Interactive, very detailed flash chart of Obama's proposed budget, broken down

[MotF Bane]

You know it would be fantastic if we had some sort of national legislative body elected on a regular schedule who's sole purpose was to craft, debate, and vote on legislation on behalf of the people and that was ultimately responsible to those very citizens.

But what would we possibly call it? :hmm:

A national body, etc, etc, on behalf of the people and responsible to those very citizens? We don't have anything like that at all. On behalf of corporations and interests, and responsible to whoever pays them the best, that we have.

 

[K1052]

A national body, etc, etc, on behalf of the people and responsible to those very citizens? We don't have anything like that at all. On behalf of corporations and interests, and responsible to whoever pays them the best, that we have.

I somehow don't think that eval corporations are preventing Congress from making changes to programs that don't impact them...like say SS. I hear that's a ponzi scheme we should be rid of...voters should be able to get behind that.

All the big spending categories (Defense/Medicare/SS) have strong constituencies which has prevented them from being cut in any meaningful way.

 

[shadow9d9]

We spend probably 10x on social spending compared to china with 1/3rd the population. Lets cut it all.

So you want to cut our standard of living down to where china is?

 

[piasabird]

Just cut SS and medicare accross the board. Kick all the people not retired off of SS. The documents I see in the Fin Aid office say too many people draw SS who are able to work, or are just having babies on the government dime. It is time to cut the fat and push all the baby makers off of the government payroll.

 

[K1052]

So you want to cut our standard of living down to where china is?

Well it would be nice to still have some forests we can send the sick and elderly out to die in at least...so not quite that far.

 

[Jaskalas]

I found at least $1 trillion in areas that I would cut and I didn't even try hard. It was east to find areas to cut and money to save.

Too bad and very sad we are "lead" by fools.

Who are voted in by Greeks.

Don't believe me? Cut from them and see how Greek the Americans really are. Just be sure to use an inhaler until the smoke clears.

 

[monovillage]

I looked at the chart.
It's obvious that the patient is terminal unless the surgeons can remove that disgusting tumor.
Start cutting in order to save the life of the patient.

 

[dmcowen674]

No sane person can look at this and not yearn for the "responsible" deficits of the Bush years.

Links, proof of said "responsible" deficits of the Bush years.

 

[trenchfoot]

Well, before we all go ballistic on Obama's budget proposals, let's compare that with the proposals from Romney, Gingrich and Santorum and see who these Repubs want to bless our tax $$$ with as compared with Obama.

Fair enough?

 

[monovillage]

Well, before we all go ballistic on Obama's budget proposals, let's compare that with the proposals from Romney, Gingrich and Santorum and see who these Repubs want to bless our tax $$$ with as compared with Obama.

Fair enough?

No, because Obama is the freaking President of the United States with a huge Administration to do his budget planning paid for by the taxpayers, the other 3 are running to become a candidate that faces President Obama in an election. You see any difference?

 

[trenchfoot]

No, because Obama is the freaking President of the United States with a huge Administration to do his budget planning paid for by the taxpayers, the other 3 are running to become a candidate that faces President Obama in an election. You see any difference?

Sure I do, when you frame the subject in a way that deflects from what the intent of my post was.

Obviously, Obama's proposals favor the middle class and the poor who constitute the vast majority of the population and the Repub candidate's proposals will just as obviously favor the very rich who constitute a very small but very powerful minority of the population.

That's the point I was attempting to make, and thanks for allowing me the opportunity to clarify my position.🙂

 

[monovillage]

Sure I do, when you frame the subject in a way that deflects from what the intent of my post was.

Obviously, Obama's proposals favor the middle class and the poor who constitute the vast majority of the population and the Repub candidate's proposals will just as obviously favor the very rich who constitute a very small but very powerful minority of the population.

That's the point I was attempting to make, and thanks for allowing me the opportunity to clarify my position.🙂

Keep working on it, it still sucks.

 

[CLite]

We spend probably 10x on social spending compared to china with 1/3rd the population. Lets cut it all.

Yes let's act like children and ignore the 2.5 trillion dollars the USA government owes to the social security fund and the retirees that paid into it. We have pillaged the payments from our elders to fill budget deficits and now you want to erase the debt we owe them?

