1 First.

2 ....and then, there's nuking actual departments and functions.

Let's see some blood, motherfuckers -- Dept of Ed, Dept of Ag, NLRB as an appetizer.....Dept of Lab, Dept of Energy, half of HHS as an entree....

3 This construct assumes a steady state of no-collapse.

4 Did anyone turn out the lights in the previous thread, because we're wasting electricity and stuff.

5 > 2 ....and then, there's nuking actual departments and functions. Let's see some blood, motherfuckers -- Dept of Ed, Dept of Ag, NLRB as an appetizer.....Dept of Lab, Dept of Energy, half of HHS as an entree.... Posted by: cthulhu Hey, I like the sound of that. However, unless Cthulu rises from the Potomac and takes over the White House and the Capitol, how likely do you think that is to happen?

6 ....and when do we start getting, "Secretary of _____ proposes continued employment and 10% cut on an up-or-down vote. If cuts pass, Secretary continues.....if cuts fail, so does Sec."

7 The last thread was so collapse.

8 and then, there's nuking actual departments and functions.

Let's see some blood, motherfuckers -- Dept of Ed, Dept of Ag, NLRB as an appetizer.....Dept of Lab, Dept of Energy, half of HHS as an entree....

There's not one politician with enough guts to start with this stuff. Hell, the IRS should be the first thing gone with a flat tax but that would bring about someone's bed ending up with a horse head in it. Likewise, the 43% or so that have no skin in the game should be the starting point when discussing increase 'revenue' for the blood suckers in the Fed.

9 Someone wrote a few threads back that a good law would be "any elected official loses their seat automatically if the deficit goes above 3% of GDP". I don't know if that's reasonable for a figure, but if Preznit Divots told everyone that the first people to not get paid if the shutdown occurred would be the empty suits in Washington, things may actually get done.

10

That's right.... you get the pocket calculator and the Boehner shami both for one low price. But you must act now.

11 I am Germany, guess I not banned over here!  Ha Ha.

12 Kemp, wha up.

13 Hey, I like the sound of that.

However, unless Cthulu rises from the Potomac and takes over the White House and the Capitol, how likely do you think that is to happen


I keep repeating
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

with hopes he will visit DC

14 Foster's arguments and the way he presents the CBO scoring are excellent. But the trouble is that it's going to take time to undo all the liberal government policies going back to the New Deal, and we simply don't have the time.

15

Problem is that even though the numbers get big by this 'tactic' of how to count... it does NOT really control the REST of the spending...

All the other spending is also increasing at that same 7% rate... so you do spend less than you would have spent, BUT, you still spend a LOT more than you do today...

Thus.... boneage...

AND, when you consider that you CANNOT control what the next Congress does... adding up numbers for cuts this way is meaningless...

We need REAL cuts, right now....

16 This construct assumes a steady state of no-collapse.

Yes we will set it right next to my massless frictionless table
(It's great for air hockey)
My Rankine engine,
My rock cooled to absolute 0
and my perfectly elastic collision device.

17 We need REAL cuts, right now....

ohhh, your in stage 1 aren't you?

18 and we simply don't have the time.

oh and the doomsday clock has started to chime. And suddenly we say maybe we shouldn't have....

19 The reality is that we cannot find a politician who would cut 30% across-the-board, or at least not one who would say so in public. As for shuttering departments, not even Ronald Reagan could do that.

Here's a kitteh.

20 Department of Education  - Gone.

Department of Energy - Transfer nuclear weapons to Department of War, the rest - Gone

(Oh did I mention we are ditching the Department of Defense and going back to the Departments of War and Navy?)

HUD - Gone.

Department of Labor - Gone. (Oh and we pass a national Right to Work bill.)

Department of Commerce - Gone. (Need to negotiate a trade agreement with foreign countries? Call the Department of War.)

Department of Agriculture - Budget goes from more than the total gross revenue of all farms in the US to a max of 5% of gross revenue of farms in the US.

Department of Justice - No longer spends US taxpayer funds giving illegal weapons to drug gangs.

Just some quick ideas for starters.

21 The reality is that we cannot find a politician who would cut 30% across-the-board, or at least not one who would say so in public. As for shuttering departments, not even Ronald Reagan could do that.

