There are only two places to go for budget cutting in the Federal Budget

The Pentagon and Social Security and Medicare.

Morally seeing that Social Security and Medicare have taxes that are directly taken out for their purpose and that the Pentagon has been eating those taxes for the past 30 years, there is only one place to go for deficit reduction in the United States.

I don't expect the current crop of US politicians to act morally though, that is fundamentally against their nature.

about where the massive cuts will have to come and also taxes will have to be raised as well.

The public won't tolerate it. That's the thing. The American people have had a generation that got used to services with no taxes and passed the mantra on to their kids. You see this in nearly every Southern state government where they want all the services and big government at the state level in the world but won't pay the taxes for it.


The truth is, there are more people in the public who'll choose national default over paying even more in taxes. Because even if the United States fails it doesn't mean we're conquered. The country could end up breaking up like the old Roman Empire or we could just issue a new coinage. And truthfully, hyperinflation and completely currency overhaul might benefit the country as a whole because it would wipe out every bad loan, keep everyone on their property who still has it and allow us to start over again with a more responsible financial system

The elites in Rome had the common sense to pay their soldiers and enforcers well and not to fuck with them.

Well they lost that common sense later, which led to barbarians at their gates.

Barbarians are at our gates.

marched on Rome, deposed the Emperor, and installed their own Emperor.

total annual tax revenue is slightly over 1 Trillion dollars with half coming from individuals and half coming from corporations.

According to the IRS, in 1971, corporations paid 23 percent of income taxes collected by the federal government.

By the year 2000, the corporate share of taxes had fallen to 17 percent.

This reduction may seem relatively minor unless we appreciate that individual taxpayers were required to fill the gap left by the effective decrease in corporate tax rates. If corporations had paid 23 percent of the income taxes collected in 2000, as they did in 1971, the federal government could have distributed an average rebate of $628 per tax filer at no net loss of revenue.

Corporations are able to avoid paying the 35 percent tax on profits called for under the law by taking advantage of thousands of loopholes. According to a study conducted by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 250 of America's largest corporations paid an average tax rate of 20.1 percent in 1998. Many of these corporations, including Texaco, Enron, and Goodyear actually received rebates from the federal government. Indeed, one of the most striking aspects of corporate taxes is the disparate treatment received by different industries. While some industries, such as publishing and health care, pay close to the standard 35 percent rate on profits, the petroleum and forest products industries pay only 10- 15 percent of their profits in taxes.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Corporations/Corporate_taxes.html


First, however, we should be clear about who they are not. Or, at least, who among the "rich" does not pay a lot of income tax: corporations. According to Table No. 472 of the 2001 Statistical Abstract of the United States, corporations paid only 11.4% of the total income tax in 1999. And in 2001, according to Table No. 459, that figure dropped to less than 10 percent.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/fedgov.pdf

Most people lose at least 30-40% of their income to taxes. Now, the public would support hiking it on the rich but the rich won't let that happen and the overtaxed poor and middle class will simply revolt if they are told they have to pay more taxes to service things like the bank bailout.

You begin to wonder where on the Roman timeline we are because they had these fiscal crises twice. The first time they simply expanded beyond Italy and cannibalized the entire mediterranean and that led to the end of the Republic and the birth of the principate. The second time it led to the ultimate disintegration of the west and the establishment of the Greeks in the east. So it all comes down to where are we on the Roman time line. The edge of Caesar? Or, was Bill Clinton the equivalent of Marcus Aurelius and have we begun our decline, one that will be punctuated with rebirths, but ultimately a decline?

We have hired Mercenaries to fight our wars because a draft would be unpopular and lead to an uprising.

Our society has no moral standing in anything, and culturally we are dead.

The only time we ever had true national unity was WWII. All other times we have been at each other's throats and the north-south divide has been a part of America immemorial and truthfully, multiple nations exist within America.

After two decades of cultural issues being the dominant theme and people being pissed at each other it is no wonder that conservative Texas and liberal Vermonters both express heavy secessionist sentiments.

We never really developed a true national culture. We developed a national popular culture but the Romans had that too even as each province kept many traditions and such alive. We don't even have unified culture in our states as those are also all arbitrary boundaries that really don't respect cultural regions (exceptions maybe Utah and West Virginia which exist precisely because of culture)

But you have to remember, Rome became morally dead sometime before Julius Caesar. Remained so for several hundred years. We could be going into an era of decadent prosperity but such a thing won't be possible under a democratic system. But you'll never reverse the decadence within American society itself because for 2 generations its been lauded and has become the norm. And being moral doesn't mean being prudish (though that was a part of Roman morality when they were moral) but it means at least being ethical and decent to people and we flew that coop a long goddamned time ago.

