View Single Post
Old 12-29-2012, 08:26 PM   #64
SoCalBronco
Nixonite
 
SoCalBronco's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 37,080

Adopt-a-Bronco:
D.J. Williams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
Yep, going forward (meaning for people not currently at or near the eligibility age) we will need to make some changes, but that's not going to do anything to solve the current deficit problem.

Nor have you addressed the slobbering over cuts to Social Security.

It's pretty simple, The top three causes of the current deficit problemare:

1.) Military Spending (more than doubled, after inflation, since 2000): $350+bn/year (much more, probably a total of over $500bn/year, when you consider things OTHER than DoD budget)
2.) Bush Tax Cuts (as well as other tax cuts from Obama): $450bn/year
3.) Medicare Part D: $/year

Want to cut the deficit now without stealing from people? You have to work with #1 and #2. You can assist with a general cut to other discretionary spending (which I'm in favor of) but that contribution will be dwarfed by rolling back #1 and #2.
Military spending will automatically decline as the war ends in 2014 and the administration has already began a program to streamline it. I'm all in favor of replacing the Bush tax cuts withnsomething more responsible but it has to be linked with serious structural changes to Medicare. There will never be any incentive for the Left to agree to changes if they already got the tax changes they wanted. The tax changes and Medicare changes have to be linked.

There is no such thing as "let's take care of taxes first and we can talk spending next year". If taxes go up on everyone automatic cuts come to Medicare and defense and it all leads to a recession that's fine. That's a far better result than eliminating any incentive to tackle spending issues. I'll take the recession and 2.2T in savings.
__________________
SoCalBronco is offline   Reply With Quote