A little topical music.
http://bit.ly/qNbK4B

22 17 We need REAL cuts, right now....

ohhh, your in stage 1 aren't you?

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2011 03:12 AM (GE1+K)

Said need... not will get...

I've actualy given up on Washington being able to do anything productive about the debt, and am preparing for the collapse.

I currently have Zero Debt.... no mortgage... no carpayment... and no rent... started an IT support Company with a couple of buddies and we are working CHEAP to build the client base (buisness's will still need IT in a collapse...)... with mainly Doctors Offices, Lawyers, and small businesses for our clients.

We're building as secure of a 'service' business as possible...

23

Posted by: Have Blue at July 29, 2011 03:17 AM (XPwyF)

Hmmmm.... how about we merge Dept of Commerce, and State Dept., and call it the 'War by other means Department'?

24 We're building as secure of a 'service' business as possible...

GL.
I'm a controls engineer. Hopefully, they will still need me to keep the rapidly collapsing infrastructure operational as long as possible.

25 Have Blue,

Your proposals indicate you have no idea how government work. You are not eligible to be a part of the club. Now, get back to work and get me a sammich.

26 I get a new hash each time I turn on my "Hotspot". Can I still be traced by Big Brother?

27 I get a new hash each time I turn on my "Hotspot". Can I still be traced by Big Brother?

Yes.

28 The only problem with those promises of future savings is that it never comes true.

29 The only problem with those promises of future savings is that it never comes true.

Dude you are arriving way late to this pity party with that one.

30 Getting rid of the annual deficit over the next 6-10 years (with the right guys in office) is more plausible - then we can start nibbling or slashing away at the outstanding debt.

Over at Free Republic, they're actually praying. They're begging God to not let the Tea Party congressmen "betray" them. Some of them say they're crying.

On the same site, many of the comments are from people getting Social Security and Medicare. To a person, they say that their benefits shouldn't be cut. Other programs should be cut, and people not yet receiving benefits should have theirs reduced. But everyone already getting benefits shouldn't have to accept any cuts.

I'd like to see Ace post a thread asking all the Tea Partiers who post here if they're willing to accept cuts in their benefits.

31 I'd like to see Ace post a thread asking all the Tea Partiers who post here if they're willing to accept cuts in their benefits.

Check out the 1% cut thread a few back for some epic epic on that very topic.

32

Posted by: Llarry at July 29, 2011 03:30 AM (uQA8F)

Problem is that there are many many places you can cut FIRST...

Average American worker makes $46K a year.... Average Fed Gov Employee? over $75K... If'n the Government works for the people, why are the Servants making more than the Masters?

Add in the sheer NUMBER of Gov Employees who have to try to justify their jobs???

You could cut the Fed Government in Half, and still keep all services going... just by weeding out those who don't do crap except create and enforce Non Constitutional Regulations....

Lots of places to cut.... lots of savings... heck, there was a study done last year that showed that almost $100 BILLION is spent every year by Departments who do the same dam job.....

And Boney can only find a couple of billion to cut?

33 I declare 'rocks' as our new currency.  Pretty ones are worth more.---someone with better sense than the dumbfucks in charge now.

34 33 I declare 'rocks' as our new currency. Pretty ones are worth more.---someone with better sense than the dumbfucks in charge now.

Posted by: Case at July 29, 2011 03:44 AM (0K+Kw)

/looks at the Gold Nugget paperweight on his desk...

Isn't that how the whole thing started anyway?

35 30
...
Over at Free Republic, they're actually praying. They're begging God to not let the Tea Party congressmen "betray" them. Some of them say they're crying.
...

Posted by: Llarry at July 29, 2011 03:30 AM (uQA8F)

A very curious statement indeed.

36 > 32 ... Lots of places to cut.... lots of savings... heck, there was a study done last year that showed that almost $100 BILLION is spent every year by Departments who do the same dam job..... And Boney can only find a couple of billion to cut? Posted by: Romeo13 You're right. Now find the votes to implement your plan. See, that's what I'm getting at. 90% of the people reading this blog can come up with a way to cut and hack away at the Fed budget at least as severely as you and, after it's done, we'd hardly notice what was missing. But we don't have the votes to do it our way. It appears Boehner is trying to do what he has the votes to accomplish. Also, I sort of doubt he wants to eliminate any depts. But it's not like he's Speaker forever.

