Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 110

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

  1. #61
    This got zero coverage outside of the fox broadcast...



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by kona View Post
    This got zero coverage outside of the fox broadcast...
    Googling "Trump 5%" brings up articles from:

    -CNBC
    -USA Today
    -WSJ
    -CNN
    -Bloomberg
    -Marketwatch

    That's on the first page.

  4. #63
    A 5% cut in spending isn't going to correct everything but if our economy improves it would help sell the ideas that cutting spending can improve the economy to the most amount of people possible. Plus when the dollar is spent more wisely there is less inflated mess so your good investments buy more which will make the government run leaner and cleaner..

  5. #64
    This is the type of stuff we have been working towards since the liberty movement began in earnest. The goal is to start cutting these things down until they are erased from existence.

    I understand the apprehension since government and politicians love to lie and dangle the carrot on the stick just enough to bring in the skeptics and the fence sitters.

    But with that said, how is something like this, something Ron Paul has been yelling from the mountain tops like crazy for decades, being rejected on these boards? We would have been singing hallelujah in 2007 if this had happened then. We couldn't have imagined 11 years ago we would have a president that would propose such a thing, unless we got our guy, Dr. Paul, in there. Not to mention cutting foreign aid from countries, another thing Ron Paul desperately tried to convey in the debates to the tune of wild laughter from the audience and the msm.

    Now it's happening, a sitting president is actually considering these issues, and we still have people whining? I love you guys.



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    You realize that, even with a 5% cut in non-defense discretionary spending, total spending will increase?

    At this point Trump is actively making good on his campaign promises and appears like he is trying to do more. At this point I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt and its worth waiting to see what happens.
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll

  8. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by eleganz View Post
    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.

    Appease and control? Naaa....just a requirement as the Fed money printer slows down due to ongoing loss of global dollar reserve currency status. That is also assuming any such cuts aren't directed to the MIC instead...

    It's really rich when people troll and imply others are 'stupid', yet troller clearly knows nothing about economic current events that aren't mentioned in the Fox News bubble.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  9. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    I'm not buying into Trump full tilt. I was the most vociferous anti-Trumper on these forums leading up to the election. Didn't vote for him. But, I'm open to seeing what plays out. Right now it means voting Red Wave to see what the sequel brings.
    I'm still an "anti-Trumper" until he actually does something on this front. But like you, I'm open to the possibility.

    Here's the thing... Trump wrote a book about playing to people's fantasies. It's part of his con. In this case, he's playing to my fantasies about cutting government spending. I can see how easy it is to get caught up in it. I want to believe it. It's my hope speaking. Trump, like Obama, is incredibly adept at manipulating people's hopes. So I'm very cautiously optimistic.

    I also recognize that he may be using this stunt as a way to rev up the base for the red wave. Since I've never voted party, I'll continue trying to vote out incumbents unless there's a true liberty candidate on the ballot.

    As far as keeping an open mind, I just hope those true Trump believers will do so if this turns out to be a 5% cut in the rate of growth. (If the plan was to grow spending at 7%, but the cuts amount to a growth of 6.65% then this whole exercise is useless.) Also, keep an open mind if these cuts never come to fruition - that should indicate this is an election year ploy. Also, keep an open mind if there are cuts in some areas, but bigger growths in other areas. His comments about the military suggests he still isn't serious, but we'll see.

    In short, Trump has a big opportunity here to win me over. I really, really hope he does it! If the GOP wins next month, they should have no reason not to do it. He'll turn me into a Trump-thumper and I'll be on the front lines pushing for his re-election!

    But if this doesn't pan out - NO MORE EXCUSES! Sound fair?? You can tag this post.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  10. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    Appease and control? Naaa....just a requirement as the Fed money printer slows down due to ongoing loss of global dollar reserve currency status. That is also assuming any such cuts aren't directed to the MIC instead...

