General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo seriously how would you negotiate these polar opposites?
Our side:A. No cuts to anything that directly helps people
B. Would like cuts to defense spending
C. Would like to raise taxes on the wealthy and close loopholes
Their side:
A. Want cuts on SS, Medicare, and entitlement - things that directly hurt people
B. Want to raise military spending
C. Want no new taxes on the wealthy and don't want to hurt fat cats by closing loopholes.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)We need to educate the voters, bring this to everyone's attention, and get the Rs and DINOs out of congress.
ASAFP!
K/R
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)congress to hopefully a moderate group.
But, not too sure if I agree that they win. If you think about the big picture results of the sequester, we got cuts in military while only a very small percentage affecting entitlements (4%). Earlier, we got the very upper bracket of Bush's tax cuts reversed.
doc03
(35,328 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Is it really so efficient to be running all those funds separately?
Why can't we save money and make delivery of assistance much more efficient?
I think the problem is that so much is spent on the bureaucracy that not much goes to the people.
How does government even track what one person gets?
Once things are more efficient then maybe we can lower costs through attrition. This can work on both sides of the equation...assistance to people and defense.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)in a perfect world we could start from ground zero and re-engineer. And, then reduce staff like you said, by attrition.
Perhaps our side should work at more intelligent and creative ideas to take to the table for reducing spending.
dkf
(37,305 posts)How does a person who needs assistance even navigate who handles these funds?
Instead think if there were a single point person who could instantly see it all including veterans benefits.
This is such a hit and miss operation. Ridiculous.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)at adopted the same approach to customer service - called "relationship managers" and they are the focal
point for all a customer's needs - small and large. But they are trained and knowledgeable on every
aspect of the bank's products and services.
If the government could do like you say and consolidate more, reduce staff by attrition, we could afford to create what
you say - a single point of contact.
I know this sounds very antiquated - but I have always thought that with the advent of fake news and information (i.e. Limbaugh et al and Fox) that our president should use public service announcements to educate the public. I can't tell you the last one I saw - but it would help counteract the fear. First one would be about how the health care act affects you.