37 I'd like to see Ace post a thread asking all the Tea Partiers who post here if they're willing to accept cuts in their benefits.

since i don't believe for a second that there will be any "benefits" left to pay me out of SS etc, go right ahead.

as for my munificent military retirement, having spent 20 years in the Reserves and retiring as an E-4, that's going to be ~$150/month... take 10%.

38 i think Iowahawk, as usual, has a good idea:

iowahawkblog David Burge $1 in spending cuts for every $1 increase in debt limit? Okey doke. Increase debt limit $20 trillion, cut spending $20 trillion. #QED

39

....34,  the rock standard baby, they should have left it alone.

40 I can't find in my copy of the constitution where the leader of the Senate has the power to refuse to put before the body a Bill that has been passed by the House. Does anyone know the reference? If so, how can one person hold the Nation hostage?

41 Eric, show me the clause that says he has to.

42 I'm no lawyer, I'm just asking. Can't the people (House) force the Senate to vote on a bill they have sent to them? If not, I doubt the Constitution states anywhere that the "head" of the Senate(one person) has the right to hold the United States of America hostage by refusing to put forward a bill passed by the House (people). Can't the House sue the Senate in the Supreme Court for not taking a vote on a House passed bill?

43 FORCE THE SENATE TO VOTE!!!!!!

44 42 I'm no lawyer, I'm just asking. Can't the people (House) force the Senate to vote on a bill they have sent to them? If not, I doubt the Constitution states anywhere that the "head" of the Senate(one person) has the right to hold the United States of America hostage by refusing to put forward a bill passed by the House (people). Can't the House sue the Senate in the Supreme Court for not taking a vote on a House passed bill?

No and No.  Both houses operate under the rules that they set for themselves.  Perhaps if large numbers of their constituents were to meet with them and relate their concerns the rules would be changed to reflect their constituencies desires.

45

The math isn't that hard. You demonstrate the simple, yes simple, notion that cutting 10% now will lead to "X" savings over the years in a program that is simple growing more slowly, kinda like pruning a tree or bush. Correct, we ain't gonna get 40% chopped off next year. But there's no reason to believe that cutting out entire programs, merging some redundancies as well, wouldn't yield something pretty significant, maybe 20% pretty quickly.

These DC lifers are in the box. Getting them out of the box (elections) or at least getting some folks who'll think out of the box to reduce the bloat of gubmit is a good thing. While encouraging everyone to think long term, encourage it for elections, budget reductions, and regulatory excising as well.

46 Well, if we just freeze spending at present levels, that is a 7% cut right there, but I think we need to get the language back to a state where if we increase spending by $800 billion it doesn't get scored and reported as a cut.

47 "But if you think we're going to cut 40% out of the budget in ONE YEAR... " It will happen voluntarily, _or_ it will happen involuntarily when the downgrade/interest rate increase initiates the chain reaction that blows up the bond market. It _will_ happen. There is no way around it. Everyone insisting that slight modifications are the "realistic" course is going to find out that wishful thinking doesn't override math, no matter how politically feasible the wishful thinking is. What's the point of winning elections, again?

48 The Senate sets its own rules, and the Majority Leader has the authority to bring up the bills he wants to.  A majority can overrule him on any given bill, but this is almost never done.

Cutting useless and wasteful programs and even departments is a great idea.  CAN NEVER HAPPEN with Democrats in charge of the Senate and the White House.  But thanks for playing and enjoy your lovely parting gifts.

Not raising the debt ceiling is really not an option.  Despite cutesy ideas to evade default, we would be 44% short for the month, which would get our bond rating downgraded anyway.  But thanks for playing and enjoy your lovely parting gifts.

Now, do you want to risk something which will dig us a hole we can never dig out of - up to half a trillion MORE in interest costs every year - just to make some point?  Well, maybe you're "principled," but you are also dangerously stupid.

49

I've been hearing a lot of talk that the current budget "cuts" still aren't enough to satisfy the credit rating agencies. I also heard Rush say the other day that three agencies have already downgraded us.

