Ryan's continuous spending deal is a joke

[awesome guy]

This is why people support the Tea Party and Trump, hoping for a saviour from our 20 trillion dollar debt and outrageous spending.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/ ... r-tracks-/

[133743Hokie]

What would you cut out?

[awesome guy]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

[Bay_area_Hokie]

Medicare. Having two elderly parents, I could go on all day about how the doctors push procedures and pills on them. They are a buffet to the medical industry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[133743Hokie]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

[133743Hokie]

Medicare. Having two elderly parents, I could go on all day about how the doctors push procedures and pills on them. They are a buffet to the medical industry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My experience has been just the opposite with my Mom on medicare for 20 years.

[awesome guy]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

It's better than increasing all spending while pretending to be for fiscal constraint.

[133743Hokie]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

It's better than increasing all spending while pretending to be for fiscal constraint.

Do your annual expenses go up every year?

[awesome guy]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

It's better than increasing all spending while pretending to be for fiscal constraint.

Do your annual expenses go up every year?

I cut things out of my budget.

[BigDave]

Medicare. Having two elderly parents, I could go on all day about how the doctors push procedures and pills on them. They are a buffet to the medical industry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

After my mom had an illness, her doctor wanted her to see a neurologist to make sure there wasn't a more serious problem. I took her to the appointment. After keeping us waiting for an hour, he sees her for two minutes, taps on her knees with the hammer that tests your reflexes, has her grab his hands to test her strength, declares there is nothing wrong, and that she should come back in three months for a follow-up. Her co-pay was $40. I have no idea how much Medicare paid him for that two minutes of his time, but I'm assuming it dwarfs her co-pay.

[awesome guy]

Medicare. Having two elderly parents, I could go on all day about how the doctors push procedures and pills on them. They are a buffet to the medical industry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm going though more of an Obamacare experience now. One of my parents needs a surgery and the doctor says that's all that will cure the illness. But instead of that, they're making them go through all of these low-cost options first, ironically driving up costs, and making them suffer more as it'll take a couple months to finish the lower-cost and ineffective stuff before getting the surgery they need now. So yeah, it's driving costs, but it's more of the penny wise and pound foolish sort instead of flat out greed from the doctors.

[ip_law-hokie]

This is why people support the Tea Party and Trump, hoping for a saviour from our 20 trillion dollar debt and outrageous spending.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/ ... r-tracks-/

Is Trump conservative?

[VoiceOfReason]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

Thanks for the excellent segue 133743... giving me another chance to interject facts into the budget conversation! If you want to balance the budget, there are really only 4 levers you can pull. Otherwise, you are just talking out your ass.

1) Reduce Social Security spending
2) Reduce Medicare spending
3) Reduce Defense spending
4) Raise taxes.

The FACTS are that #1 + #2 + #3 are 75% of the federal budget. An additional 5% is interest on debt. That's 80% of all spending right there. You want to be serious? Pull those levers.

The entire rest of the government - every other program and department combined is the remaining 20%... each a mere percentage point or fraction thereof. The biggest department of the rest is the VA... so if you want to mess with the little stuff, you can start by not supporting our troops.

We won't get out of this hole by cancelling food stamps and shutting down NPR.

[burgrugby]

We won't get out of this hole by cancelling food stamps and shutting down NPR.

Exactly! But it would be a good start. You really want to make a dent then you need to get tough... I'm talking things like defund Planned Parenthood. If you're not willing to cut that, then there is no hope to save this Country.

[133743Hokie]

What would you cut out?

ObamaCare 100%, social spending 20%, DOD 10%, discretionary 80%

And how would you get that approved?

And if you look more closely, how do you reduce social spending by 20%? How do you reduce DOD by 10%? And how do you reduce discretionary by 80%!? It makes for a great rant against overspending but it's all unrealistic.

Thanks for the excellent segue 133743... giving me another chance to interject facts into the budget conversation! If you want to balance the budget, there are really only 4 levers you can pull. Otherwise, you are just talking out your ass.

1) Reduce Social Security spending
2) Reduce Medicare spending
3) Reduce Defense spending
4) Raise taxes.

The FACTS are that #1 + #2 + #3 are 75% of the federal budget. An additional 5% is interest on debt. That's 80% of all spending right there. You want to be serious? Pull those levers.

The entire rest of the government - every other program and department combined is the remaining 20%... each a mere percentage point or fraction thereof. The biggest department of the rest is the VA... so if you want to mess with the little stuff, you can start by not supporting our troops.

We won't get out of this hole by cancelling food stamps and shutting down NPR.

Yep, but the population of the US keeps growing (some by legal means, some not --Just for you VOR), and costs do go up some as well.

[VoiceOfReason]

We won't get out of this hole by cancelling food stamps and shutting down NPR.

Exactly! But it would be a good start. You really want to make a dent then you need to get tough... I'm talking things like defund Planned Parenthood. If you're not willing to cut that, then there is no hope to save this Country.

No, that's the whole point of looking at the budget data... it would not be a good start. It would be equivalent to UWS holding a bake sale with the proceeds to go against the debt. It would make the Right feel good perhaps... but it would accomplish very little against the debt.

A good analogy would be when Obama extended the Bush Tax Cuts for everybody but the top 2% of earners. Made the Left feel good... but did not raise taxes nearly enough to make any kind of a dent.

It's simple math. The Right wants you to think runaway entitlements is the problem, but it's not. However, it is something the Right can propose without offending anyone in their base (except redneck LIVs that don't know better).

Similarly, the Left wants you to think we can raise taxes on the rich and solve the problem... but there are not enough "rich" to tax. However, it something the Left can propose without offending anyone in their base (except the super rich Hollywood bleeding hearts).

Don't believe me? Google the Federal Budget Open Data. You can find all of your pet programs and see how little they cost with respect to the total budget. If a politician on either side tells you he can balance the budget without pulling at least 1 of the 4 levers I listed... he is lying. Very simple really.