suck if Trump only cut 5% spending to 60% of all agencies. Ron Paul would have shut down ALL agencies on day one.

[Brian4Liberty]

Is any of that untrue?

The glass is half empty perspective.

They said on one media report that the military spending is excluded, and we can probably assume that the mandatory and debt maintenance spending can’t be touched. As for the rest, it was pure speculation, so who knows?

A 5% across the board headcount reduction would help even more. Someone tell Trump.

[r3volution 3.0]

yes, if we cant cut it all now, we should not bother cutting anything at all.

We might first bother not increasing it.

You you did like Rand's penny plan though. Right?

I'm always for spending cuts.

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy/delusion inherent in praising this little cut, after Trump just signed a much bigger increase.

Altogether, he's is not cutting spending; he's increasing it while redirecting it from one agency to another.

Rand, on the other hand, has always proposed cuts plain and simple: not coupled with more than offsetting increases.

*this all assumes that these cuts will even happen (I expect it's a ruse - Congress objects, Trump doesn't veto, can say he tried)

[juleswin]

Wow, I would have been just fine with a freeze in spending increases but a 5% plan would blow Rand and definitely Ron Paul's plan out of the water. I guess this is the Ron Paul on steroids people were talking about. I support a cut in spending but I will advice him to start slow and as the people and dept adjust, increase the cuts up to 5% a year.

I just hope to be still alive when this plan comes to fruition.

Godspeed Trump

[Madison320]

Hold on, let me go get some straws for the anti-Trumpers to grasp at..

That's like praising the fat guy for ordering the diet coke, after he just scarfed up a triple cheeseburger and 3 orders of large fries.

Or like Elizabeth Warren bragging about being native American.

And don't give me that crap about moving in the right direction. Moving in the right direction would be spending less each year. Or even cutting the rate of increase. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe we've been increasing the rate of increase. Wipe that kool aid off your chin.

[Swordsmyth]

That's like praising the fat guy for ordering the diet coke, after he just scarfed up a triple cheeseburger and 3 orders of large fries.

Or like Elizabeth Warren bragging about being native American.

And don't give me that crap about moving in the right direction. Moving in the right direction would be spending less each year. Or even cutting the rate of increase. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe we've been increasing the rate of increase. Wipe that kool aid off your chin.

It is definitely not enough yet, lets hope it is the beginning of something that will grow bigger.

[kona]

Here is the beauty of Trump cutting spending. He called for 5% but implied he would like to see more from some agencies. Underpromising, overdelivering. A successful cut this year (which will be a record) will have Trump wanting to beat that record next year. And for five successive years after that.

If Trump couples this with bringing a significant part of the military home and more tax cuts, it will be very significant.

[r3volution 3.0]

That's like praising the fat guy for ordering the diet coke, after he just scarfed up a triple cheeseburger and 3 orders of large fries.

Well put

[oyarde]

I think 5 , more like 10 percent is a good start . Then do it every year .

[phill4paul]

We might first bother not increasing it.



I'm always for spending cuts.

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy/delusion inherent in praising this little cut, after Trump just signed a much bigger increase.

Altogether, he's is not cutting spending; he's increasing it while redirecting it from one agency to another.

Rand, on the other hand, has always proposed cuts plain and simple: not coupled with more than offsetting increases.

*this all assumes that these cuts will even happen (I expect it's a ruse - Congress objects, Trump doesn't veto, can say he tried)

Did you watch the video? Trump said that he increased the defense budget because he said they needed it. They don't. You and I both know that. He said now that that has been accomplished it is time to move toward reducing government. Through the defense spending he solidified his base. That means his party wins in the mid-term and he wins in 2020.
Please don't tell me that you believed that Ron Paul, on day one, could have shuttered the FBI, CIA and IRS without being impeached. That he could have taken all the troops and "marched them home like we marched them out."
It was great rhetoric. It spoke to me. But, for even an instant, did you actually believe it was that easy?
Believe what you want. I personally believe that Trump, with his ego, wants to leave a legacy unlike other presidents. We've seen the legacy of former presidents. He wants to leave his unlike others. The hate against him just emboldens him.
He can do spectacularly well, or spectacularly fail. It's all left to be seen. But, hearing you and others bitching about every little thing is getting old.
But, I've yet to see a single president in my lifetime call for budget cuts, from any agency, at a 5% rate.
So, I guess time will tell.

