Gov't downsizes amid GOP demands for more cuts

Feb 22, 2013 Full story: WTOP-FM Washington 147

Republicans and other fiscal conservatives keep insisting on more federal austerity and a smaller government.

Full Story
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1 Feb 22, 2013
So let the GOPasaurs lead by cutting their congressional staffs in half and cutting their own pay & benefits by half as well.

Congressional pay should make no more than the average income in the US- currently about $50k for a dual income household- as opposed to their current $174,000/yr income (plus benefits).

C'mon GOPasaurs, start cutting!
S-N-A-F-U

Sierra Vista, AZ

#2 Feb 22, 2013
In retrospect, Our founders were Genius -- and currently led by Idiots!!

It seems, the only part of the Constitution is embraced by Liberals, is the First Amendment, providing for their freedoms to speak out, but hushes the opposition...

Talk about insight -

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334


Thomas Jefferson....
•“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”

•“I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.”

•“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

•“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

One can see why our founders were diametrically opposed to socialism of any stripe...

Lets here it from our Socialist president....
http://www.youtube.com/embed/6Zy297Xgr8Q

“Open your eyes”

Since: Sep 09

Central Florida

#3 Feb 22, 2013
Look people, This is all Kabuki theater. They do this all the time.

They wait till the last minute, instill fear into the people through their use of media, then in the final hour they make a deal that will add more debt onto all of us.

Every year it is the same crap. See through it and see the reality show for what it truly is. Remember the Debt cieling? Remember the fiscal cliff? All the same crap. And the people fell for it hook, line and sinker.

They will do the same thing here at the 11th hour. Minutes from doomsday, the clouds will part, angels will play their trumpets and they will act like saviors.

All the while they wage more war, kill more innocent people, focus their gaze on their own citizens with drones. And the people will cheer them on for they are new nobility to be worshiped.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#4 Feb 22, 2013
Am I the only one who remembers that there have already been cuts of near a $$$ TRILLION???

The next round of cuts must be on a state by state basis, cutting back Federal spending in states that get far more than they send into the Treasury.

See pg.12, CUT SPENDING IN #1 to 34, the real welfare states.
http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Feb 22, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
Am I the only one who remembers that there have already been cuts of near a $$$ TRILLION???
The next round of cuts must be on a state by state basis, cutting back Federal spending in states that get far more than they send into the Treasury.
See pg.12, CUT SPENDING IN #1 to 34, the real welfare states.
http://martincantor.com/files/FederalbudgetAn...
And yet the deficit for 2013 will be over a TRILLION anyways.

Obviously they've got a LOT more cutting to go.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#7 Feb 22, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet the deficit for 2013 will be over a TRILLION anyways.
Obviously they've got a LOT more cutting to go.
Yes, cut the damn LOOPHOLES and exemptions that lower tax rate to zero for the very rich, and wealthy corporations.

Most of these loopholes were paid for with 'legal' bribes.

CUT CUT CUT!
well goll eeeee

Vandergrift, PA

#8 Feb 22, 2013
is we tallkin, feddins, stateins, or couuntyins.all 30 million of them, and that does nott includes the 16 percent on permenante welfareins.about 55 million,plus the 4000 fedstatecounty hand out programs,.or sub contractorsins.....the mr bill mentality has finally caught up with government,.....welfare and a government job all get paid from the same troughtins,which is empty..

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#9 Feb 22, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, cut the damn LOOPHOLES and exemptions that lower tax rate to zero for the very rich, and wealthy corporations.
Most of these loopholes were paid for with 'legal' bribes.
CUT CUT CUT!
We need to cut spending as well.
Pills Clinton

Hanoi, Vietnam

#10 Feb 22, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, cut the damn LOOPHOLES and exemptions that lower tax rate to zero for the very rich, and wealthy corporations.
Most of these loopholes were paid for with 'legal' bribes.
CUT CUT CUT!
siccors or hammer! maybee N!;-00
celticwarriors

Bradenton, FL

#13 Feb 23, 2013
Tell the MFing repunants we are a big country with a big population, therefore we need our government. We don't need repugnants and their idiocy! WE won the election.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#14 Feb 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
We need to cut spending as well.
I agree.
Why should I pay for federal firefighters in Texas and Arazona.
Or for 14 Military bases in New Mexico;