In total OASI/DI/HI/SMI effect on the deficit is -31.7 billion dollars (income during 2010 minus outage). Yes those programs combined brought in more money than they spent.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/index.html

So eliminating all payroll-tax based social programs would increase our deficit by 31.7 billion dollars, it would trash our credit rating to that of a bankrupt pauper because we would erase a 2.5 trillion dollar debt as if it didn't exist, and finally yes it would give us back our payroll taxes.

 

[woolfe9999]

And?

Purpose a budget and accompanying law to address the issue instead of sitting on your hands only adding to the problem.
That is unless you are a coward and don't have the balls to address the real issues.

Seriously? Which political party is going to put its fingerprints on cutting Medicare and/or SS in an election year? And to wrap it up in a budget bill? Yeah, good luck blaming Obama for not putting such things into a proposed budget.

 

[Texashiker]

Looks like transportation and infrastructure is taking big cuts

Railroad administration -31.8%
Aviation administration -31%
Corp of engineers, civil works -29.7%

 

[ElFenix]

Household expenses could save a lot if they stop buying food and medicine and shelter.

Social Security is NOT a drain. Paying back the Reagan-started borrowing out of it is.

as social security has always invested in treasuries and has nearly always run surpluses, congress has been borrowing from it since the word go.

Looks like transportation and infrastructure is taking big cuts

Railroad administration -31.8%
Aviation administration -31%
Corp of engineers, civil works -29.7%

some of this stuff is in here twice for mandatory and discretionary. railroad administration has a mandatory at the top (on the right) with a 77% increase to 2.5 billion (which swamps the millions that were cut in discretionary). highways are getting a 103% increase.

 

[Genx87]

Because our goal is to be like China?

How did you get that from my response? I was responding to somebody pointing out our military spending being bad because we spend 3x more than china with 1/3rd the population. I am pointing out we do the same with our entire govt. So there is plenty to be cut since that is his litmus test.

 

[Genx87]

So you want to cut our standard of living down to where china is?

Strawman

 

[Genx87]

Yes let's act like children and ignore the 2.5 trillion dollars the USA government owes to the social security fund and the retirees that paid into it. We have pillaged the payments from our elders to fill budget deficits and now you want to erase the debt we owe them?

In total OASI/DI/HI/SMI effect on the deficit is -31.7 billion dollars (income during 2010 minus outage). Yes those programs combined brought in more money than they spent.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/TRSUM/index.html

So eliminating all payroll-tax based social programs would increase our deficit by 31.7 billion dollars, it would trash our credit rating to that of a bankrupt pauper because we would erase a 2.5 trillion dollar debt as if it didn't exist, and finally yes it would give us back our payroll taxes.

That is your idea, not mine. The strawman arguments in this thread are strong.

I'd say litmus test benefits is a start.

 

[K1052]

How did you get that from my response? I was responding to somebody pointing out our military spending being bad because we spend 3x more than china with 1/3rd the population. I am pointing out we do the same with our entire govt. So there is plenty to be cut since that is his litmus test.

We spend more on social services because we are a developed nation. Comparing our spending to other developed nations is a much more useful exercise. There can be basically no debate that we outspend the rest of the first world for defense on a percent of gdp basis by an enormous margin, particularly over the last 10 years.

 

[Texashiker]

highways are getting a 103% increase.

That is good news.

A couple of weeks ago there was a guy from the Texas Highway Department on the local news (Beaumont Texas area). He was talking about the increased mile per gallon rating of cars as caused fuel sales to level off or even go down. Since people were buying less fuel, taxes have stagnated. Less taxes mean less money for road and bridge repair.

Interstate 10 runs through the middle of Beaumont. The HWY 69/96 & I-10 slpit needs to be redesigned. The idiot who designed that split made HWY 69/96 go down to 1 lane. During rush hour the traffic can be backed up for miles. The whole area of highway needs to be redone and redesigned, but there is no money for the expansion project.

A couple of years ago I told some people who work for the highway department, the idiot engineer that designed the HWY 69/96 & I-10 split needs to be kicked in the nuts. Taking a major highway to 1 lane was a stupid idea.