[phill4paul]

That's like praising the fat guy for ordering the diet coke, after he just scarfed up a triple cheeseburger and 3 orders of large fries.

Or like Elizabeth Warren bragging about being native American.

And don't give me that crap about moving in the right direction. Moving in the right direction would be spending less each year. Or even cutting the rate of increase. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe we've been increasing the rate of increase. Wipe that kool aid off your chin.

You just don't understand how populism works, do you? How it is absolutely needed to accomplish goals.

Did you really believe on day one of a Ron Paul presidency that he could have shuttered the FBI, CIA and IRS all while ordering every troop home without being impeached?

[phill4paul]

Wow, I would have been just fine with a freeze in spending increases but a 5% plan would blow Rand and definitely Ron Paul's plan out of the water. I guess this is the Ron Paul on steroids people were talking about. I support a cut in spending but I will advice him to start slow and as the people and dept adjust, increase the cuts up to 5% a year.

I just hope to be still alive when this plan comes to fruition.

Godspeed Trump

It's a negotiation. Start bigly. Settle lower. If it even amounts to 1% it is a win. Unless of course you hate Trump and nothing is ever good enough.

[r3volution 3.0]

Did you watch the video? Trump said that he increased the defense budget because he said they needed it. They don't. You and I both know that. He said now that that has been accomplished it is time to move toward reducing government. Through the defense spending he solidified his base. That means his party wins in the mid-term and he wins in 2020.
Please don't tell me that you believed that Ron Paul, on day one, could have shuttered the FBI, CIA and IRS without being impeached. That he could have taken all the troops and "marched them home like we marched them out."
It was great rhetoric. It spoke to me. But, for even an instant, did you actually believe it was that easy?
Believe what you want. I personally believe that Trump, with his ego, wants to leave a legacy unlike other presidents. We've seen the legacy of former presidents. He wants to leave his unlike others. The hate against him just emboldens him.
He can do spectacularly well, or spectacularly fail. It's all left to be seen. But, hearing you and others bitching about every little thing is getting old.
But, I've yet to see a single president in my lifetime call for budget cuts, from any agency, at a 5% rate.
So, I guess time will tell.

Yea, you lost me when you started comparing him to Ron..

The guy currently growing government, who's always advocated big government, isn't on a secret mission to shrink government.

If it even amounts to 1% it is a win.

My math isn't great. Maybe you can help me out.

$150 billion spending increase (done)
- $50 billion spending decrease (proposed)
---------
= winning?

You just don't understand how populism works, do you? How it is absolutely needed to accomplish goals.

Did you really believe on day one of a Ron Paul presidency that he could have shuttered the FBI, CIA and IRS all while ordering every troop home without being impeached?

Here's how populism work (at least in the fiscal arena):

1. Keep the gravy train rolling

2. Cut taxes anyway

3. Print money to cover the difference

[juleswin]

It's a negotiation. Start bigly. Settle lower. If it even amounts to 1% it is a win. Unless of course you hate Trump and nothing is ever good enough.

That would be amazing if he can get only a freeze in spending, a real spending cut on the other hand would make him a legend. I will go a little bit further and say that if the next year's budget only increases by the rate of inflation which is 2-3%, I will be among the people singing his praise on this site. I don't like Trump but that kind of achievement would be impossible for any fiscal conservative on this site to ignore.

I wish him the best cos I have a strong feeling that many people aren't going to like it.

[TheCount]

Is this going to be the kind of cut where the new numbers are smaller than the old numbers, or the kind where the new numbers are bigger than the old numbers?