tkihshbt wrote:

One of the easiest ways to cut spending would be to close around three quarters of the military bases we have abroad, end our occupations of Iraq/Afghanistan and end the massive redundancies we have in intelligence.

What people should really start worrying about is the residual costs of Bush's Iraq and now Obama's bungling of Afghanistan. The amount of money we're going to pay out in health care and disability for our soldiers will be enormous.

Of course but speaking out against the wars and our occupancy in various countries around the world will get you labeled as unAmerican.  I wish there was a study on how long it would take to pull ourselfs out of debt if we pulled ever military back to the States.

artie_fufkin wrote:

I wish I could remember the name of the Senator from Ohio who I heard on the radio yesterday. He's adamant about us yielding the title of "the world's Sugar Daddy."

That saves about $17 billion out of the $418 billion shortfall.

http://2006cardinals.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=229

APRTW wrote:

There are some great idea on there like raising SS and medcare age to 70.

Krugman has a great analysis about that.  It turns out that life expectancy has been going up for wealthier Americans, but not for poorer ones, such that it is as though we plan to "tell janitors to work until they’re 70 because lawyers are living longer than ever."

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/unserious-people-2/

tkihshbt wrote:

Max wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

One of the easiest ways to cut spending would be to

Play the game, people!  (It only takes a few minutes)


http://2006cardinals.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=229

I already did that the day it came out.

So, post your solution. 

It's too easy to criticize solutions if a person hasn't tried it.  You're not going to get a 50% majority on any complex solution because there are too many variables (same goes for health care, Fors).

tkihshbt wrote:

One of the easiest ways to cut spending would be to close around three quarters of the military bases we have abroad, end our occupations of Iraq/Afghanistan and end the massive redundancies we have in intelligence.

What people should really start worrying about is the residual costs of Bush's Iraq and now Obama's bungling of Afghanistan. The amount of money we're going to pay out in health care and disability for our soldiers will be enormous.

How has Obama bungled Afghanistan?

artie_fufkin wrote:

APRTW wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

One of the easiest ways to cut spending would be to close around three quarters of the military bases we have abroad, end our occupations of Iraq/Afghanistan and end the massive redundancies we have in intelligence.

What people should really start worrying about is the residual costs of Bush's Iraq and now Obama's bungling of Afghanistan. The amount of money we're going to pay out in health care and disability for our soldiers will be enormous.

Of course but speaking out against the wars and our occupancy in various countries around the world will get you labeled as unAmerican.  I wish there was a study on how long it would take to pull ourselfs out of debt if we pulled ever military back to the States.

It'd also be about a week and a half before someone tried to blow us up, AP. Bush's stupid invasion of Iraq to avenge the attempt on his daddy's life has ensured there will be generations of Islamic radicals who will hate us. Clinton's immediate response was proper, but then Dumbya had to get involved. Invading Iraq was one of the dumbest and shortest-sighted events in the history of the country, by an extraordinarily dumb and short-sighted man.

I dont think we will get blown up if we pull out and mind our own.  At some point we are going to have to pull you and see what happens.  I dont think it is the war in Iraq that is the heart of the problem.  I think it is that every time we get involved we establish permanent military residency.  My idea with what the military should be is procecting this country, not others.  We have our own problems to deal with.

APRTW wrote:

Here is my amateur stab at it.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?ref=weekinreview

I think you posted the wrong link, unless you were trying to be funny.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=vz8pgj11

Max wrote:

APRTW wrote:

Here is my amateur stab at it.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?ref=weekinreview

I think you posted the wrong link, unless you were trying to be funny.

Not trying to be funny. 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?ref=weekinreview

Farmers have money.  Crops are selling at all time highs.  Plus they cheat on there taxes.  Guys making 200,000 are claiming 40,000 and that is common.

I wouldnt cut jobs.  I feel that only makes things worst.  Slowly down sizing by not replacing people who leave works better if it can be afforded.

At this point the miltary is only need to protect our boarders.  We can afford to protect others.  I choose to reduce everything except benifits to vets.

I choose to reform malpractice.  That is a easy pick that i believe wee all can agree on.  However I wouldnt raise SS or Medicare.  That lowers the standard for living in the country.  I also think you have to give insentive for employers to provide health care.

I dont really know what capping medicare means but it sounded good.

I wouldnt reduce SS for the higher incomes because they paid into it just like everyone else.

Tighten up disablity for sure.

And the rest is pretty much raising taxes.  I think a national sales tax is a good idea but the money goes to paying off the national debt, no new projects.  I would also do away with child tax credit and morgage deduction.  We all choose to have kid and buy houses.  The governement doesnt need to pay us for them.

I guess i dont know how to post the saved version.

I agree with you to an extent AP, but I don't think having a military base in Seoul or Germany is necessarily any more expensive than having a base in North Carolina. The expense come from use and deployment of the troops and replacing the equipment/supplies that are being used.

Artie, I don't disagree that the War in Iraq didn't help matters, but I think the country's continued support of Isreal ensures the existence of Muslim radicals. Bin Laden' beef with the US started long before we went into Iraq.

forsberg_us wrote:

I agree with you to an extent AP, but I don't think having a military base in Seoul or Germany is necessarily any more expensive than having a base in North Carolina. The expense come from use and deployment of the troops and replacing the equipment/supplies that are being used.

Artie, I don't disagree that the War in Iraq didn't help matters, but I think the country's continued support of Isreal ensures the existence of Muslim radicals. Bin Laden' beef with the US started long before we went into Iraq.

It seems like we are trying to be ready for a large war as if it could happen at any second.  Instead I think we should be more geared toward being ready to get ready.  Have a smaller army but being able to become large quickly would be more cost effective then being large all the time.  You only put a truck in 4 wheel drive when you need to.  You dont drive around all year in 4 wheel drive in case the road turns to mud.