How nice it would be if the reality of the direness of the situation that A. Dick and Co. got us into suddenly became glaringly obvious to the nation, and that the nation said to Washington, "Play time's over. Time to put on your big boy pants and get serious about real, live budget cuts."

I wonder if the credit agencies have issued any numbers regarding exactly how much debt needs to be cut to satisfy them and keep us from being downgraded. I'm perfectly willing to let them control that discussion, as all we've heard from both sides is basically bullshit, false estimates, phony numbers and more bullshit.

Also, we should start a pool on who from teh Pubbies will be the first to use the word, "obstructionist" to describe the Dims. If that's not what they're doing, I don't know what is.

50 This is really becoming digesting and frustrating. None of those stupid politicos, Democrats, Republicans or Tea Partiers, have any idea how to approach this problem and develop a viable solution so they result to puffing, posturing, feathering their own nests and protecting their political futures. In the meantime, regular hard working Americans are left wondering how their lives will be affected by this ignorant insanity. There is certainly a change coming in 2012 but it will be more massive and broad based than anyone now expects. Enough!

51 The same logic goes for not getting any cost of living raises each year, yet we all know and understand why we need a cost of living raise, right? fucking inflation bitches! Courtesy of which entity? do I need to say any more?

52 If a trillion was measured in miles, there would be no place we couldn't reach in our universe. That is if we used a Russian space ship.

53 51

-

54 Emotions are high, and this is a very difficult dilemma for conservatives.

The people are beginning to understand that the cuts in all of these bills are phony outyear cuts in the rate of growth, not the real cuts the average citizen wants.

I'm reluctantly against the Boehner bill because it doesn't solve anything and give the Democrats immediate borrowing authority to pile on more debt we can't afford.

And, I guess I'm "fool me twice, shame on me" with respect to all the warnings about the melt down of the country:  I listened to the financial guys last time and believed them on TARP. Then they turned around and used the money differently than Congress authorized.  FAIL.

I understand that we have to make real cuts and stop the growth of government in order to regain our AAA rating and, frankly, to save the country.

Anyone who doesn't is in fantasyland.

But, I also understand why people who are conservative support the Boehner bill: they believe the doomsayers. 

But, I'd point out most of them signed on for TARP, too. Then, when Bambi came in, they got religion and opposed all of his spending. Good, but not good enough.

Bush - whom I strong supported on foreign policy - and the 'pubbies ran up a fair chunk of debt and spent far too much.  Lots of us were bitching long and loud about it at the time! That's mostly the reason they lost Congress in 2006 - the Democrats ran to their right on both spending and morality! Obviously lying, but, it worked.

It's time to say no to both parties. I've been a Republican activist (working in campaigns since Ike II) for over 55 years, but I think it's time to say goodbye, unless they elect a Tea Party-friendly leadership team. No more 'go along', no more McConnell type wimps.  I think McConnell and Boehner have tried, but they're just too caught up in 'inside the beltway' thinking. They don't understand we didn't elect them for more of the same back room, last minute grand bargains that we have to pass to know what's in them.

Just vote NO!

55

On the contrary, the TP'ers are the only ones with their head screwed on straight. They know what needs to be done, and there's only one solution: drastic and immediate cuts everywhere in Washington.

Remeber all the talk about waste in the federal government when Bush was in office? You don't hear any of that talk these days. That's one place that should be seriously examined.

You need to remember who it was that got us into this mess. The blame belongs to Obama, Reid, and Pelosi and no one else. I've never heard so much bullshit from the media surrounding an issue in all my born days. We the people are being lied to and manipulated in such a blatant way that I doubt those left in the media with a conscience can sleep at night, assuming they have a conscience at all.

What's coming in "012 will be a more thorough housecleaning than ever in Washington. The TP is getting fired up and is already looking around for viable candidates to challenge a lot of long-time pols. They absolutely have to be replaced, and soon. You would do well to direct your frustration towards maybe helping them do that. Make no mistake, I'm just as frustrated too, but I'm not going to sit back and let our country decline for no good reason. Talk to your friends and start bringing them around to a bit of common sense and you'll feel a lot better, trust me.

