Cutting Expenses

The biggest source of debt for the US Treasury is Social Security followed by Medicare, Medicaid & the DoD in that order. Add state spending & education tops the DoD, combining Medicare & Medicaid makes that more than Social Security. Medical spending is included in the DoD budget as well, so is some education spending & pensions. Medical care IS already the largest expense for the federal government & has been for years. Something has to be done, something has to be done to all of these budget items, we have to trim $1Trillion from the budget. That's a very large T with a bunch of porky filled zeros & we have to cut it because it will never be easier than to day, it only gets more necessary & the cuts more "savage" to borrow a prhase from those who will argue they cannot be cut, streamlined or altered in anyway that doesn't merely make them more expensive. I am 48, I should not collect before 75 without a disability. If I were to make more than $100k in my retirement from my wise investments & other pensions, I sould not collect in any year I make that much as a retiree. I should get to write the value I am not getting off on any taxes I might owe, currently we can assume that'd be about $36k. Just that little change that hurts no one, it just keeps money in the pot that would be returned in taxes anyway. The government lets 3 accountants & 2 bureaucrats go, while running more efficiently & saving a billion. Obviously I'm guessing at the numbers because I don't have the GAO & the CBO at my disposal to run the numbers back & forth.

To leave a comment, please sign in with
or or

Comments (20)

  1. noahbody

    An interesting proposal but I hesitate to place that age at 75. I already cannot collect SS benefits until I am 67. Pushing that back further would hurt… a lot.

    April 15, 2017
    1. Munkyman

      Maybe not for your age group, but I’m looking at a reliable estimate of 80 or older & the system can’t really afford to carry the average person much more than 5 years. That people die before they collect is the only way it’s still “solvent,” that & the fact that we borrow a lot of money to pay the obligation.

      April 15, 2017
  2. fuall

    It’s hard to cut anything for those that are getting that “anything” for themselves. To them it’s absolutely essential. The govt. needs to start working from an ‘essentials’ viewpoint, as opposed to just greasing the squeaky wheel, which is what they do now. There are plenty of areas, whole departments in fact, that are duplicative with the states, and could be released to them without detrimental effect. The Dept. of Education comes to mind. Let the state’s Depts. of Education raise their own revenue and manage their school systems how they see fit. The only education the government should be involved in is for military academies and colleges, which are already under the DoD and the DoHS. AND…they already handle the training for all other areas of the Armed Forces.
    .

    Other departments could be scaled waaaay back if not eliminated entirely, allowing their state counterparts to take more responsibility for their local governance. HUD and the Dept. of Health and Human Services are two such agencies that could easily be scaled back or turned over to the individual states altogether. Or maybe the Dept. of Agriculture, the Dept. of the Interior, Labor, BLM…all of which could be handled at the state level without the federal government. Who collects the taxes to pay for the various services would need to be figured out. I would say congress should set guidelines for running those departments and allow the states to set their own taxing structure to pay for their own programs how they see fit, as long as they stay within those reasonable guidelines. The only department we would need out of all of these would be a Dept. of Oversight to monitor and advise the various state agencies and the way they levee and collect the congressionally authorized taxes.
    .
    But none of that will ever happen any more than the war on drugs ending, or the border(s) being secured… There’s simply too much of an industry already established around all of those things. Eliminating one would ripple through the economy like a slow-moving tsunami, wiping out job after job. Each dept., each “war,” each “action” has a huge price tag in the billions which generates jobs and income for countless businesses and individuals. Take it out and you take out all of those businesses and jobs, unless you have another massive project with which to replace it, which defeats the purpose we started out to address.

    April 15, 2017
    1. Munkyman

      So the Republic is doomed to bankruptcy & the wisest move is to immigrate elsewhere with more promise before the dollar evaporates.

      April 16, 2017
      1. fuall

        Look on the bright side…there’s always revolt and overthrow of the government. It’s happened before, it’ll take something like it to have a chance at something better. There’s no such thing in government as “change.” Raze it to the ground and start over.

        April 16, 2017
        1. Munkyman

          Ours was the most bloodless establishment of a government through Revolution, most turn out as bloody as our Civil War & worse, most end with “the Terror” or worse. I just can’t see the failure of ourselves to use the malleable system we have to fix things before they get too bad as anything, but the not too bright side of things.

          April 16, 2017
  3. Gulfman

    You can either work until you die or be a bum and not work at all.The bum gets everything free.Thanks to your hard work.

    April 15, 2017
  4. This comment has been deleted
  5. jaageet

    Thinking about the future is not naval-gazing. It’s a responsibility, a concern for one’s welfare as well as that of the community.

