Trump just tasked a 5% reduction

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horn6721, Oct 17, 2018.

  1. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    • Like Like x 3
  2. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 1,000+ Posts

    Finally! I have been asking for this sort of thing for 25 years.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. nashhorn

    nashhorn 2,500+ Posts

    No, I don't think it will happen. Maybe a Govt accounting, i.e. a 5% reduction of a proposed increase but not a 5% reduction in current spending.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. huisache

    huisache 2,500+ Posts

    across the board reductions in spending are a standard call for pols who don't know what they are doing or how to do it.

    If history is any guide, it wont happen much of anywhere.
  5. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    When was the last time a potus called for a reduction in spending?
  6. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I'm all for it! It is clumsy and shows a lack of understanding about what activities need what budget, but does anybody really know? At this point any and all government group has more than 5% fat they can cut. He needs to convince the Congress to pass a law doing this. That would be a great start.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. huisache

    huisache 2,500+ Posts

    He could call for a law that cuts the budget to match collections. Just as likely to pass.

    Or he could just veto big budgets.

    Or he could propose a balanced budget to show the whippersnappers how it could be done.

    I'm sure he knows how that could be accomplished.

    One frequent commenter suggested that the current deficit is not far short of collections. Right, only 700+ billion. With all his brilliance he should be able to handle this with ease.

    Maybe it would be cheaper to just pay each congress critter $130,000 to shut up about it?
  8. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Of course there is at least 5% fat in every Dept
    so this is a start.
    I don't remember any other POTUS doing anything
    He has had plenty of experience in trimming costs before
    and in getting others to trim costs. ( remember the costs of new Air Force Ones?)
  9. huisache

    huisache 2,500+ Posts

    He also has a history of paying more for things than they are worth and experience bankrupting business entities.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Many have given it lip service. Very few have actually followed through.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Horns11

    Horns11 5,000+ Posts

    I'm kind of tempted to check out the line-by-line for like Veterans Affairs or something. And figuring out where the 5 percent would come from.

    And as soon as someone makes recommendations for that department, it'll be right back to "I love the veterans so much" in speeches, showing how he increased the budget just last month. And how bipartisan all of the changes to the VA department have been. They're bipartisan because they're spending increases. Neither party is going to take the wrap for cutting services to the VA.

    And then say the 5 percent DOES get cut in the next budget, Dems will roll out their "look how much the GOP hates Vets" plan for the 2020 elections. Yeah, this is going to go over well.

    Plus, 5 percent of $half a trillion (non-defense discretionary spending) comes out to like $25B. Not exactly chump change but not big enough to make a dent. Even though the general population wouldn't know it was cut, the stories about "so-and-so in the VA lost her job and she was about to make a breakthrough on care for veterans" would dominate the ads for 2020 and just kill any momentum the GOP had.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Well Huis
    I would think you would be quite pleased if Trump ran a few depts down to near broke.

    Maybe we can see if he follows through( anyone doubt he will?) before we decide it will not happen?
    At least he very publically put the entire Cabinet on notice. By doing so he made sure the people know he is asking for cuts.
  13. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    If we're only talking about 5 percent of non-defense discretionary spending, that's a joke. A 5 percent cut in all spending would mean about $200B (which shows how big defense and non-discretionary spending really area). That would be a real dent in the deficit, and with added revenue, you'd probably see a balanced budget in a few years.
  14. Horns11

    Horns11 5,000+ Posts

    Are we talking about all spending or non-defense discretionary? He isn't talking about SS or Medicare or whatever, right? And surely he isn't asking the Pentagon for a 5 percent reduction after the 3 percent increase last budget.

    If he's talking to cabinet-level heads, it's gotta be the stuff in the executive branch that he can control.
  15. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    So we should NOT try to decrease gov't at all since we can only make small cuts?
    Right now Dems and media ( same thing) are pointing out that Trump ran on decreasing the size of govt but has not done anything .
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. horninchicago

    horninchicago 2,500+ Posts

    I'm sure there is plenty of pork in the VA and the defense budgets that can be cut without having any negative effect on VA benefits or military readiness.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Trump said the DOD budget would be 700 bil for next year. It was 720 this year to fund more ships planes etc
  18. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    We certainly should. And if Trump pulls it off, good for him, but I'm skeptical.