We're ready for some real change, this time the good kind.

56 OK,  I will speak up.  I will accept a 10% cut in my Social Security.  I would also like to see cuts in student loans, federal salaries (particularly Congress and the White House), cuts in funding for arts, public broadcasting, Congressional fact-finding trips, Obama's entertainment and travel expenses, Congressional staff, Congressional gym, restaurants (they can brown-bag), State Department entertainment, farm subsidies, ethanol, the entire EPA, the entire Education Department, etc. etc.

57 ItÂ’s time for Americans to realize that governing is hard work, and that they canÂ’t just wave a pitch fork and a torch and fix everything.

58 Why is it so hard to cut 40%? Isn't most of that the "stimulus" now baked into the baseline?

59 "governing is hard work" I could not disagree more. Spending someone else's money is the easiest job in the world.

60

Miss Marple, you've hit the nail on the proverbial head. What we need is more people in Washington who are average, common sense Americans. We all know what needs to be done, yet we blindly assume that those we elect think the same way we do.

They don't. And we're getting a lesson in that, good and hard.

There is absolutely no difference between how we balance our home finances and what goes on in Washington, except they have a lot more zeros to play with. When we start finding people to put there who actually share our values and have proven to do so, then we start to reverse this slide we're on.

We got ourselves into this mess by being idiot voters. We can get ourselves out of it by waking up and realizing we are the government and can control who gets elected.

61 Daily Caller is going after Bachmann again (link to NRO). 

62 60 _{"governing is hard work"}

I could not disagree more. Spending someone else's money is the easiest job in the world.

Alas, 'tis a joke contained within an older joke.  Bush ruined humor for us all...

63 THE POINT of this entire exercise is to RETURN CONFIDENCE TO THE BUSINESS SECTOR that business leaders feel confident in what they will face over the next 10 years so that they can stop hoarding cash and invest.

The enemy here is UNCERTAINTY and Obama, they name is UNCERTAINTY.

This is why the big goal in all this is NOT cutting the budget significantly now but positioning ourselves to win enough independents in 2012 to take over.  THEN and only then can we effect real change.

It is very telling that Democrats believe that the only way to add revenue to the Treasury is to raise tax rates.  They do not even consider the revenue raising effects of increasing business activity.  To the left, the pie always remains the same - higher tax rates mean higher tax revenues when exactly the opposite is true.  The fact that Republicans have allowed Democrats to demagogue the idea that there is "no new revenue" in Republican plans speaks to the stupidity of our leadership.

64 'tis a joke contained within an older joke. Glad to hear that! I guess somewhere along the way I lost my sense of humor.

65 Seeing Miss Marple's list of what she'd like to see cut reminded me of the spot I saw on our local PBS station last night. The guy who hold the top spot comes on and says WTTE of 'Hi, I'm Blood Sucking Tick and if you want to see less of me you have to give more to your local station.' Besides thinking 'Not in this lifetime, pal' I wondered if I should write him a letter suggesting he set an example of how to be a responsible citizen by refusing federal dollars, after all it'd be for the children! and the grandchildren! and the greatgrandchildren....

66 65 'tis a joke contained within an older joke.

Glad to hear that! I guess somewhere along the way I lost my sense of humor.

The camps will laugh at you!!

67 #64  The reason democrats view revenue as something only attainable by increasing tax rates has several origins:

1. Their entire philosophy is based on envy.  Many of them do not care about increasing revenue as much as they care about taking money away from people.  This is heard in almost every speech Obama gives.  It's "fairness."  His supporters would react gleefully to see millionaires stripped of all property and paraded through the streets,  even if they saw not a dime of it.

2. Most democrats have, at best,  a tangential acquaintance with business operations.  They do not understand that there isn't an unlimited pool of money for a business to draw from.  They refuse to believe that regulations cost money, sometimes so much that a business is forced to lay people off in order to cover expenses of the regulations. 

3. (Amish Dude would say this should be #1.)  Most democrats are math illiterate. They are liberal arts majors who never had to do more than basic algebra,  with which they struggled.  I would bet cash money that they do not balance their own checkbooks,  and when they were still too poor to hire a bookkeeper they frequently overdrew their accounts.  Quite simply,  they do not know what they are doing with money.

