Everyone's talking about cutting spending, no one can agree on what to cut.
What would happen if we literally cut everything by 5%? Completely across the board. Everyone gets fucked equally.
Would that even start to help the deficit?
Yeah, I know this would never happen in The Real World due to politics, etc. But What If?
In keeping with the GOP's pledge to reduce the size of government, one of the first votes in the Republican House will be to cut the chamber's operating budget by 5%. Republican aides claim the move will save $25 billion.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/05/pelosi.boehner/index.html?hpt=T1
It would be the most equitable thing to do. And it's so simple really. It's much easier for an agency to deal with reshuffling the books and the work force to deal with a 5% dip into their budget than a 30% slashing, or, having the fold up the tent altogether. And of course the Military could deal with 5%. They have to have that shit in the couch cushions of their waiting rooms.
Mothball 8 carrier groups. We have 12, and no Tojo out there.
Stop with the gadgets, and train infantry. That's where war is, today.
Put the government, including congress, on a regular PPO.
Rduce our nuclear arsenal to 1000 bombs from 6400. 1000 guarantees the destruction of all surface life on Earth, why the hell would you need more than that?
Fund infrastructure. Not only does it NEED it, it employees people with a return on the investment, to boot.
Legalize pot, and empty out the prisons a bit.
Get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Period.
There's plenty of other things, but of course none of them will happen. They're just going to cut SS/Medicare, and call it a day. The resulting horrible hardship and continued overspending will, of course, be blamed on Obama and the senate.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 05, 2011, 04:48:26 PM
Mothball 8 carrier groups. We have 12, and no Tojo out there.
Stop with the gadgets, and train infantry. That's where war is, today.
Put the government, including congress, on a regular PPO.
Rduce our nuclear arsenal to 1000 bombs from 6400. 1000 guarantees the destruction of all surface life on Earth, why the hell would you need more than that?
Fund infrastructure. Not only does it NEED it, it employees people with a return on the investment, to boot.
Legalize pot, and empty out the prisons a bit.
Get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Period.
There's plenty of other things, but of course none of them will happen. They're just going to cut SS/Medicare, and call it a day. The resulting horrible hardship and continued overspending will, of course, be blamed on Obama and the senate.
This is the correct Budgetcycle.
If you cut everything by 5%, the problem would be that programs that are struggling or require greater investment will fail, while other, far more wasteful but better funded programs *cough*NationalSecurityState*cough* will continue on while absorbing the hit.
You want to locate where the most waste and corruption is first, and eliminate that. Then you can start to look at the finances and see if anything else needs changing.
Quote from: The Poster With No Name on January 05, 2011, 05:02:34 PM
If you cut everything by 5%, the problem would be that programs that are struggling or require greater investment will fail, while other, far more wasteful but better funded programs *cough*NationalSecurityState*cough* will continue on while absorbing the hit.
You want to locate where the most waste and corruption is first, and eliminate that. Then you can start to look at the finances and see if anything else needs changing.
:mittens:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 05, 2011, 04:48:26 PM
Reduce our nuclear arsenal to 1000 bombs from 6400. 1000 guarantees the destruction of all surface life on Earth, why the hell would you need more than that?
We need to stockpile so that if we discover intelligent life anywhere else, we can wipe all life out on their planet, too.
On a serious note, what do we do with the excess missiles? What has the US done in the past to dispose of weapons-grade nuclear material- is it stored in the same facilities as reactor waste, or are there special precautions for it?
I think we just stick warheads somewhere, with no launch capability.
That is sooo going to bite this planet in the ass at some point after the unpleasantness when some local warlord get a hold of a pack of them..
Yeah, they don't count as missiles, for treaty purposes, if the warheads and missiles are kept in seperate locations.
Quote from: Cramulus on January 05, 2011, 05:57:04 PM
Quote from: The Poster With No Name on January 05, 2011, 05:02:34 PM
If you cut everything by 5%, the problem would be that programs that are struggling or require greater investment will fail, while other, far more wasteful but better funded programs *cough*NationalSecurityState*cough* will continue on while absorbing the hit.
You want to locate where the most waste and corruption is first, and eliminate that. Then you can start to look at the finances and see if anything else needs changing.
:mittens:
Seconded.