Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What to cut?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What to cut?

    Here's one plan to balance the budget:

    http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/...ed-budget-plan
    Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

    snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

    Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

  • #2
    Re: What to cut?

    If this money is not important then those cuts would be fine.

    But if what is cut is actually necessary and valuable then
    1. the money will still be spent. Nobody actually save anything except the rich will be able to keep more of their money.
    2. The things that are useful and valuable will no longer be available to a certain population. Another part of the population will get the services in a diminished form and the rich will get everything they need.

    When the market is tasked with providing critical services it doesn't do it evenly. It acts like a hill climbing algorithm prone to be fooled by local maxima and minima. It is often very efficient and fast but rarely solves the problem on a wide scale basis. When government is tasked it acts more like a genetic algorithm. Because the people as a whole are involved the fitness tests are constantly being modified. This makes the whole process look very inefficient and in fact requires more work overall. But over time it does produce a better solution.
    Iím not racists, I have republican friends. Radio show host.
    - "The essence of tyranny is the denial of complexity". -Jacob Burkhardt
    - "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" - Emerson
    - "People should not be afraid of it's government, government should be afraid of it's People." - Line from V for Vendetta
    - If software were as unreliable as economic theory, there wouldn't be a plane made of anything other than paper that could get off the ground. Jim Fawcette
    - "Let me now state what seems to me the decisive objection to any conservatism which deserves to be called such. It is that by its very nature it cannot offer an alternative to the direction in which we are moving." -Friedrich Hayek
    - "Don't waist your time on me your already the voice inside my head." Blink 182 to my wife

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What to cut?

      Spending can be cut in some areas but to the extent outlined on that website is asinine. We're in a deficit and all economists agree that deficit spending is the right course of action.
      -Cut all Farm Subsidies? Yes it would save a lot of money but then we would have to rely so much on imported food our food supply would be shot to hell. We're #1 in protected food supply in the world for a reason.
      -Cut all K-12 Subsidies? As if school's aren't hurting enough. They didn't have enough materials 10 years ago let alone today. Cutting financial aid to them would lead to an even bigger disaster later on down the road.
      -Block Medicare? A typical case of "I don't need this so let's recommend to others to cut it". So many people rely on this already. The changes proposed would be a death sentence to millions of Americans.
      -Stop all forms of energy research? Not like we're in an energy crisis or anything. Not like we need a new source of energy in the next couple of decades. Sure we'll have our debt paid off in 20 years but what's the point if the whole world starts to suffer a black out?
      -Stop state and local grants? That money is almost always put to good use much more than any amount of general spending. Ending this would lead to a lot more problems.
      -Privatizing This or That? How does turning over a semi-money losing endeavor from a non-profit organization to a for profit one? Answer: It doesn't, in fact it'll cost more. Love the lack of evidence to support their argument though.
      -Cut Federal Employees/Cut Retirement Options? Any Federal Employee does the job of 10 people. Cutting back more is definitely not the solution. Cutting back their payment and Retirement options which are already lower than any private industry? Even dumber. Privatizing more = More spending.

      I'm all for spending but a lot of these independent plans to balance the budget aren't worth the paper they're printed on. It's always a case of "This doesn't affect me so let's cut it". It's like Jack the Ripper all over our spending budget without any foresight or thought of the american people at large. There are places we can cut. Discretionary military spending and NASA are both prime choices. A lot of things can be done, but to the extent outlined in this proposed plan shows a lack of foresight and thinking.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What to cut?

        Originally posted by Sirusblk View Post
        Spending can be cut in some areas but to the extent outlined on that website is asinine. We're in a deficit and all economists agree that deficit spending is the right course of action.
        -Cut all Farm Subsidies? Yes it would save a lot of money but then we would have to rely so much on imported food our food supply would be shot to hell. We're #1 in protected food supply in the world for a reason.
        I just want to talk about this one in particular...

        You are misinterpreting what "farm subsidies" are. In the case listed in the report, they would involve mostly the money the gov't pays farmers to grow either specific crops or none at all. Allow me to give an example..

        Say you farm 400 acres, and next year soybeans project to be the highest paying crop, lets say $2,000/acre. The government on the other hand wants US farmers to grow a lot of corn and wheat, which only pay's $1,500/acre. Maybe this is for the purposes of a trade deal with another country, or whatever. So the USG pays farmers say $750.00/acre if they grow corn or wheat. Now the farmers can sell their wheat for $1350/acre and still make more money then soybeans would pay. The only effect this would have on normal Americans is some food products would go up a little in price. If you take a look at the obesity of some Americans, that might not be a bad thing.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What to cut?

          Originally posted by Morganan View Post
          I just want to talk about this one in particular...

          You are misinterpreting what "farm subsidies" are. In the case listed in the report, they would involve mostly the money the gov't pays farmers to grow either specific crops or none at all. Allow me to give an example..