68 #56 - Agree.that DC needs to be cleaned out more.  Problem is that the GOP are all shooting at each other instead of the Dems who still don't want to reduce spending in any way.  Just frustrating watching the Dems sit back and do nothing while the GOP who are trying to do something are getting pummeled

69 truman north's post has it right.  pass a bill, no cuts, just freeze spending and you get the $9.5 trillion in "cuts" for free.

70 Just to prove that we on the Right aren't completely unreasonable I have a proposal that I would support.

$1.00 in real cuts.

One measly dollar.

I'd support a debt limit increase if they agree that the amount the government can spend in 2012 is to be $1.00 less than the amount to be spent in 2011.

The sad thing is that would be the largest spending cut Washington has made in decades.

Come on, it's just one lousy dollar.

Is that too extreme?

All I'm asking for is one dollar but I'm the unreasonable one?

71 Ghostship, enough of the political grand standing on your 1 dollar cut plan. The American people are suffering and all you can do is put forth plans for the radicals that were put in office by radicals. Real Americans reject your dollar cut and demand that you raise the debt ceiling another 2.4 trillion dollars so that we may get on with the peoples work. -------TIlts head back and sticks nose in the air in a holier than thou manner------.

72 Say we raise the debt limit $2.5T.

Given Barry's performance thus far, this would translate into a loss of somewhere about a million more jobs.

73

#70 Sounds good.  But if you take the arguement that any cuts in the future are not real because future Congress's can't be bound by them then these $9.5B are just as solid as the $1T in Boner's plan which no one agress with.  That's why everyong is pushing for immediate cuts because they count

Best would have been to set the Budget at 2008 levels and go from there

 

74 @72

I'm just pointing out how absurd is the completely low expectations we Conservatives demand of the Republican Party.

I'm supposed to go along with increasing the debt ceiling by trillions but I'm an extremist if I demand so much as a single measly dollar in real cuts.

Yeah, Us Tea Party Hobbits are the unreasonable ones in this debate. Let's all play make believe with these accounting gimmicks and ten year plans and lie to ourselves that we're making a difference.

75

Miss Marple, I heard this from a politician once: Democrats love workers, but hate employers. 

Oh, and by the way, $22 billion is a LOT OF G-D MONEY.  It's more than the annual budget of most of the states.  It's almost the entire HUD budget in a year.  It's sickening that it is such a puny amount off of a $1.5 trillion deficit.  But as the saying goes, a journey of 1000 miles starts with a single step, and make no mistake, thiso IS a journey of 1000 miles.  I expect it will take a solid 10-15 years for the USA to get out of this hole.  But  it CAN be done.  Howveer, we can't be foolish and think we can just cut up the credit cards at once.

I hope something can get done on this debt ceileing this week so we can get back to what we really need to be doing, namely beating the shit out of Barack Obama about JOBS.  A huge part of the fiscal solution has to be growing the economy and creating morre taxpayers.  Let's have our side put together some numbers about how much revenues will grow and the deficit will shrink if all we do is get back to a 4-5% growth rate and get unemployment back down into the 6% range.

This does not have to be a painful as many people on bth sides think.  Some intelligent tax and regulatory policy, a real energy policy that fanatically focuses on increasing supply instead of punishing producers and worshipping the false religion of climate change, and we can get America's economic engine humming again.

76 #2, #5,. etc - shutting depts is sorely needed and should be a winner.  I would think the GOP candidate that starts talking along those lines would get the Tea party support

77

#71 I LOVE THAT IDEA.

Maybe we can start a grassroots effort to get Congress to vote every week to reduce spending by like 10 bucks.  It would be hysterical, and pretty educational for a lot of people. 

78 Why not a simple bill repealing baseline budgeting?  That's a major cause of the dysfunction in Washington.

Yes, it would fail, but the theater is the important part.

79 @79

We need to stand by the roadside with a cardboard sign saying "Will support debt increase for $1.00 in real cuts."

God knows, it would better than anything these D.C. Republicans are doing. 

80 Also it would be fun to get people to start mailing in cut up credit cards to Congress, like we did with the tea bags.

