![]() |
Republican proposed Budget - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Republican proposed Budget (/Thread-Republican-proposed-Budget) Pages:
1
2
|
Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-20-2017 http://www.npr.org/2017/07/19/537959833/heres-whats-in-the-house-republican-budget-and-why-it-matters Quote:The House budget plan would slash spending by $5.4 trillion over 10 years, including more than $4 trillion in cuts to mandatory spending like Medicaid and Medicare, while ramping up defense spending.Typical. Ryan's end game forever...cut the safety net as completely as possible while padding the pockets of the people behind the war machine. RE: Republican proposed Budget - Millhouse - 07-20-2017 Country is just under 20 trillion in debt http://www.usdebtclock.org/, in large part due to the last two presidents before Trump. Put it in perspective, each taxpayer is roughly $165k in debt, which is nuts. So cuts need to be made somewhere. That said, I am not a fan of this current proposal with the increase in military spending. RE: Republican proposed Budget - ballsofsteel - 07-20-2017 Yeah, increase defense spending. best way for all those crooked politicians to get their share of kickbacks. The opposite Robin Hood approach, take from the poor to give to the rich. RE: Republican proposed Budget - Benton - 07-20-2017 (07-20-2017, 06:54 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Country is just under 20 trillion in debt http://www.usdebtclock.org/, in large part due to the last two presidents before Trump. Put it in perspective, each taxpayer is roughly $165k in debt, which is nuts. So cuts need to be made somewhere. Pretty much my thoughts. I would add, you can't keep cutting taxes and spending at our rate. It's insane. RE: Republican proposed Budget - TheLeonardLeap - 07-20-2017 (07-20-2017, 06:54 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Country is just under 20 trillion in debt http://www.usdebtclock.org/, in large part due to the last two presidents before Trump. Put it in perspective, each taxpayer is roughly $165k in debt, which is nuts. So cuts need to be made somewhere. Agreed. I am okay with the cuts, but they need to be extended to defense as well. There's a lot of bloat that can be cut back without changing effectiveness. People just need to make the hard calls on cuts without thinking about kickbacks, donations, and lobbyists. RE: Republican proposed Budget - michaelsean - 07-21-2017 Yeah cut everything including the military, and my guess these cuts don't mean they are getting less than they are now, but rather less than they would be getting. RE: Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 09:19 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah cut everything including the military, and my guess these cuts don't mean they are getting less than they are now, but rather less than they would be getting. Many of the safety net programs would be cut to almost nothing. Medicare would go to a voucher system. It's Ryan's wet dream budget plan. RE: Republican proposed Budget - michaelsean - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 09:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: Many of the safety net programs would be cut to almost nothing. Medicare would go to a voucher system. Cut almost to nothing? Did I miss the $20 trillion cut over ten years? RE: Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 09:39 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Cut almost to nothing? Did I miss the $20 trillion cut over ten years? The House budget ultimately plans for trillions of dollars in mandatory spending cuts, but in the near term, it calls upon 11 committees to cut $203 billion altogether over a decade. So, for example, the Committee on Education and the Workforce will have to cut $20 billion over the next decade. And the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over a variety of spending programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, would cut $52 billion over the next decade. Billions cut for the safety net while they spend more on the military. But as long as we can INCREASE military spending why worry about helping those in the most need or education, right? That's the kind of stuff that has Paul Ryan stocking up on kleenex and lotion. RE: Republican proposed Budget - michaelsean - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 09:45 AM)GMDino Wrote: The House budget ultimately plans for trillions of dollars in mandatory spending cuts, but in the near term, it calls upon 11 committees to cut $203 billion altogether over a decade. So, for example, the Committee on Education and the Workforce will have to cut $20 billion over the next decade. And the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over a variety of spending programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, would cut $52 billion over the next decade. And what I am guessing is the cuts don't mean they will be getting less in ten years than they are now, but rather less than their set increases. RE: Republican proposed Budget - TheLeonardLeap - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 09:21 AM)GMDino Wrote: Many of the safety net programs would be cut to almost nothing. Medicare would go to a voucher system. (07-21-2017, 09:45 AM)GMDino Wrote: The House budget ultimately plans for trillions of dollars in mandatory spending cuts, but in the near term, it calls upon 11 committees to cut $203 