Balancing the Budget

[jasoncran]

So what should congress do to balance the budget? Obviously we need to cut spending and while at the same time raise revenue, but what does that look like? Can we tax or way to prosperity?

If you could provide some source links with your responses it would be much appreciated. I think sometimes, regular people can actually arrive at better solutions than the ruling elite of either party.

In the Cayman Islands, none of the citizens pay any taxes. Tax revenue comes from tourism and tarriffs. The standard of living in the Caymans is very high.

To raise money we could place tarriffs on goods coming in from overseas..no matter what the nationality of the exporter is. This tax should be made high enough that it would be cheaper for companies to locate and hire here than to ship it here. This would increase our own tax base by putting our people back to work. Along with cutting wasteful spending this would work to balance the budget. An added bonus would be that the bigger the tax base, the less each individual taxpayer would need to be accountable for.

theres no icome tax in florida so please visit florida as you pay for my benefits

Here in Tennessee we don't have state income tax either. We do have other taxes such as Federal Income Tax, sales tax, property etc. The Cayman citizens pay none of these types of taxes. All their taxes are paid by foreigners.

If you are on entitlements, I am already paying for your benefits...I don't get your point here.

the jobs are low paying here. its the republican retiree who is rich o paradise but not a workers paradise. thats my point.

[MorningGlory]

I have often wondered how much we would save if we ceased paying retirement pays for our elected officers. They have turned our elected offices into a business, so it seems.

I tried to follow this, but had a hard time with it ... good luck.

http://www.senate.go...pdf/RL30631.pdf

Good call, I believe we also pay their insurance for the rest of their life.

The Congress and Senate get free mail service, all those campaign mailing you get from those already in office are paid for by taxes, not their campaign funds.

We could also, stop paying for research on things like the mating habits of flies.

Earmarks are out of control. Here are some examples, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

1. Museum Where Neon Signs Go to Die – $1.8 Million

2. “Free” Grateful Dead Archive – $615,000

3. Poems in Zoos – $997,766

4. “Critter Crossing” – $150,000

5. Internet Dating Study – $239,100

6. Census Super Bowl Commercial Too Ironic to be Understood – $2.5 Million

7. Studying Male Prostitutes in Vietnam – $442,340

8. Zoo Receives Federal Funding to Develop Online Video Game, “Wolfquest‟ – $609,160

9. Teaching South African Men How to Wash Their Genitalia – $823,200

10. Gold-Plated Potties in the Woods – $1.49 Million

11. A Recession-Inspired Video Game – $137,530

12. NSF Studies Political Talk Shows on Fox News and MSNBC – $66,638

13. Alcohol, College Students, Foreign Countries, and Your Money – $41,380

14. Pedestrian Bridge Built Steps from Another Pedestrian Bridge – $260,000

15. Banjo Player Honored in Museum – $1.5 Million

16. Studying Wild Blue Monkey‟s Business – $168,766

17. NIH Promotes Awareness for Non-Existent Vaccine – $55,000

18. Renovating Pizzeria with New Vertical Garden Entry Way – $60,000

19. Storm Surge Signs Frighten Local Residents – $42,544

20. City Gets Funding for “Slightly Different” Bike Signage – $900,000

http://www.economicc...10#.T1mBMvEgef4

Cutting these earmarks won't change anything fundamentally. Even if all these earmarks are removed it won't change the federal budget by more than 1%.

Big budget programs needs to be cut. Media loves distract people's attention to these small items but don't address the elephant in the room.

Biggest categories that must be cut back are: Social security, Medicare, Defense and other discretionary spending.

Defense is NOT discretionary spending.....like in the fact that we HAVE to defend ourselves. Those other programs could be trimmed of the fraud that is rampant without taking away necessary services for the elderly and disabled.

[udx]

I have often wondered how much we would save if we ceased paying retirement pays for our elected officers. They have turned our elected offices into a business, so it seems.

I tried to follow this, but had a hard time with it ... good luck.

http://www.senate.go...pdf/RL30631.pdf

Good call, I believe we also pay their insurance for the rest of their life.

The Congress and Senate get free mail service, all those campaign mailing you get from those already in office are paid for by taxes, not their campaign funds.

We could also, stop paying for research on things like the mating habits of flies.