    It's really rich when people troll and imply others are 'stupid', yet troller clearly knows nothing about economic current events that aren't mentioned in the Fox News bubble.
    ^^^^^^^^

  11. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    I'm still an "anti-Trumper" until he actually does something on this front. But like you, I'm open to the possibility.

    Here's the thing... Trump wrote a book about playing to people's fantasies. It's part of his con. In this case, he's playing to my fantasies about cutting government spending. I can see how easy it is to get caught up in it. I want to believe it. It's my hope speaking. Trump, like Obama, is incredibly adept at manipulating people's hopes. So I'm very cautiously optimistic.

    I also recognize that he may be using this stunt as a way to rev up the base for the red wave. Since I've never voted party, I'll continue trying to vote out incumbents unless there's a true liberty candidate on the ballot.

    As far as keeping an open mind, I just hope those true Trump believers will do so if this turns out to be a 5% cut in the rate of growth. (If the plan was to grow spending at 7%, but the cuts amount to a growth of 6.65% then this whole exercise is useless.) Also, keep an open mind if these cuts never come to fruition - that should indicate this is an election year ploy. Also, keep an open mind if there are cuts in some areas, but bigger growths in other areas. His comments about the military suggests he still isn't serious, but we'll see.

    In short, Trump has a big opportunity here to win me over. I really, really hope he does it! If the GOP wins next month, they should have no reason not to do it. He'll turn me into a Trump-thumper and I'll be on the front lines pushing for his re-election!

    But if this doesn't pan out - NO MORE EXCUSES! Sound fair?? You can tag this post.
    This is also my take on the issue. Anyone else remember Trump talking about auditing the fed, bringing troops home, building a wall, prosecuting Hillary Clinton etc etc? the man is a sweet talker. Many of the newbies are still new to the game and will start waving the victory flag just from the proclamations of a politician.

    I hope this time he is serious this time

  12. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Cutting taxes is not populism. Maybe you didn't get the memo. I'm absolutely assured that the Democrat base wants taxes raised to the point that corporations and their CEO's don't make more than the average worker.
    Hate all you want. I don't care. At least Trump shakes the tree constantly. Job growth is back. At least in my area and that is enough for me. Wages are rising. Less illegal workers equals higher wages in a tight hiring market.
    So, go on with your bad self and the belief that someday all the Americans on welfare are gonna vote for a 1789 reset. Or whatever utopia you think you are going to achieve.
    I'll take small victories when I can get them. Federal deregulation against corporations on a scale unseen in my lifetime. The bolstering of the labor market and higher wages through that. And now a call out for 5% slashes on the Federal agencies.
    Keep doing what you do best. Bitching and accomplishing nothing.
    Reading thru the responses it's obvious that most of you guys have no clue as to the state of the economy. It's a massive bubble that could pop at any moment. We have almost 22 trillion in debt. Since the last crash in 2008 we've borrowed 12 trillion, printed 4 trillion, ran half trillion trade deficits and had rates at zero. Its been 10 years since the last recession which is almost a record. By taking credit for the "booming" economy (same as the Obama "booming" economy), Trump (and all of you) are setting yourselves up for the blame when it crashes.

    And don't tell me that you understand that all the debt and money printing and ZIRP is bad. No you don't. If you did you wouldn't be constantly bragging about how "great" things are.

  13. #71
    Just another election promise not to be fulfilled but to play to voters after concern over sharply rising deficits was announced last week. It was asked that each Cabinet Secretary (except defense) offer a plan to reduce their spending by 5%. That covers less than $500 billion in a $4 trillion budget. The "cuts" would be about $25 billion in that $4 trillion budget and won't really happen unless Congress passes a spending bill which reduces that spending since they are the ones responsible for taxes and spending. All hat and no cattle as they say. He wants at least that much more in spending for his wall and border security.

  14. #72
    So, @Swordsmyth, will you admit that you were wrong about Trump's yuge deregulation?

    Post #55

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The $600 M was just what it cost the government to enforce the regulations.
    No, it's the estimate of the annual economic impact.