Taxes are simply one of the many direct costs of doing business. They are simply passed on to the end user.

can be a "right wing" talking point.

:shrug:

tax increases without considering their competitors.

since if a competitor chooses not to raise prices & thereby capture market share, the company who passed the entire cost on -- loses.

there's also the little detail of non-consumer goods -- goods that businesses make to sell to other businesses -- which brings in even more concerns.

it's only in monopolistic markets & corporate wet dreams that taxes can just be "passed along" as you state.

and it's a right-wing talking point.

they want the general public to believe it -- for obvious reasons.

We got no fuckin' Manufacturing Base. If we had a substantive manufacturing base we could negate the dollar, issue the Washington or something, build up a nationalistic fervor among our business sector like they did in World War II, and manufacture our way back to health. Right now the Chinese are going "all your manufacturing base are belong to us" so, if we did zeroize the dollar, we'd be fucked: we are, at this point in time, NOT capable of supporting ourselves. We can't even make a car without it being half-full of Oriental parts.

If the US falls learn to count Yuan real quick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition

The idea we don't make anything is silly.

The reality is productivity has grown faster than demand for US goods.

Thus less people can make more product and amount of labor goes down.
Net result jobs losses.

This will continue to happen until demand exceeds productivity gains.

American civilians have more guns in their possession than all other militaries besides the U.S. combined. Not only that, but they know how to use them and know their neighborhoods real well.


We lost Vietnam because we faced guerilla fighters who were more determined even as we had modern equipment. There are simply too many guns in the civilian U.S. population for this country to ever be subdued by a foreign enemy. Now, we may war with each other. We could break up like the Roman Empire, but this country will never be conquered because this is the only country in the world where civilians can go out in broad daylight to legal retail outlets and buy military grade rifles.


America can never be conquered. The only ones who can conquer us will be ourselves and that would simply mean we descend to a sort of no-man's land Mad Max kind of scenario until the ammo runs out or we kill each other off.

Either revenue must go up or spending must go down. The only thing worse than raising taxes (or fees or penalties, etc)is cutting a benefit (entitlement). Now that won't happen to anyone already receiving them. I don't expect to get anything (SS or Medicare) by the time I retire.

Were a civically minded people who put the good of others and the nation as a whole and who viewed everyone in the nation as their brothjers and sister you might have a point. They would do it for the good of the nation.

But that's not the American people. We have had successive "me" generations and there is a great deal of public anger and hatred towards the baby boomers as younger generations hold them responsible for fucking up the country. Don't feel so sure that they won't leave them out in the cold because they have their own crippling debts they have to live with.

And after nearly a half century of cultural warfare we could be approaching the point where America can't be brought back from the brink.

than at the federal level.

Unlike the Federal government, State governments must balance their budgets.

They're separate, self-funded accounts. They don't draw on general revenue.

General revenue has been drawing on *them* for thirty years.

The minute you commingle funds, the funds are the same account.

The fact we commingled Social Security and Medicare to fund Military aggression means that it is an item to be targeted by budget cuts by those in power, because they got into no trouble for commingling funds in the first place.

i don't care if you're an accountant or not, social security isn't part of the general budget.

i'm sorry to see you of all people pushing this absolute crap.

However, in reality, the fund has been raided for years by war mongering prostitutes we call Senators and Congressman, and the politicians will justify raiding it further for their ends.

We are on the same side of this issue, re-read the OP.

I do that at work, they call it fraud.

which mandates that any excess collections not paid out to retirees will be held in US securities.

i.e. loaned to the federal government.


You want to demagogue that by calling it "raided," fine.

But in fact, the law has been the same since day 1, & SS is in fact *required* to maintain 1 year's reserve, held in us securities.


The *only* thing that changed was the Reagan fica acceleration that produced increasing surpluses for the last 25 years.


It ain't "raided" until you go along with letting them not pay it back in the same way it's been done for the last 60 years.

which you seem to be doing by presenting it as a fait accompli.

Is the same as raiding a fund. Look at the deficit. They have two ways out of this, default or inflate.

Either way, they will do one or the other if they are not stopped shortly.