    Of course, they're wrong. He didn't run on decreasing the size of government.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    Democrats always turn to daddy to fix their problems instead of doing it themselves. I see you’re in that boat too. What are the leftys doing to fix the problem? Nothing.
  20. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Mr D
    Actually during the campaign Trump did promise to reduce size of government. And some agencies have already reduced the number of employees with a hiring freeze. EPA for one
  21. 4th_floor

    4th_floor 1,000+ Posts

    Trump comes from the business world. This sort of thing is very common in the business world. And 5% is nothing. I've seen budgets cut by 50% or more when profits are slim. So Trump expects this to be done. I'm really surprised he didn't ask for 10%, expecting to get 5%. Maybe he is looking for a 2% cut, which would be a real accomplishment.

    The government will fight against a 5% cut in the rate of increase of their budget. An actual 5% reduction, or 2% reduction will be Armageddon to these types. Look for a ramp up in the resistance. We might get actual violence from govt employees.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

    Good, because then they can be fired for cause.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  23. Crockett

    Crockett 5,000+ Posts

    The real fat in the budget (like results from not negotiating pharmaceuticals prices or paying subsides to absentee landowners) is defended as if by Mamma Grizzlies. Muscle and bone cuts are more likely, cause you ain't hurting millionaires with time, expertise and money to hurt you back.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  24. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Nailed it.
  25. 4th_floor

    4th_floor 1,000+ Posts

    Agree that there is waste in industrial subsidies. Disagree that cuts to department budgets would be muscle and bone cuts. If you fire 1/2 of the government workers, you will put Maryland and Virginia in a recession. The rest of us will not miss them a lick. All most government employees do is try to stop others from improving our lives. It's not so much "You didn't build that!" as it is "We ain't gonna let you build that!"
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2018
  26. Statalyzer

    Statalyzer 10,000+ Posts

    I'm seeing a lot of posts lately from liberal friends about how America will come to fiscal ruin thanks to Trump, because of the deficit. Amazing how they suddenly care about the deficit again.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Most definitely. I've hassled the GOP about this, but that's only because they're in charge right now. When Democrats are in charge, they're no better.

    Hell, if they had their way, they'd do Medicare for All and free tuition. They can claim that they'd pay for that with raising taxes on the wealthy, but that won't add up. The money simply isn't there to do that, which would mean catastrophic deficit levels. They like to extol Western Europe, but those countries tax the lower and middle classes much harder. Here in Germany, the income tax rates are higher, and they pay a €.75 per liter fuel tax (which is what gives them the $7.00 per gallon gas) and a 19 percent VAT. And none of that pays for their healthcare or pensions. That's financed through payroll taxes that are much higher than ours. The American middle class would never stand for that.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  28. UTChE96

    UTChE96 1,000+ Posts

    I remember when I was in grade school in the 80s, listening to my teacher freak out about the trillion dollar debt that Reagan had run up. We did some class exercises to quantify how big the number one trillion was - like how many times around the earth or trips to the moon. Of course, I did not realize it at the time but she was very likely a flaming liberal. Funny but I don't remember any liberals freaking out about the trillion dollar a year deficit that Obama was racking up.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  29. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I don't see any Ds speaking against the deficit or debt other than to point out Republican hypocrisy. The Ds are always calling for more spending and regulation.
  30. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    That didn't used to be the case. There used to be moderate Democrats who opposed most GOP tax cuts and deficits but also recognized the obvious problems with the entitlement state and favored reform. It was guys like John Breaux, Bob Kerry, Tim Penny, and Charles Stenholm. Those guys have no place at all in the modern Democratic Party. It's sad.
    • Agree Agree x 2

Share This Page