GOP to Stop Border Patrol & ICE Paychecks

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-01-2023, 01:42 PM)GreenDragon Wrote: Then cut the military spending back to Clinton days. You know, when gas was $.99 a gallon.

Clinton was President from 1993 to 2000. During that time period US spending on defense averaged 3.63% of GDP.

In 2021 the US spent 3.48% of their GDP on defense.

Gas was $0.31/gal in 1960, and the US spent 8.99% of their GDP on defense.

[GreenDragon]

(10-01-2023, 10:47 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Clinton was President from 1993 to 2000. During that time period US spending on defense averaged 3.63% of GDP.

In 2021 the US spent 3.48% of their GDP on defense.

Gas was $0.31/gal in 1960, and the US spent 8.99% of their GDP on defense.

And the POTUS in 1960 until the election in November was Eisenhower. A Republican. Thanks for proving my point. 

[SunsetBengal]

(10-01-2023, 01:42 PM)GreenDragon Wrote: Then cut the military spending back to Clinton days. You know, when gas was $.99 a gallon.

There is no singular "fix" that will erase the debt and keep the government funded.  It's going to take a controlled reduction in spending, or at least a capping any spending increases over the entire spectrum of items covered by the federal budget.

[Belsnickel]

(10-02-2023, 07:36 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: There is no singular "fix" that will erase the debt and keep the government funded.  It's going to take a controlled reduction in spending, or at least a capping any spending increases over the entire spectrum of items covered by the federal budget.

I can see some room for government cuts to expenses. When you look through the history of the US, the sweet spot seems to be about 20% of GDP being federal net outlays. We are lower than many of what people consider our peer nations, but one of our biggest issues is that we haven't adjusted this appropriately based on economic trends. We could, and are, working to decrease the percentage in current times based on the current economic activities, but we need to also work on increasing government revenues if we are ever going to dig ourselves out of this hole.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-02-2023, 02:54 AM)GreenDragon Wrote: And the POTUS in 1960 until the election in November was Eisenhower. A Republican. Thanks for proving my point. 

....what was your point? 

Because it sure seemed like you were connecting defense spending to gas prices. Also you made it seem like we were spending much less in Clinton's time than now.

I only mentioned 1960 because that was the furthest the data I found went back to. In '61 under JFK it jumped to 9.16% followed by 9.33%. It was above 9% again for a few years under Lyndon B Johnson. It has actually only been above 9% exclusively under Democrats since 1960.

So again, I am not really sure what point you are trying to make. We are spending much less of our GDP on defense (under both Trump and Biden) than we historically have in the past.

[GreenDragon]

(10-02-2023, 07:36 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: There is no singular "fix" that will erase the debt and keep the government funded.  It's going to take a controlled reduction in spending, or at least a capping any spending increases over the entire spectrum of items covered by the federal budget.

Well, Donald Trump even said the economy is better when the Democrats are in charge. 

Trump Is Right About One Thing: 'The Economy Does Better Under The Democrats' (forbes.com)

[GreenDragon]

(10-02-2023, 07:36 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: There is no singular "fix" that will erase the debt and keep the government funded.  It's going to take a controlled reduction in spending, or at least a capping any spending increases over the entire spectrum of items covered by the federal budget.

Which is what Democrats try to do constantly. The last 2 Republican presidents - Bush and Trump - have left America worse off than they left it and Democrats have had to fix things. 
Weird, Biden was involved in fixing things BOTH times. It's like he knows what he's doing. 

[Luvnit2]

This thread did not age well. It was not correct even if government did strike. They are essential employees.

[*pally*]

(10-02-2023, 08:42 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I can see some room for government cuts to expenses. When you look through the history of the US, the sweet spot seems to be about 20% of GDP being federal net outlays. We are lower than many of what people consider our peer nations, but one of our biggest issues is that we haven't adjusted this appropriately based on economic trends. We could, and are, working to decrease the percentage in current times based on the current economic activities, but we need to also work on increasing government revenues if we are ever going to dig ourselves out of this hole.

The problem is that politicians of both parties refuse to address the elephant in the room....the budget of the DOD.  Billions of dollars are wasted in their budget, fraud, cost overruns, outdated or bad weapons systems, and extraneous bases.  No one wants to be the politician that causes a defense contractor to lose a federal contract or hold them responsible for their costs.  No one wants to look weak on defense so their budget gets increased year after year.

Congress's unwillingness to address outdated technology, true fraud control within the various departments also adds billions to the budget and loss of manpower hours

They want to fix the entire budget from the smallest segments which are the programs that benefit Americans directly.

I know that my financial planner would tell me, that when faced with a deficit like that, it has to be fixed in a 2 pronged attack...cut expenses and add revenue.  We have had over 40 years of trying to make the Republicans' "trickle-down economy" work and what we've learned is that it doesn't.  Time to rollback some of those tax cuts

[Luvnit2]

(10-02-2023, 02:22 PM)pally Wrote: The problem is that politicians of both parties refuse to address the elephant in the room....the budget of the DOD.  Billions of dollars are wasted in their budget, fraud, cost overruns, outdated or bad weapons systems, and extraneous bases.  No one wants to be the politician that causes a defense contractor to lose a federal contract or hold them responsible for their costs.  No one wants to look weak on defense so their budget gets increased year after year.

Congress's unwillingness to address outdated technology, true fraud control within the various departments also adds billions to the budget and loss of manpower hours

They want to fix the entire budget from the smallest segments which are the programs that benefit Americans directly.

I know that my financial planner would tell me, that when faced with a deficit like that, it has to be fixed in a 2 pronged attack...cut expenses and add revenue.  We have had over 40 years of trying to make the Republicans' "trickle-down economy" work and what we've learned is that it doesn't.  Time to rollback some of those tax cuts

You may get your wish. The Trump tax cuts that helped all classes including lower and middle class ends soon unless Biden does something. If Biden is President nominee in 2024, it will be up to him to continue these cuts or allow them to end at a time inflation and the Biden economy sucks.

I find it interesting your goal is to roll back tac cuts for the lower and middle class, that will not add money to the top line, it  will remove it as those classes will not have money to spend, it will be gobbled up by more tax dollars. This is a lose-lose scenario. Are Democrats going to run in 2024 on cutting taxes (not extending the individual tax cuts)?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-era-tax-cuts-set-160750197.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

When 2025 draws to a close, so will many of the sweeping Trump-era GOP tax breaks established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017. While the legislation made some tax cuts to corporate profit permanent, lowered individual tax rates will expire on Dec. 31, 2025, and will revert to pre-TCJA levels.

[Luvnit2]

Why are Biden and Democrats insisting on Covid spending level budgets? It makes no sense. I say start there and then as has been said, lots of waste and fraud to eliminate.