    From the guidance published by the Trump administration about how to apply the EO:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whi...-17-21-OMB.pdf

    V. Accounting Questions

    Q21. How should costs and cost savings be measured?


    A: Except where noted in other portions of this guidance, costs should be estimated using the methods and concepts appearing in OMB Circular A-4. There are several types of impacts that, under O MB Circular A-4, could be reasonably categorized as either benefits or costs, with the only difference being the sign (positive or negative) on the estimates. In most cases where there is ambiguity in the categorization of impacts, agencies should conform to the accounting conventions they have followed in past analyses. For example, if medical cost savings due to safety regulations have historically been categorized as benefits rather than reduced costs, they should continue to be categorized as benefits for EO 13771 regulatory actions. Identifying cost savings, such as fuel savings associated with energy efficiency investments, as benefits is a common accounting convention followed in O IRA’s reports to Congress on the benefits and costs of Federal regulations.
    ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth
    The White House said it had eliminated regulatory costs totaling $23 billion in the most recent budget
    That figure isn't the annual savings; it's the present value of the annual savings out to infinity, discounted at 7%.

    https://reginfo.gov/public/pdf/eo137...M_12072017.pdf

    Annualized Value v. Present Value.

    The above chart uses the present value of regulatory and deregulatory actions. Annualized value and present value are different forms of the same summary numbers. With a perpetual time horizon and a 7 percent discount rate, a present value can be transformed into its contemporaneous annualized value by multiplying by 0.07.
    Incidentally, the final report for FY 2018 (link above) gives an annual savings of 1.64 billion, or well under 0.1% of the total regulatory burden.

    P.S. As to that percentage, here is a study by the National Association of Manufacturers, which put the total cost of federal regulation at $2.028 trillion annually in 2012. Even if we use that figure, i.e. ignoring both inflation and the growth of the regulatory state, Trump's $1.64 billion in annual savings equals 0.08% of the total. If Trump were to continue his yuge deregulation at this rate, we'd halve the burden in about 600 years.



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    So, @Swordsmyth, will you admit that you were wrong about Trump's yuge deregulation?
    If you admit that you were as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    The deregulation is a rounding error relative the total cost of regulation, $600 million/year
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Incidentally, the final report for FY 2018 (link above) gives an annual savings of 1.64 billion
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    P.S. As to that percentage, here is a study by the National Association of Manufacturers, which put the total cost of federal regulation at $2.028 trillion annually in 2012. Even if we use that figure, i.e. ignoring both inflation and the growth of the regulatory state, Trump's $1.64 billion in annual savings equals 0.08% of the total. If Trump were to continue his yuge deregulation at this rate, we'd halve the burden in about 600 years.
    Maybe if we get the Demoncrats out of Congress and the right kind of judges appointed he can start to cut regulations even faster.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  17. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Just another election promise not to be fulfilled....

    Oh no! Campaign promises going unfulfilled is unprecedented!

    Is he taking someone else to the prom, too?







    Quote Originally Posted by TheCount View Post
    ...I believe that when the government is capable of doing a thing, it will.
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    which one of yall fuckers wrote the "ron paul" racist news letters
    Quote Originally Posted by Dforkus View Post
    Zippy's posts are a great contribution.




    Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members

  18. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    If you admit that you were as well.
    Both the $600 million and $1.64 billion figures were based on documents published by the Trump administration.

    The $600 million figure was for part of a fiscal year. The $1.64 billion figure was the final report for the whole fiscal year.

    You never read either, you simply bought the fake news from FOX that Trump had engaged in some great deregulation.

    Do you now, presented with the facts, complements of r3vo wasting his time to bring them to you, admit that these changes are trivial?
    Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 10-19-2018 at 08:10 PM.

  19. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    Both the $600 million and $1.64 billion figures were based on documents published by the Trump administration.

    The $600 million figure was for part of a fiscal year. The $1.64 billion figure was the final report for the whole fiscal year.

    You never read either, you simply bought the fake news from FOX that Trump had engaged in some great deregulation.

