Can you balance the budget?

Getting into Med School is Hard? Not with BeMo.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
T

TTigers70

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
I remember doing something like this in government last year. My partner and I basically cut anything that was not a necessity like social security checks. We had like 100 billion in surplus
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Can I balance the budget?

No, probably not.
 
Dissolve the miltary! People love us, we have nothing to fear :D
 
loveoforganic said:
Dissolve the miltary! People love us, we have nothing to fear :D
Click to expand...
We spend more than the rest of the world combined. We could spend $400 billion less and we'd be spending more than the next ten countries combined.
 
It would be nice to have all the Congresspeople and Senators do this exercise and publish it so constituents know exactly where they stand.
 
I love the idea, but 99% of the budget balancing proposals will never occur since everything that decreases benefits for group x will result in anger from group x and cutting the military means you're soft on terrorism.

No one has or is willing to gamble all their political capital to solve the deficit. It's easy to publish something that has a list of things to cut then have people basically check little boxes according to their political ideology. The actual difficult part is coming up with a combination that can possibly be passed as real legislation.
 
I second every politician be required to take something like this. We can at least start with the ones with the most checkboxes.
 
Very easy index to one half of inflation or freeze growth. Bring the troops home, cut medicare, medicaid and social security.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I would love to see a politician actually mention raising the minimum age for receiving social security benefits...that sure wouldn't end well :laugh:
 
Lol, it's funny that everyone's is so different. I ended up with a huge surplus, but a large majority of that surplus came from tax increases, not spending cuts. I have no problem spending the money for programs; I only have a problem that we are spending money we don't have. Increase income = problem solved. The way I see it, we should suck it up and dig ourselves out of this deep hole. Then, when that is out of the way, we can look at cutting taxes again. Not so very different from the way individuals dig themselves out of consumer debt by increasing their payments.

As a sidenote, it makes me curious what everyone's political preferences are. Don't worry, I won't open that can of worms here, just something to consider.
 
Last edited:
teddy bear doc said:
As a sidenote, it makes me curious what everyone's political preferences are. Don't worry, I won't open that can of worms here, just something to consider.
Click to expand...

Essentially if their selections take us back to the Clinton eras by letting a lot of tax breaks expire, reduce the military, and maintain entitlements, they're probably "liberal".

If their selections wants to maintain the course of the Bush era, they probably want to decrease benefits and drastically reduce the size of the federal government to keep the various tax cuts fiscally viable they're probably "conservative".

It usually comes down to belief in the trickle down theory of Reagonomics and whether you think rich people deserve to keep their money, poor people deserve help or if everyone should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
 
getright said:
I would love to see a politician actually mention raising the minimum age for receiving social security benefits...that sure wouldn't end well :laugh:
Click to expand...

It would be tantamount to political suicide, but Sarkozy did it. Social Security was originally meant to be 1) a safety net 2) that you would die before receiving any. We need to move the retirement age for social security the early or mid 70s. I wish we'd just close it, allow us younger individuals to invest our own money. FWIW politically I'm a libertarian.
 
TooMuchResearch said:
I like mine slightly better:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=d2uk52q1

But yeah, fixing the budget is no problem according to this game.
Click to expand...

I like mine even more :).

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=d02k44l7

FutureCTDoc said:
It would be tantamount to political suicide, but Sarkozy did it. Social Security was originally meant to be 1) a safety net 2) that you would die before receiving any. We need to move the retirement age for social security the early or mid 70s. I wish we'd just close it, allow us younger individuals to invest our own money. FWIW politically I'm a libertarian.
Click to expand...
I disagree in because Social Security is such a small part of our budget, it's so easy to keep it working forever, and it provides such a massively important safety net for tens of millions of people. Seriously, I don't see how people think something that is essential to so many people is less important than 1% tax increase for people making over a million dollars. I don't get it.
 
Lokhtar said:
I like mine even more :).

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=d02k44l7


I disagree in because Social Security is such a small part of our budget, it's so easy to keep it working forever, and it provides such a massively important safety net for tens of millions of people. Seriously, I don't see how people think something that is essential to so many people is less important than 1% tax increase for people making over a million dollars. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it small, it's about 20% of the federal budget.
 
DrYoda said:
I wouldn't call it small, it's about 20% of the federal budget.
Click to expand...
Haha, sorry. You are right. I misspoke. I meant as a % of our GDP.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=011bn5qd

60%taxes/40%spending. bring the troops home, push back retirement, push taxes on everyone, soak the rich. income inequality is driving most social unrest these days. it's time the winners started paying for their "American Dream," instead of having the Chinese pay for it and the rest of us signing their IOUs.

there's a reason capping Medicare spending saves so much money - it's totally unfeasible. malpractice reform is a red herring best left to the states.

what's incredible about going through this exercise is how far away we are in reality from coming up with an actual solution.
 
gravitywave said:
60%taxes/40%spending. bring the troops home, push back retirement, push taxes on everyone, soak the rich. income inequality is driving most social unrest these days. it's time the winners started paying for their "American Dream," instead of having the Chinese pay for it and the rest of us signing their IOUs.
Click to expand...

LOL, mine was even worse, 65% taxes / 35% spending cuts. Guess everyone probably knows where I fall politically. :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

B
Rent/Budget Question
Replies
4
Views
414
Bwesternn
B
kirvoyant
Balancing ECs and mental health/physical wellness
Replies
2
Views
280
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
U
No IIs. What can I do? 516/3.95 with balanced ECs.
Replies
10
Views
2K
LeaveNoTrace
L
T
  • Locked
Does 100th percentile MCAT with Unique ECs balance out 3.67 GPA for T20s?
Replies
1
Views
1K
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
M
WAMC / More Balanced School List?
Replies
2
Views
519
migs888
M
Top