Why cuts everywhere, regardless of budget, is lunacy

[A Theist]

It's not that hard...I can think of another too....

Fuck off you fascist shitball.

All I have to do is push this button and......HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!......Watch Min get pissed!!!!

[TaraJo]

Yeah, in all honesty, I'm convinced that not only do they not really object to the government spending too much, they're mor than willing to piss money away all day as long as it's for one of their own projects. For example, there's DOMA. Democrats don't want it; support for same sex marriage is damn near universal within the Democratic party. Cutting funding to the defense of DOMA would get through the Democrats in congress easily, the President wouldn't mind a bit and, hey, if the public really considers the issue to be that important, the Republican economic theory is that the private sector can take over, right? Let the private sector handle the legal bills to the defense of DOMA.

Turns out, the GOP had other ideas in mind. That's another 3 million Boehner is wasting, trying to screw over more gay people. He's spending that money while he's chastising Democrats for not cutting spending. Shouldn't be too surprising, though; they had majority control of both houses of congress for a while and they had Bush in the white house. What did they do? Start two wars with no exit strategy, fail to pay for them, and deal with every problem by giving rich people tax cuts.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/01/15...ation-law/

[Aractus]

I've seen it put forth on these forums that cutting programs, regardless of actual budgetary constraints/usage, should be done.

I said it was fucking stupid then, and I'll say it now -- cuts for the sake of cuts is not being fiscally conservative.

It's fiscal stupidity, as the loss of opportunity and intellectual property is absolutely assured while significant savings to the federal budget is not.

The “continuing resolution” that Congress passed in the fall, which allowed the government to avoid a shutdown, only runs until March. It includes a 10% across-the-board budget cut to everything. That includes most of the critical medical research in the U.S.

...

A 10% cut from the NIH budget (the so-called “sequester” plan) would save 0.008% of the federal budget. This matters not a whit in the overall budget debate – but it would be a huge blow to biomedical research, crippling some research programs for years to come.

REF: http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzbe...-research/

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and again, and again until I'm blue in the face. Yanks are stupid, spoiled, wasteful and ignorant. So you don't want to make any sacrifices for your country's future and for the future wellbeing of your children and grandchildren? You'd rather spend money that you don't have now, then let your children enjoy their own money?

It is a fucked up world we live in.

Every single cent in the US federal budget is money you don't have. "Budget cuts"? What budget cuts, what budget, why do you deserve to have a budget with over 20 Trillion USD in public debt?

[jonb]

Being a brit a bit of yank bashing comes quite naturally to me, you could call it my cultural inheritance, but to blame Americans in particular for financial mismanagement, seems a trifle over the top. I don't see Americans on this thread blaming anyone else for their particular predicament. That an Australian should blame an American for the over use of resources, pot and kettle come to mind.
But I should expect this sort of thing from a criss-t-on, they have a predisposition to say others persecute them, but overlook all the little infractions they have done themselves.

[Faith No More]

That loud, wooshing sound you just heard, Daniel, was the point soaring clearly over your head.

Edit: Oh, and remind me again of what Jesus said about casting the first stone.

[The Grand Nudger]

To present a side of the coin not given any due thusfar - investing at current rates and then deferring payment on that investment into the future is a great way to garner a discount or turn a profit with even a small measure of inflation accounted for. Many of us have ourselves benefited from this minor thrift (though not on the scale that our Gov is capable of achieving) when we deferred our student loans by continuing with the minimum amount of credit hours required after completing our degrees (or while we hold in stasis pondering over what direction we want our educational futures to take).

IOW, the tens of thousands of $ you incur as debt today in a low interest deferred loan will likely be "worth" a whole lot less in ten years, while your earning power will be substantially higher. The longer you can defer the loan the less you pay (relative to the current value of the currency) and the more profit the investment returns. The same principle holds true for research. If you can pay today's rate for said research at a point in the near-mid inflationary future with an expectation of return on that research it hardly makes sense to withhold the funds (or credit). Now, most organizations offering loans attempt to account for this inflation - and most people (including our government) seek sweetheart deals to circumvent this modification.

[Minimalist]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, and again, and again until I'm blue in the face. Yanks are stupid, spoiled, wasteful and ignorant. So you don't want to make any sacrifices for your country's future and for the future wellbeing of your children and grandchildren? You'd rather spend money that you don't have now, then let your children enjoy their own money?

Stick to your bible, son. You can't understand that either but at least it is less harmful in the long run.

[KichigaiNeko]

I agree with Min Daniel, Australia is no better off. The only difference is the number of zeros. Our Current deficit (gross) is AUD$296billion; AUD$30 billion in only three "promised" projects that the current government will have to borrow for, and we have poor Australia families having their welfare cut and told to go to work in an economy that is shedding jobs a a rate of 1000 per week? I haven't even gotten to the refugees and the issues surrounding that poor group, let alone the expense..and then we have the bush fires? By the way how is that AUD$300.00 Bushfire levey going for you??

No Daniel; Australia should be the last to vehemently blanket critique the USoA. Mind you the savings are there in their military budget...R&D projects come to mind.. I mean 20 years to build a fighter jet? Oi vay!

[Darth]

Using those numbers^

Aus deficit: AUD$ 296 billion
Aus population: 22.6 million
296billion/22.6 million= AUD$ 13,097 per person

1 Aus dollar: 1.05 American.

Aus deficit (in american): $311 billion
Aus deficit per person (in american dollars): 13707.18

deficit and not debt? Must be debt, surely...

[Aractus]

Kichi, to begin with, I don't agree with having a government debt. I agree with running deficit budgets sometimes, but not doing what the ALP does. Didn't Swan say to Rudd "You won't believe how much they've left us!" in 2007? Labor thinks money grows on trees.

Next, the federal government in Australia collects something like 23% or so of GDP in taxes. The USA federal government collects about 15% or so. I don't know the exact figures off the top of my head, but it's something like that. The USA is very different to Australia, they have much higher State taxes - and they have to if they want to stay united together as one country. So you may look at their debt-to-GDP, federal (that'd be 16.4 trillion USD) and say "it's only 75%". Well Australia's is about 30%, but the federal government collects much more of the GDP in taxes so you can't compare side-by-side like that. By my calculation we would need a federal debt-to-gdp of 115% to be in "the same position".