    Do you now, presented with the facts, complements of r3vo wasting this time to bring them to you, admit that these changes are trivial?
    I do not admit that $1.64 B is trivial especially as a change of direction from adding Billions more in costs every year.

    Given time and the right support he may do much better yet.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  20. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I do not admit that $1.64 B is trivial especially as a change of direction from adding Billions more in costs every year.

    Given time and the right support he may do much better yet.
    You don't admit that $1.64 billion out of 2.028 trillion (0.08%) is trivial?

  21. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    You don't admit that $1.64 billion out of 2.028 trillion (0.08%) is trivial?
    It is. Now if they did this every year...
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  22. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    It is. Now if they did this every year...
    ...we'd eliminate the problem in 1236 years.

  23. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    You don't admit that $1.64 billion out of 2.028 trillion (0.08%) is trivial?
    It isn't, it may be proportionally small but it isn't trivial, especially as a change of direction from adding Billions more, he should be getting credit for the Billions in increases that didn't happen in addition to the $1.64 B decrease.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    ...we'd eliminate the problem in 1236 years.
    Maybe we should help him to be able to eliminate regulations at a faster rate?
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  26. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It isn't, it may be proportionally small but it isn't trivial, especially as a change of direction from adding Billions more, he should be getting credit for the Billions in increases that didn't happen in addition to the $1.64 B decrease.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Maybe we should help him to be able to eliminate regulations at a faster rate?



  27. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    ...we'd eliminate the problem in 1236 years.
    5% a year? I think your math is a bit off.
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  28. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    5% a year? I think your math is a bit off.
    $2028 billion / $1.64 billion = 1236.58

  29. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    $2028 billion / $1.64 billion = 1236.58
    You are not good a math. That figure would be reduced by 5% every year.
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  30. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty View Post
    Oh no! Campaign promises going unfulfilled is unprecedented!

    Is he taking someone else to the prom, too?







    The Gal I bought one of those when I was 15 is going to be disappointed if she sees this one . Pretty fancy . LOL
    Do something Danke

  31. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It isn't, it may be proportionally small but it isn't trivial, especially as a change of direction from adding Billions more, he should be getting credit for the Billions in increases that didn't happen in addition to the $1.64 B decrease.

    Right. And the serial rapist who reduces the INCREASE in the number of rapes he commits per year, and reduces the ones he actually commits by 0.08% deserves credit for those additional rapes he decided not to commit? What kind of sick, twisted logic arrives at such a farcical conclusion? SMGDH
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  32. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by CCTelander View Post
    Right. And the serial rapist who reduces the INCREASE in the number of rapes he commits per year, and reduces the ones he actually commits by 0.08% deserves credit for those additional rapes he decided not to commit? What kind of sick, twisted logic arrives at such a farcical conclusion? SMGDH
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    You are not good a math. That figure would be reduced by 5% every year.
    If you're talking about the proposed/imaginary 5% cut in non-defense discretionary spending, that has nothing to do with it at all.

    The $2028 billion is the economic cost of federal regulation. It has nothing to do with the budget.

    They let you fly planes?

  35. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0 View Post
    If you're talking about the proposed/imaginary 5% cut in non-defense discretionary spending, that has nothing to do with it at all.

    The $2028 billion is the economic cost of federal regulation. It has nothing to do with the budget.

    They let you fly planes?
    Yes they do, I have a degree in Mathematics, but I guess reading comprehension is not one of my skills.

    What are you trying to say, a annual cut of 5% will not reduce the size of government spending?

    If not, what is needed?
    Pfizer Macht Frei!

    Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.


    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!

    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Aide Ousted From White House Re-emerges at Justice Dept
    By Swordsmyth in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-11-2018, 05:16 PM
  2. Trump Picks Rep. Mick Mulvaney to Head Budget Office
    By Sentinelrv in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-17-2016, 06:31 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-07-2015, 04:05 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-06-2015, 04:19 PM
  5. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-05-2009, 04:51 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •