I think the Federal budget is indeed bloated and needs to be slashed.

[WarGamer]

The problem is... GOP'ers will take the savings and dump it into shit that does nothing for Main Street.

We're not the world's "protector or Daddy" and the military budget can be cut by 50%

The cost of debt is even higher than the DoD. Figure something out. Mint the $1T coin or some other trick.

No, we don't need to spend money on studying the mating habits of the Australian Aboriginal Spotted Marmet

Medicare shouldn't be paying $5 for a Tylenol or $25 for a catheter set.

I WISH that a Democrat for once would say...

"We're going to slash $2T off the budget and put it all into Medicare for ALL and doubling Social Security for the Poor, School lunches and Child Tax Credits."

[Silent Type]

1. +1. Should have done this under Obama or Biden, rather than waiting for trump. One quibble, Medicare doesn't pay

$5 for Tylenol, etc.

Hospitals might "charge" $5 for Tylenol, etc., but they get paid nowhere near that under Medicare's DRG reimbursement system.

Not unusual for hospitals to charge $100,000 for a hospital stay, adding it all up, only to get paid $23,000 from Medicare and Medigap. The rest is written off. Medicaid, might pay $13,000 for the same stay.

[FakeNoose]

2. Everything you say is correct

... but if the ultra-wealthy were actually paying their FAIR SHARE of taxes in this country, these problem would already be solved. Or they never would have happened in the first place. It all went to hell in a handbasket with Ronald Reagan, and every R President since Reagan has been piling on. The D's cannot govern alone, and the R party is completely dysfunctional.

[drray23]

3. That is a luddite view of the world.

No, we don't need to spend money on studying the mating habits of the Australian Aboriginal Spotted Marmet

These kind of statements are naive and typically made by right wingers or people with no idea of the overall scope. You may have made up this particular one ( I don't know) but it illustrates the point I am going to make.

Taken out of context, things like this might seem wasteful and useless. However, science encompasses a wide range of things, which turn out to be beneficial to mankind no matter how strange it seems.

For example, animals are good models for human diseases, often carry the same ones. Studying how they are affected let us predict the next pandemic.

Likewise, funding scientists to catalog the type of plants growing in some remote parts of the Amazonian forest might seem useless, however a huge amount of medicinal drugs have their origins in nature, discovered after we studied these plants.

I could go on but because as a lay person, one does not see the significance does not mean it's not.

I do agree that there are other areas where one could save money, the defense budget being an obvious one. Taking pot shots at science is where I draw the line.

[maxsolomon]

6. Yes, that animal is made up.

It's akin (I suppose) to the "underwater basket weaving" joke people (my wife's aerospace engineer father) made about useless college degrees.

[dpibel]

27. Think he was reaching for "marmot"

But the rest is made up.

[eppur_se_muova]

4. Start with oil, gas, and coal subsidies. The rest is debatable. nt

[maxsolomon]

5. DU's mortal enemy, the hated New York Times, once had a "you cut the budget" feature

Back in 2010 when the GQP last made a big stink about the deficit and debt (as a way to attack Obama). I used to link it for conservative jackholes on social media (and DU's contingent of kneejerk know-nothings); it always sobered them up (if they were smart enough to complete the quiz).

It's still up if you want to give it a whirl:
https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html

You're correct that the military would need to see the biggest cuts.

[appmanga]

7. How about taxing these billionaires who can give tens of millions of dollars to politicians...

...but balk at helping to pay their fair share to support their country. And the same goes for corporations.

Warren Buffett says his piece:

[Kid Berwyn]

47. What appmanga said.

Tax the dodgers and the budget gets fixed PDQ.

[kacekwl]

8. Lift the

goddamned cap on Social security. Let them pay on their whole salary and compensation. Why limited their contributions to SS.

[Scrivener7]

37. This. Really, kids, it's not rocket science.

Bezos and Muskrat pay a smaller percentage in taxes than all of us. Smaller by far.

You and I subsidize billions to oil companies while they make trillions in profits.

Profitable companies that overuse the infrastructure we all pay for pay no taxes.

I could go on.

None of this will be touched. There will just be more of it.

[karynnj]

9. The cost of debt is not changed by minting a coin - of any value

The cost of the debt refers to payments to people, corporations etc that hold US debts - such as bonds and treasury bills. Now, if interest rates went way down, some high yielding bonds or bills could be bought back and paid for by dollars from selling lower yield bonds and bills.

When people have spoken of minting a very valuable coin, it is essentially a trick to not exceed the debt limit because the treasury can mint coins and if they then hold that coin it can be counted as an asset.

[WarGamer]

18. The debt has to be eliminated...

And take a good look at the interest being earned off of US Treasuries... much of it goes to billionaires and foreign countries who are parking vast sums in the US.

Mint the $1T coin and pay off debt.

Stop new bonds auctions.

[karynnj]

24. The debt does not have to be eliminated

That would be equivalent to increasing the money supply by that amount, essentially devaluing the dollar. That effectively would create inflation because the dollars every one has and everyone earns would be worth less. Note that wages won't immediately go up.

So, everyone holding treasury bills or bonds would get their investment back and their assets would not necessarily lose value.

[WarGamer]

25. that's right... and a risk.

But servicing the debt is now more than the DoD budget.

Something's gotta give.

I'm not fond of paying the rich to park their cash in Fed bonds.

[karynnj]

44. Don't renew the tax cuts for the wealthy to raise more income

Raising more from taxes is another way to cut the deficit. Cutting programs will hurt the most vulnerable. Greatly increasing the money supply will too.

When Republicans especially people like Musk intentionally ignore that possible solution AND call for everyone else to have less we need to remind them that a large part of that debt was accrued over the last 5 or 6 years due to tax cuts that expire because they were not sustainable.

[WarGamer]

45. Not a single "vulnerable person" is hurt by cutting the Pentagon budget by 50%

[karynnj]

46. However that is not what they are speaking of cutting.

[soandso]

30. Get rid of FERNs for currency and print US notes

Pass a balanced budget amendment. Pay off the existing debt and no more new debt sold with interest paid on it. Interest free US notes. The current debt is over 36 trillion, with interest paid (to date, this year) over one trillion. That is not sustainable.

[BannonsLiver]

10. Putin and Xi would love your plan to disarm our military.

[WarGamer]

16. At 50% of our current spending we'd still be the world's greatest military.

For example... Europe can take care of themselves.

We can reduce our footprint in Europe greatly...

Slash wasteful new projects... The F35 was a boondoggle as are the littoral ships

Stop building new fighter aircraft, the next generation won't even have pilots.

Aircraft design is limited by the frailty of human bodies anyways.

[HereForTheParty]

11. We seem to be "protector or Daddy" for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan among others

Democrats are pretty united in protecting these countries and other democracies.

[BannonsLiver]

12. The OP is for isolationism

That didn’t serve us very well in the years after WW1. The bill came due on Dec 7 1941 and it was a whopper.

[dpibel]

28. Cutting a bloated military budget is isolationism?

That's a bit of reach.

You really believe that the military industrial complex really earns its money?

No bloat in the military budget?

K.

[BannonsLiver]

41. No that's the disarmament part.

Not living up to our NATO commitments and not supporting Ukraine militarily is the isolationism. I hope that clears it up for you,

[WarGamer]

43. That sort of logic is a carbon copy of Neocon dogma from the late 90's and early 00's...

Remember "Arsenal of Democracy" ???





Or Spreading Democracy to the Middle East?

[soandso]

31. It's not isolationism

a pejorative obviously cooked up to shame those not wanting to engage in and fund wars. A country can interact with the world without being involved in or starting wars and being involved in regime change. Lots of countries do it!

[BannonsLiver]

40. So you don't agree with the majority of Democrats that support Ukraine.

Got it. And yes, that is isolationism. That you don’t care for the term is completely irrelevant.

[WarGamer]

42. there you go again... painting people into a corner

Let me clarify.

The USA is a MEMBER of NATO and supporter of European nations.

And equal member to Spain, Estonia and Italy.

Ukraine is IN Europe.

It's quite normal to support Ukraine in their war vs Russia...

What's NOT normal... is to be the leading "donor" to the War.

The US has spent DOUBLE as much as the European nations.

That's lunacy.

Reasonable people can believe the US, as part of a coalition to defend Ukraine should pay... maybe 10% of the bill?

The war never should have happened...

Boris Johnson, possibly in coordination with the White House convinced Zelenskyy to abandon talks with Russia before the invasion, urging them to "fight and we got your back"

Money is not finite.

Every dollar spent to buy bombs to extend a war is a dollar that won't subsidize childcare, fund medicare for all, feed a child or allow a single retiree to live a more dignified life.

[soandso]

48. I don't care what any majority thinks

and follow my internal knowing about what's right. And, not all Democrats are war hawks and those who aren't certainly won't be bullied into it. I got my political feet wet because of the Vietnam war so there's also that.

So, do you really want to assert that nations who have chosen not to get drawn into wars are isolationist? Yes, if directly attacked, there is no choice, but to go out of the way to stir shit and get involved in conflicts like wars, proxy wars, arms trafficking, etc, is the lowest form of human engagement there is. Do you consider Switzerland, who had a policy of neutrality for so long, as isolationist? Costa Rica, Singapore? How about life affirming and positive engagement, such as trade? Without war, is that isolationist?

[Passages]

13. Let's keep the money for the spotted marmet.

The rest I agree with....thank you


On edit..are they real? ha ha


Spotted Marmot On KKH.
https://www.tiktok.com/@tiktoktreand/video/7354324235151625514

[soandso]

32. That might not have been the best example

of some of the idiotic grants given out. The most important part, though, is that the US has to borrow money from China (biggest debt holder) to make those grants. Would you take out a loan and go deeply in debt to make grants like that?

[Passages]

39. My response was more tongue and cheek. What I do believe the American people

deserve is a full audit of the Fed, long overdue.

[soandso]

49. Agreed :)

[Skittles]

14. how much did repukes waste on bullshi wars

what did you say about that

I can guess

[WarGamer]

15. I was anti_iraq war from the start.

[Skittles]

20. neither war accomplished a fucking thing

so sick of repukes whining about "saving tax dollars" - THEY are the biggest ripoffs

I AM NOT FOOLED

[WarGamer]

22. War IS a racket.

In modern society VERY FEW wars are justified.

Too much inter-connectivity.

People need to know... slash the DoD budget and reduce the debt and we CAN AFFORD to end poverty in the USA.

[harumph]

23. We could (end poverty), but you know very well we won't.

[thebigidea]

17. That's some pretty ignorant gibberish.

What a coincidence that it's often used to disguise some pretty awful goals that only benefit folks like Putin.

[WarGamer]

19. instead of insulting it... use your words and tell me why

[Skittles]

21. THANK YOU

YOU GET IT

SO DO I

[Scrivener7]

36. Yep. Not a clue.

[VMA131Marine]

26. What do you have against the spotted Marmet ...

[soandso]

33. OMG, look at that!

I want to kiss him/her.

[lapfog_1]

29. The problem with cutting spending

is that the GOP wants to give all of the savings, and them some, in the form of tax breaks to the very rich ( mostly ) in YATDBET. Yet Another Trickle Down Bullshit Economic Theory.

The Democrats wants to cut spending on mostly military budget and spend it on more social programs and ( sometimes ) or direct payments to poor ( most of which never get TO the poor ).

Neither is correct.

The military spends so "much" on something mundane ( pick your favorite example ) because the companies that build specialized military hardware ( sometimes like very special and small quantity items like fighter aircraft ejection seats ) that cost inordinate amounts of money to design and build and test and the the military orders a few thousand a year ( or less ). So they make up for that by billing $200 for a hammer or a $1000 for a toilet.

Sure, we could go to war with a less sophisticated set of weapons and "smart" gear... but only at the expense of more casualties. Or in situations where we are only matching what the potential enemy brings.

Trickle Down has failed every time it has been tried. The economic eggheads that push this failed theory think that all that is missing from the basic demand / supply equation is more capital to start the supply chain into producing enough to meet demand... never mind the labor or the demand parts of the equation. you need to stimulate all aspects at once ( demand but making things that people want or need and can afford, well paid labor to both product the products AND create money to stimulate demand, and some cash infusion to provide the needed capital to build the factory and buy the inputs to start production )...

Democrats fail to understand that deficit spending is for when times are tough and the government NEEDS to spend to stimulate demand and pay labor... but during good economic cycles reduce spending so that the excess can be used to pay down the debt accumulated in bad times... thus reducing the impact of government borrowing and paying interest which does nothing for the economy in any long term way. Not start new programs of spending because we have more revenue than expenses ( surplus ). Clinton/Gore, for all their faults, were the last administration that sort of understood these fundamental aspects of capitalism and government policy.

[Martin Eden]

34. That's ONE side of the ledger. The OTHER side is ....

TAX the GODDAMN RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Scrivener7]

35. I guarantee it will be ten times worse when they're done. It always is.

[Voltaire2]

38. Scientific research project funding is minuscule.

The total nsf budget is 9B. It is down by 5% from the prior year. This is not the problem.

When interest payments and social security - the non discretionary parts of the budget are set aside, the huge bloat in federal spending, the part that keeps growing, the part that gets near unanimous support, is our war budget.