Or for a fighter plant that Newt Gingrich moved from Seattle to Atlanta, and is now only kept running for welfate jobs for Georgians>?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#15 Feb 24, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
Why should I pay for federal firefighters in Texas and Arazona.
Or for 14 Military bases in New Mexico;
Or for a fighter plant that Newt Gingrich moved from Seattle to Atlanta, and is now only kept running for welfate jobs for Georgians>?
I was thinking more along the lines of the 150+ military bases overseas, the billions in foreign aid, the F-35 fighter jet (grounded again because of mechanical problems), the 800,000+ DOD employees (1 civilian employee for every 2 active duty members), the $174k Congressional salary & their tens of thousands of overpaid staffers, social security & medicare for the rich, etc, etc.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#16 Feb 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I was thinking more along the lines of the 150+ military bases overseas, the billions in foreign aid, the F-35 fighter jet (grounded again because of mechanical problems), the 800,000+ DOD employees (1 civilian employee for every 2 active duty members), the $174k Congressional salary & their tens of thousands of overpaid staffers, social security & medicare for the rich, etc, etc.
No argument, except that I believe that the rich should get SS, aand be entitled to medicare. They pay for it.
xed

Miami, FL

#17 Feb 25, 2013
celticwarriors wrote:
Tell the MFing repunants we are a big country with a big population, therefore we need our government. We don't need repugnants and their idiocy! WE won the election.
In that case, you also need to pay more in taxes to pay for it. How much you got?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Feb 25, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
No argument, except that I believe that the rich should get SS, aand be entitled to medicare. They pay for it.
If it comes down to choosing between everyone taking a cut in social security & medicare benefits, or cutting off the wealthy, I'd cut off the wealthy first.

Raising the eligibilty age for either social security or medicare disproportionately impacts the poor & middle class, since they are more likely to die before ever receiving the benefits THEY paid for. Those who do live long enough are also are less likely able to afford to retire without social security & medicare.

That's why the rich support raising the retirement age; they know it preserves THEIR benefits, and they know they can still afford to retire before their benefits kick in.

“It's a Brand New Day”

Since: Feb 06

New Rochelle

#19 Feb 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
If it comes down to choosing between everyone taking a cut in social security & medicare benefits, or cutting off the wealthy, I'd cut off the wealthy first.
Raising the eligibilty age for either social security or medicare disproportionately impacts the poor & middle class, since they are more likely to die before ever receiving the benefits THEY paid for. Those who do live long enough are also are less likely able to afford to retire without social security & medicare.
That's why the rich support raising the retirement age; they know it preserves THEIR benefits, and they know they
can still afford to retire before their benefits kick in.
I'd keep them covered, but eliminate the upper income cutoff. Stary excluding people, and it will become a slippery slope.

Just becaust medicare is available, they won't use much, compared to what the would pay without a cut-off. Do the math.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

#20 Feb 25, 2013
Rand Paul said if they brought wages of federal employees down to same level as those in the private sector that the federal government could save about $48 billion per year. Imagine that.

They should shut down many of our 900 plus military bases around the world. Keep half of them, 450 and shut down half. End the wars, end the cost plus contracts to Haliburton, get the 200,000 military contractors off of the government, stop having multi-trillion dollar wars for the oil companies to get control of oil in Middle Eastern countries.

They should make Medicare into vouchers now. They should have done so in the 1980s when the government saw that the World War II generation who paid nothing into Medicare began to use up hundreds of billions of dollars per year in new Medicare costs with new surgeries and new expensive tests and new and expensive meds too. Had they made Medicare into vouchers back then, there would be no debt in Medicare today. If they gave everyone a voucher for $12,000 a year, all these people who have several pensions would then be forced to spend a bit of their pensions on their own health care instead of them sticking the entire bill to the government and then living so fat off of their pensions. People do not want to have to save any of their own money to live retired and they don't even want to have to spend any money at all on their old aged health care, and as long as the government lets them get away with it, they will keep demanding Medicare as it is, and Medicare has about $85 TRILLION of debt now.

They need to stop paying women who never worked Social Security, stop giving men double payments, give them one payment same as women who work get, and end SSI payments for young people who have never worked. Make it so that people can no longer go onto SSI at 18 rather than working.

The other thing they need to do is begin to phase out welfare. End Section 8 housing, give everyone a year to find other living arrangements. Cut food stamps in half so they do not look so good to stay on, end SSI for young people and make disability ONLY for older people who have worked for at least 20 years and paid into SS. They need to set up copayments for Medicaid.

Basically all of the programs where people are not paying taxes and getting tons of money need to be cut, have copayments, people need to be paying something into them. We need to end the free lunch all the way around.

The government needs to push back hard on the fake tea party and tell them they have to pay more of their own old aged health care. SS and Medicare are the biggest expenses we have and will be using up 97 percent of our budget in a few more years. the old people have ALL the money and they don't want to pay anything for their necesssities so they can travel and shop til they drop. They didn't save any money at all and they do not want to take responsibility for having to pay for some of their basic necessities once they are retired.