    April 16, 2017
  6. bobbisue

    I like your idea, except the one-size-fits-all-wait-until-age-75-to-collect. Disability is already too hard to collect and almost everybody has to go to court to get it. Disabled people cannot afford to wait the length of time it takes to get a favorable ruling through the courts. My wife had to quit working in December of 1999 and did not receive her first check until March of 2003. If I had not been working and had not been able to support the both of us, she probably would have become homeless during that long wait. Then there are those who are not disabled and who are not physically able to work full time until age 75. I am 62 and plan to continue working full time as long as I am able. I will not draw SS until I am old enough to receive benefits without having to repay any portion of what I draw. I will enroll in medicare as soon as I am eligible. I have paid into the system and the government has no right to make me wait so long as to prevent me from drawing what I put into the program along with a reasonable return on my investment.

    April 16, 2017
    1. bobbisue

      My point in all of that is that SS is not the place to make cuts. We deserve everything we get out of it. We earned it and it is not our fault the government robbed from it to pay for other shit, I mean, stuff.

      April 16, 2017
    2. Munkyman

      I didn’t say one size fits all waiting til 75, I’m 48 those my age have the time & most of us have the health to get it at 75, those who don’t can get it early through disability now & would then.
      Fact is you don’t deserve everything you get out of it. It was a poor investment that earns no interest, the money you get out isn’t yours it’s your grand kid’s. It also wasn’t built to be an investment in your retirement, it was built to be the what if your investments fail & you’re faced with your children throwing you out as an unendurable expense. Johnson changed that & it hasn’t worked, America has gone in the toilet since we began expecting Social Security to take care of us, when established the day it began to pay out was 5 years after the average American died, I’m suggesting it move forward with our life expectancy to 5 years before the average American dies.
      .
      Remember you’re never going to see a dime of what you put in, it was spent as soon as it was taken. All you will get is the wages of slaving someone still at work for your Social Security. You can pretend you put that money away, but the fact remains our government just took it for a Ponzi scheme that’s gonna explode.

      April 16, 2017
      1. Gulfman

        How come the government never talks about running out of money for welfare and food stamps?

        April 16, 2017
        1. Munkyman

          Welfare & food stamps don’t make the top 3 budget items, cutting them destabilizes society & puts those wealthy retirees futures at far greater risk, when Bubba can’t find work & decides it’s time to eat the rich because he’s already given starving a try. Welfare is there to keep peace nothing else or it’d serve those on it better & provide a better platform from which to become productive instead of a steep slide to prison.

          April 16, 2017
  7. stevehayes13

    Cut a trillion. Sensible defence (ie, not global policeman stuff), and stop incarcerating so many people for so long.

    April 16, 2017
    1. Munkyman

      Sadly we have people that need to either be lobotomized or executed, sure our society made them who they are 99% of the time… that changes nothing about what they are & the options we have to protect ourselves from them. I am totally down with opening the doors to every non violent offender that can work & wear an ankle monitor. I’d say that weekends & nights/days in jail would be sufficient punishment, they need to be earning atonement & paying for their own incarceration to re-enter society as a full & equal member.
      .
      I don’t mind our Navy policing the seas for piracy, I don’t mind dropping a BFB when someone is doing something terrible. Playing regime change, nation building & pushing world politics 1st doesn’t work, we could have learned that from England & 2nd because of 1st’s it’s a waste of lives & treasure. We benefit greatly from open seaways & our standing military stems from our need to protect ourselves from African pirates, as then naval vessels are the only sufficient deterrent.

      April 16, 2017
      1. stevehayes13

        Three quarters of a trillion per year to protect from African pirates

        April 17, 2017
        1. Munkyman

          no, definitely not. I also have no issue with a lot of defense research spending, I have enjoyed many things produced by that.

          April 17, 2017
  8. Brn2bfree

    we have to trim $1Trillion from the budget. That’s a very large
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Yes it is… that’s just to break even.
    As for trimming, no help will ever come from the Democrat liberal socialist party and not enough Republicans will help because they are RINO’s. So, it looks like we don’t have any brakes and we’ll end up going over the hill. It’s just that the Democrats want to speed us up and the Republicans want to slow us down.
    .
    Closing the borders and destroying the enemy is good for the economy on the long. Once the dust settles maybe the refugees can stay in their countries.

    April 16, 2017
    1. Munkyman

      It’s as if you didn’t read the top 4 budget items. Prisons CBP/ICE & welfare don’t even make the top 5.

      April 17, 2017
    2. Munkyman

      Why that matters is that the top 6 budget items alone account for all, but about a trillion. So we can trim everywhere, we can trim heavy into the top line items or we can simply ERASE EVERYTHING below the top 5. Those are the basic options.

      April 17, 2017