 

[sm625]

No sane person can look at this and not yearn for the "responsible" deficits of the Bush years.

lol. The deficits are actually the same. They only look bigger because you dont understand what's been done to the money supply and how badly this country has been raped over the last few years.

 

[CLite]

That is your idea, not mine. The strawman arguments in this thread are strong.

I'd say litmus test benefits is a start.

You said "Let's cut it all", sorry if I didn't interpret that as a hyperbole. Considering the number of extremists on this forum I can never tell.

If you are referring to "means-testing" for SS & medicare then I agree that such a measure would help prolong the life of the SS & Medicare funds (perhaps indefinitely). However, it would not address our budgetary issues at present since they are unrelated to payroll tax programs.

To address our never-ending budget issues my pipe dream would be:
(a) simplify the hell out of the tax code, but keep it progressive. Pass a law that somehow requires extraordinary % of senate/house to introduce new exemptions and complications to code (probably needs constitutional amendment)
(b) Somehow have a bi-partisan independent agency run nothing but cost-benefit analyses on programs like tech investment/etc. For instance NASA was expensive but introduced many new technologies to the world. Another example would be a transportation link that builds economic development but may run at a net loss.
(c) Raise taxes on upper class to a level which creates a balanced budget. However, allow for surpluses in good times / deficits in bad times so we aren't always fucking around with tax rates.
(d) Address an ever-growing government with potentially unsustainable government employee benefits.

I don't think we can ever get rid of social programs otherwise Emergency waits will go from 24h to 100h+ with grannies lined up around the block without Medicare. However, there is probably ways to streamline it and get rid of levels of bureaucratic red-tape which increase the cost.

But, none of this will ever happen because politicians will always buy votes with an exemption riddled tax system, extreme benefit give-aways, and lowered tax rates.

 

[Anarchist420]

All the big spending categories (Defense/Medicare/SS) have strong constituencies which has prevented them from being cut in any meaningful way.

Big Pharma and the MIC wouldn't be that strong if more voters were reasonable.

I don't know how much Medicare Part D takes up, but I'm guessing its expenditures could be reduced by well more than half if:
1. trade regs on imported drugs were lifted.
2. Imported drugs were used whenever they costed taxpayers the less than domestic drugs.
3. Generic drugs were used whenever they costed taxpayers less than name brand drugs.
4. IP was repealed or at least drastically reduced.

American taxpayers spend $320Bn or so on contractors. $250Bn of that could reasonably be cut and replaced with nothing. In addition to that, at least $40Bn could reasonably be cut from medicare part D. When I say reasonably, I mean without much of a cost to the vast majority of people.

 

[Acanthus]

You said "Let's cut it all", sorry if I didn't interpret that as a hyperbole. Considering the number of extremists on this forum I can never tell.

If you are referring to "means-testing" for SS & medicare then I agree that such a measure would help prolong the life of the SS & Medicare funds (perhaps indefinitely). However, it would not address our budgetary issues at present since they are unrelated to payroll tax programs.

To address our never-ending budget issues my pipe dream would be:
(a) simplify the hell out of the tax code, but keep it progressive. Pass a law that somehow requires extraordinary % of senate/house to introduce new exemptions and complications to code (probably needs constitutional amendment)
(b) Somehow have a bi-partisan independent agency run nothing but cost-benefit analyses on programs like tech investment/etc. For instance NASA was expensive but introduced many new technologies to the world. Another example would be a transportation link that builds economic development but may run at a net loss.
(c) Raise taxes on upper class to a level which creates a balanced budget. However, allow for surpluses in good times / deficits in bad times so we aren't always fucking around with tax rates.
(d) Address an ever-growing government with potentially unsustainable government employee benefits.

I don't think we can ever get rid of social programs otherwise Emergency waits will go from 24h to 100h+ with grannies lined up around the block without Medicare. However, there is probably ways to streamline it and get rid of levels of bureaucratic red-tape which increase the cost.

But, none of this will ever happen because politicians will always buy votes with an exemption riddled tax system, extreme benefit give-aways, and lowered tax rates.

Just a small comment: we are at one of the lowest rates of govt employees per capita in history. I would lean more toward correcting their benefits structure and wages.