81

The federal government has grown by 30% in just two years, you're telling me that we can't cut that amount right off the top?  That gets you 3/4 of the way there.

82 " But if you think we're going to cut 40% out of the budget in ONE YEAR..."

700+ billion was ADDED to the budget in one year, and remains. Why can't at least THAT be cut.

What are we getting for an additonal 700 billion NOW that we didn't get three years ago that we cannot ABSOLUTELY live without?

It's too late for that argument, however. The GOP gave up that position when they capitulated on the continuing resolution fight.

Enough of the out years BS - the only real cuts are ones that happen NOW. The others are simply promises that may or may not be kept. You know, sort of like Medicare and Social Security.

83 79 Why not a simple bill repealing baseline budgeting?  That's a major cause of the dysfunction in Washington.

Yes, it would fail, but the theater is the important part.

Posted by: nickless at July 29, 2011 08:10 AM (MMC8r)

Why not a bill that requires certain bills be paid before others, so that the POLITICIANS (not just Democrats) can't use various groups as hostages - no more 'grandma won't get her SS' or 'military won't get paid', or 'creditors won't get paid'.

This should have been done after the Democrats used the military as a hostage during the budget fight. But it wasn't. I know that Boehner isn't stupid, and I know that Michele Bachmann, among others wanted this done. We know that this idea has been proposed in the Senate, where it will never see the light of day.

So pass it in the house, and let the Democrats table it or vote it down. Then we can honestly say 'they want to make sure that they can use you for hostages during negotiations'.

But they won't. I wonder why...

84 > 2 ....and then, there's nuking actual departments and functions.

Let's see some blood, motherfuckers -- Dept of Ed, Dept of Ag, NLRB as an appetizer.....Dept of Lab, Dept of Energy, half of HHS as an entree....

Posted by: cthulhu

Hey, I like the sound of that.

However, unless Cthulu rises from the Potomac and takes over the White House and the Capitol, how likely do you think that is to happen?

Posted by: Comrade Arthur at July 29, 2011 02:52 AM (/62i9)

That wasn't the real Cthulu making that suggestion.  The real Cthulu, in the guise of the crushing debt created by uncontrolled spending, will rise from the Potomac and bring the whole country down with a heapin' helpin' of hyperinflation.

85 20Department of Education - Gone.

Department of Energy - Transfer nuclear weapons to Department of War, the rest - Gone

(Oh did I mention we are ditching the Department of Defense and going back to the Departments of War and Navy?)

Posted by: Have Blue at July 29, 2011 03:17 AM (XPwyF)  So, no Department of Air Force?  If so, please put the USAF under the Navy, because although squids may be, how do I put this, oblique, they are rational. And intelligent.  And for the same reason, make sure the nukes are in the Navy Department as well. 

86

the trouble is that it's going to take time to undo all the liberal government policies going back to the New Deal, and we simply don't have the time.

Exactly right. We don't have time for slow motion small fry spending cuts. We have almost $15 trillion in debt with the federal govt is spending almost 2X more than we're taking in adding another $1.5 trillion in debt next yr.. Boehner's cuts don't do much about that situation.

If Congress doesn't agree to a deal, that forces Obama to prioritize spending NOW. It's a safe bet he'll pay bondholders and SS recipients. How he prioritizes other spending will be in full view. Obama sees that a a nightmare scenario, but it's necessary.. it's past time for this kind of "draconian" action.

87 Maybe we could trade California to China, call it even on the bond debt. $1Tn of debt gone + interest. Then, when China gets sick of Cali's shit, buy back Cali for like, ummm, $5, rent it out to film producers for like, umm, $1Bn, and drill what's left for oil, gas, and grow veggies.

88   We need to change the debate: we should be arguing to LOWER the debt ceiling and then make the cuts to fit the new ceiling.

89 You made a few good points there. I did a search on the matter and found a good number of people will agree with your blog.

90 people always compare the <a href="http://www.hyperfuse-dunk.com">hyperfuse 2011</a> with
<a href="http://www.hyperfuse-dunk.com">hyperdunk 2011</a>,

91 You made a few good points there.
nike heels
nike hyperdunk

92
M4V Converter for Mac,M4V to iPad Mac,M4V to MP3 Mac