Imagine a "tea party" that uses most of the federal budget on social programs, on government pensions and on government health care that wants NO cuts to their spending, and these are people who spent every cent they made, did not save nor invest one cent. Let them take out reverse mortgages and pay $6,000 a year for their own health care. If they have $50-100K in pensions, they should all be paying out at least $6K per year for their health care. Old aged health care costs the government a fortune, so everyone who has pensions should be paying a lot more for their Medicare.

Otherwise if people want $122 trillion in SS and Medicare paid out over the next 20-30 years they are all retired, then we would have to create a 20 percent national sales tax everyone would pay in order to produce about $3 trillion every year to hand out in SS and Medicare to the baby boomers.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

#21 Feb 25, 2013
Everyone who wants socialist security and government Medicare is a socialist, they are pro-socialism, obviously. You can't both demand that 97 percent of the budget goes to old people in government health care and in government pensions and claim to hate socialism both at the same time.

And that's why no state even considered seceeding because no one is going to give up Medicare and SS, so we are all socialists now. No one is independent. No one saved enough money to live retired. No one can afford to pay for all of their old aged health care themselves. Everyone is dependent on the government and loves their socialism. And here the tea party is on all of that stuff and their only issue is them demanding all of that stuff from the government. It proves how dependent everyone is on the government and how deep socialism runs in this country.

The very people that are on socialism and are fighting over keeping their socialism are the ones who claim to be independent and they claim to be against socialism and they claim they do not need the government. The country is all mentally ill people in total denial about what they are doing who only think about greed of money and they are narcissists in that they say how great they are, what big patriots they are, while they are asking for SS and Medicare. They all have super low IQs and no educations and are dependent on the government to live fat, to have self-importance, and then they have American narcissism thing where they are NOTHING expect violent and they think they are god's gift to the world. They are screaming dependent little babies who know nothing who think they are sooooo important because big daddy government says so.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#22 Feb 25, 2013
Mr_Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd keep them covered, but eliminate the upper income cutoff. Stary excluding people, and it will become a slippery slope.
Just becaust medicare is available, they won't use much, compared to what the would pay without a cut-off. Do the math.
Taxing them on their income over $100k (or whatever) won't generate enough income to fix the current & future shortfalls in social security.

Also, increasing how much they are taxed will increase their eventual payout when they retire, so it defeats the purpose of generating more money for the trust fund.
Pamela

Citrus Heights, CA

#23 Feb 25, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Taxing them on their income over $100k (or whatever) won't generate enough income to fix the current & future shortfalls in social security.
Also, increasing how much they are taxed will increase their eventual payout when they retire, so it defeats the purpose of generating more money for the trust fund.
Sure. We can't tax some people SS and Medicare on their entire incomes and then tell them there's a cap on the payments, so they don't get one cent more in payments if they are taxed on all of their income instead of on only the first $100K. The problem is they pay men double payments, they pay women who never paid in, so let's say a man can get $2,700 a month. Well, if he paid $150 a month in and he now gets $2,700 a month out, plus he paid a tiny $1.45 percent into Medicare and then him AND his wife who didn't pay in both get Medicare and let's say they have knee replacements and hip replacements and get new hearts and new kidneys, and they have diabetes from being fat so they get tons of free meds and meters and free power chairs. Okay, so they paid in X amount and now they get X times 100 out of those programs. And this is WHY the tea party wants those programs. Old aged health care costs a fortune and they know it and they have 3 or 4 pensions and they don't want to spend money on their health care. I have them tell me this all the time - the ones who say they are with the Tea Party. They say they can do whatever they want right now because they get so much money and don't have to pay much for their Medicare.

Imagine that these people go on and on about not being on the government and about how they hate socialism, and yet they don't want to have to spend any of their 3 government checks on their government health care. They want the government to pay for everything.

I do not think there is ONE person in this country who claims to hate socialism who is not on the government. It's a sick joke.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Social Security Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Immigrants build document trails to remain in US 6 hr wild child 2
South Allegheny school board member and wife ac... (Sep '13) 8 hr Gary 210
Former Wash. man sentenced in Social Security case (Jan '14) Sat Sunshine Jacqueline 3
Register to receive food for holiday, Toys for ... (Nov '07) Sat johanny 31
Immigrants Social Security eligible in Obama plan Sat icthelite 118
Australian PM urged to go easy on refugees afte... Fri CACAtracker 17
George Clooney: We need to stand with Sony Dec 19 LC Campbell 4
More from around the web