Earmarks are out of control. Here are some examples, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

1. Museum Where Neon Signs Go to Die – $1.8 Million

2. “Free” Grateful Dead Archive – $615,000

3. Poems in Zoos – $997,766

4. “Critter Crossing” – $150,000

5. Internet Dating Study – $239,100

6. Census Super Bowl Commercial Too Ironic to be Understood – $2.5 Million

7. Studying Male Prostitutes in Vietnam – $442,340

8. Zoo Receives Federal Funding to Develop Online Video Game, “Wolfquest‟ – $609,160

9. Teaching South African Men How to Wash Their Genitalia – $823,200

10. Gold-Plated Potties in the Woods – $1.49 Million

11. A Recession-Inspired Video Game – $137,530

12. NSF Studies Political Talk Shows on Fox News and MSNBC – $66,638

13. Alcohol, College Students, Foreign Countries, and Your Money – $41,380

14. Pedestrian Bridge Built Steps from Another Pedestrian Bridge – $260,000

15. Banjo Player Honored in Museum – $1.5 Million

16. Studying Wild Blue Monkey‟s Business – $168,766

17. NIH Promotes Awareness for Non-Existent Vaccine – $55,000

18. Renovating Pizzeria with New Vertical Garden Entry Way – $60,000

19. Storm Surge Signs Frighten Local Residents – $42,544

20. City Gets Funding for “Slightly Different” Bike Signage – $900,000

http://www.economicc...10#.T1mBMvEgef4

Cutting these earmarks won't change anything fundamentally. Even if all these earmarks are removed it won't change the federal budget by more than 1%.

Big budget programs needs to be cut. Media loves distract people's attention to these small items but don't address the elephant in the room.

Biggest categories that must be cut back are: Social security, Medicare, Defense and other discretionary spending.

Defense is NOT discretionary spending.....like in the fact that we HAVE to defend ourselves. Those other programs could be trimmed of the fraud that is rampant without taking away necessary services for the elderly and disabled.

Funny, why do people always jump to conclusion that cutting defense spending means cutting essential function of the military and that automatically means it would paralyze the nation's ability to defend herself.

To be clear, saying to cut defense spending isn't saying military isn't important, just like how saying cutting government spending is not saying the government is useless and should be eliminated? Time and time again, without fail, there are people who take the extreme view that calling for cut in defense means cutting to the extent that the country could not defend itself, really now...

Seriously, did I say cutting defense spending means taking away services for elderly and disabled? Why so touchy?

There are plenty of places to cut the military without impacting the nation's ability to defend itself. For example there are many places where US military presence is unwelcome and unnecessary.

[Guest Butero]

I don't have a link to provide, but I would think the best place to start cutting is government agencies. Look how many beurocracies we have, and how many people the government employs. We could save a ton of money by eliminating or drastically cutting agencies. Then we could cut off all foreign aid, except to Israel. When we have a surplus, I have no problem with reaching out to other nations, but we can't borrow to give money away. Repeal Obamacare. That will save billions. We spend way too much on education, not only on the federal level, but on the state level. I would like to see the federal government out of edcuation entirely, and at the state level, I would like to see everyone getting their education on-line. Then we can eliminate all the money spent on school buildings, and school busses. We already have places to attend school over the internet. Why not set up a public system on-line? You would eliminate all that money for teacher salaries as well. My state spends more than half it's budget on education. Drastic cuts there will more than take care of the financial strain. Eliminate all government grants. Sell off a large portion of government land. The federal government has too much property, a lot more than they need. I believe that there are enough cuts to be made in these areas where we could leave Social Security, Medicare and Medicade alone, and keep military spending at current levels.

I agree with getting rid of government agencies and cutting government worker pay. Government workers get paid on average a lot more than industry for an equivalent job. I disagree that education should be online only. E-learning is not for everyone especially young kids and there are some things that couldn't be replaced online such as lab work and physical education and you still need teacher to teach online as well. There would always be demand for teachers online or not. I do think public education should be privatized so there are more competition in creating the best education experience. How an average citizen could pay for private education would have to be considered though.

Eliminating all government grants would be unwise, as much research is funded with grants. My university professors gets a lot of funding from grants from NASF, DARPA, etc, if funding isn't there... all these researchers would go elsewhere. This would deminish technological lead that US currently enjoys and reduce possibility of the next big innovation that revolutionize the industry would occur in the US.

Cutting off all foreign aid because we are borrowing money for the aid, but still give aide to Israel is contrary to the idea. Either the country gives foreign aide or not at all, with borrowed money. No country should be afforded special treatment.

Everything the government does should be funded on tax dollars only, anything that doesn't fit within the budget should be cut.

The only reason I would continue support for Israel is because I desire the blessings of God upon this nation. Those who bless Israel will be blessed. As for your other points, I won't bother to respond to them because it is just a difference of opinion. I am only responding to what you said about Israel so you will know why I made a single exception.