          Say you farm 400 acres, and next year soybeans project to be the highest paying crop, lets say $2,000/acre. The government on the other hand wants US farmers to grow a lot of corn and wheat, which only pay's $1,500/acre. Maybe this is for the purposes of a trade deal with another country, or whatever. So the USG pays farmers say $750.00/acre if they grow corn or wheat. Now the farmers can sell their wheat for $1350/acre and still make more money then soybeans would pay. The only effect this would have on normal Americans is some food products would go up a little in price. If you take a look at the obesity of some Americans, that might not be a bad thing.
          I hear you, but I'm not misinterpreting it at all. Corn is a cheap crop meaning it doesn't give a lot back on investments. It also would not be grown at all in the US if it wasn't for Government subsidies. Corn is also massively grown in China and India, if we did not have any corn grown here we would be at the mercy of these other countries for our Corn Supply. Because of these government subsidies we also have a hand in the quality of the food produced, labor laws, etc. If our food came from China we wouldn't have that and we'd be supporting a country that has it's own farmer's starve to export the food that they could be eating instead.

          It not only affects our economy but some of the citizens in rural land China as well. Another reason why I state that this study is narrow and shortsighted.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What to cut?

            Subsidies lower the value of crops, so eliminate the subsidies and the value of corn/acre will skyrocket therefore allowing farmers to grow corn without going to the poorhouse. The main reason corn is so cheap is due to the ethanol subsidies, removing those would be good for farmers, not bad.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What to cut?

              Originally posted by Morganan View Post
              Subsidies lower the value of crops, so eliminate the subsidies and the value of corn/acre will skyrocket therefore allowing farmers to grow corn without going to the poorhouse. The main reason corn is so cheap is due to the ethanol subsidies, removing those would be good for farmers, not bad.
              You mean corn syrup subsidies. We have a super-high trade tariff on imported sugar, but corn syrup is at an extremely low price and is VERY well funded, as, well, it's used in almost everything. Also the fact that 60% of the corn grown is used for cattle feed. The breakdown for corn is about 58% grain feed, 25% food/export, and 17% ethanol production. Depends on the cites though, I see some CGA's claiming 80% used for cattle/poultry livestock feed, backed up by the EPA website.

              Corn syrup makes up more than 55% of the entire US sweetener market. 90% of the starches, etc we use in industrty are from corn.

              The elephant in the room is that the reason there's so many corn subsidies is because the corn lobbying market is so huge, because there are hundreds of billions of dollars of corporations dependent on corn for their own business. The Nebraska Corn Grower's Association for an example, is huge, because that state produces 20-30% of the nation's corn output.
              Last edited by Bisclaveret; 12-06-2010, 04:12 PM.

              <04:11:24> *** You are now talking in channel: "TFP - Task Force Proteus"
              <04:16:25> "|TG-XV| Tralic": this channel is so gay
              DICE needs to make a comical boxing glove attached to a spring punch the player in the face 40% of the time they get into a helicopter or jet.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What to cut?

                Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What to cut?

                  I agree with Benjamin Friedman. President Obama also agrees and wishes to cut military spending, especially in discretionary spending. It's a shame that our ineffectual congress is such a road block.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What to cut?

                    Originally posted by Morganan View Post
                    Subsidies lower the value of crops, so eliminate the subsidies and the value of corn/acre will skyrocket therefore allowing farmers to grow corn without going to the poorhouse. The main reason corn is so cheap is due to the ethanol subsidies, removing those would be good for farmers, not bad.
                    Without subsidies corn would not be a very cash worthy crop. I'm telling you if we eliminated corn subsidies as well as other crop subsidies, many farms would pack it in. We'd lose out on a substantial part of our agricultural industry and rely on imports from other countries. Keeping it cheap encourages businesses to buy. Raising the price would kill the industry and seek alternatives.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What to cut?

                      In other words, the resources currently wasted on corn farms would be freed to be used in things people actually want to pay lots of money for.
                      Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                      snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                      Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What to cut?

                        Some info about extending the tax cuts and unemployment benefits:

                        http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-g...-the-tax-deal/
                        Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                        snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                        Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What to cut?

                          Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
                          In other words, the resources currently wasted on corn farms would be freed to be used in things people actually want to pay lots of money for.
                          No, not in other words. If you're going to put words in my mouth at least do it properly. If the farm industry (not just corn) were to collapse this would result in millions of jobs being lost, and increase in prices for buisnesses and consumers at all levels due to the uses we have for our agricultural system including but not limited to corn. But hey if this isn't a problem for you why do you even care if we balance our spending budget?

                          Comment

                          Connect

                          Collapse

                          TeamSpeak 3 Server

                          Collapse

                          Advertisement

                          Collapse

                          Twitter Feed

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X