billion altogether over a decade. So, for example, the Committee on Education and the Workforce will have to cut $20 billion over the next decade. And the Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over a variety of spending programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, would cut $52 billion over the next decade. A Google search tells me that in 2014 TANF had a budget of $17.35b. Fair to say it's more than that right now and has scheduled increases every year. $52b/10 years ("the next decade") = $5.2b/yr. That's still over $12b/yr, not including the increases. Sure glad to see that over $12 billion/over 70% of the norm is "cut to almost nothing". We apparently have vastly different definitions of what almost nothing means. RE: Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 01:44 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: A Google search tells me that in 2014 TANF had a budget of $17.35b. Fair to say it's more than that right now and has scheduled increases every year. In relation to the amount spent on the military that will be INCREASED it is a pittance. But, again, this is what Ryan has always wanted: Kill the safety nets. Kill Medicaid. RE: Republican proposed Budget - TheLeonardLeap - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 01:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: In relation to the amount spent on the military that will be INCREASED it is a pittance. My post wasn't about military spending increases. I've made my stance very clear on this board where I stand on that. My post was about you calling over $12b/yr, and over 70% of the original number "cut to almost nothing". If we were splitting a candy bar, and I gave you roughly three fourths of it, would you complain that I gave you almost nothing? RE: Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 03:13 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: My post wasn't about military spending increases. I've made my stance very clear on this board where I stand on that. If I was used to getting a whole candy bar and you were getting an addition 100 candy bars...yes. RE: Republican proposed Budget - TheLeonardLeap - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 03:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: If I was used to getting a whole candy bar and you were getting an addition 100 candy bars...yes. And yet once again you bring it back to the increase in military spending, which isn't part of what we were talking about. Probably because you won't acknowledge how absurd you sound when you say over 70% is almost nothing, and you didn't expect someone to call you out on it. RE: Republican proposed Budget - GMDino - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 05:48 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: And yet once again you bring it back to the increase in military spending, which isn't part of what we were talking about. Probably because you won't acknowledge how absurd you sound when you say over 70% is almost nothing, and you didn't expect someone to call you out on it. I've explained that cutting anything while adding to something else is wrong. I consider billions being taken away to cutting it to bare bones, almost nothing, in the scheme of things. RE: Republican proposed Budget - TheLeonardLeap - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 05:55 PM)GMDino Wrote: I've explained that cutting anything while adding to something else is wrong. So you would be against it then if they cut military spending in order to increase the budget of assistance programs? ...Mmhmm... - - - - - - $12b = nothing $17b = not nothing Got it. I think they should cut both, but the fact that you can't admit over 70% isn't almost nothing, and that you were being over-the-top dramatic, is really telling. RE: Republican proposed Budget - michaelsean - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 06:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: So you would be against it then if they cut military spending in order to increase the budget of assistance programs? ...Mmhmm... I can't figure out how to check, but Washington doesn't actually cut anything but the rate of increase. RE: Republican proposed Budget - Nebuchadnezzar - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 06:40 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I can't figure out how to check, but Washington doesn't actually cut anything but the rate of increase. That is correct I think. When they say 20% cut, it's a cut on the increase not the whole amount. Last year, widgets was budgeted at $100.00 This year, there is a 10% increase to make the budget $110.00 Proposed budget cut is 20% New budget for widgets will be $108.00 Is that correct? RE: Republican proposed Budget - Belsnickel - 07-21-2017 (07-21-2017, 07:00 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: That is correct I think. It depends on the programs. For mandatory spending, that is typically the way they are calculating the cuts since it is difficult to cut those programs. So things like Medicare and Medicaid fall into that category. They can just talk straight cuts, though, for discretionary funds. For instance, DoD makes up about half of the discretionary budget and is a very malleable budget section. There can be more immediate cuts done to that. The reason for the difference is that some programs are set to increase at rates tied to inflation and projected for growth, not all are. |