Discretionary spending is less than 15% of the federal government. Everything else is Military, Social Security, and Medicare/Medicaid.

We are running a large deficit with loans that either have to be paid through inflation or won't be paid.

bullshit.

Our structural deficit is no different than the Greeks. We just have a printing press.

Would cut national debt in half in 25 years.

We don't need a debt of $0.00 to be solvent.

Stopping the bleeding and a slow downward decline in the debt is all that is needed.

Cut military spending or to increase taxes. Neither seem to be an option.

1) Taxes will rise. It doesn't require action just inaction. Bush tax cuts will expire at end of year.

2) Economy will eventually improve. Revenue is reduced due to depressed economy.

3) Military does need spending cut and it will happen eventually. Maybe not as much as we hope but it will happen. Ending the two wars would result in substantial drop in "military spending" because operation cost of war isn't in pentagon budget.

More importantly Congress just needs to stop spending MORE money. Natural inflation will eventually let receipts catch up with current spending. If Congress keeps growing spending at 200% to 300% of inflation then it will never catch up though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CBO_Forecast_Changes_for_2009-2012.png

It isn't impossible just requires real leadership.

After a deflationary debt crisis where the creditors were bailed out and the debtors left on the hook.

Well if that is true take out your last credit card buy a handgun, box of rounds and put it to your head.

(SIGH)

The mismanagement of the recovery doesn't mean the recovery will never happen. It simply means that it will take longer and be weaker.

How economically powerful are the British, Soviets, and Romans these days....

We don't need to be an economic super power for federal tax revenue to rise.

We simply need an economic recovery for federal tax revenue to rise.

Your "logic" that federal revenue will never again rise without tax increases is not true.

New technology developed and exploited in the United States? Increase in Mining or Farming?

3 ways to grow

Mine,Farm, or Manufacture.

Service economies are masturbation.

The internet is part of the "service economy" as is telecommunications and research.

News gathering and reporting is service economy.
Health-care is part of the service sector.
There is only so much physical stuff humans need and only so much food they can consume.

Hell 64% of the WORLD'S GDP is service related.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_sector_composition

Not even worth discussing if that is your belief. It is based on magic and fantasy.

Price of oil goes up, less people masturbating. Price of food goes up, less people masturbating. Price of manufactured goods goes up, less people masturbating.

At the end of the day, something has to pay for the masturbation.

Remember what kicked off this wonderful crisis was $4.00 a gallon gasoline.

In your super self creating doom scenario there is no escape.
Eventually roaming gangs will be killing people in the street for food so there is no hope.

Smart people will kill themselves now to avoid the misery in the future.

Now back to a deflationary debt crisis and what happens when you bail out the top 1% and expect them to lend more to over leveraged debtors.

If we're all doomed even if we reduce the deficit, then why bother?

Not comforting at this point in time.
Treasuries are an IOU, back by the Gover't.
Our oh so fiscally wise government.

assets/liabilities,still the same fungible source.

...it's "insolvency":rofl: issues would vanish.

If govt didn't borrow from SS then the value of trust fund would decline in real terms due to inflation.

SS isn't insolvent. there is no need to even "repay" SS from general fund yet. SS won't begin having negative cashflow (payments more than SS taxes) until 2017. Even then the negative cashflow is tiny until about 2023.

So the only thing that needs to happen is in 2023 taxes need to rise to slowly "repay" SS the $3.6 billion is borrowed (currently $2.4 borrowed so far it will rise to $3.6 billion by 2016 = last year of surpluses).

It really is that simple.

From 1980 to 2016 SS had surplus cash. The govt kept INCOME TAXES low by using that surplus cashflow. It makes more sense than borrowing money from China. From 1980 to 2016 the total amount of money the general fund will borrow from SS is $3.6 billion.

However that deal comes to an end in 2017. The govt will then simply need to raise INCOME TAXES and start paying SS back. Once the $3.6 billion is repaid most of the Boomers will have died and SS receipts will be more than enough to pay for retirement of next generations.

they can either be an imperial empire or they can be a state that takes care of it's own people.

they have been choosing empire and it will be their undoing. It is what is bankrupting everything.

They are intelligent enough to know, without the threat of force, those investments will turn over to the local populations.

The military budget is not about national defense, it is about defending the investments of those in power.

We have made moves towards it but we haven't got there yet. However that is the choice that faces us, empire or a complete radical overhaul of our system here. The same choice that faced the Romans in 100 BC. We know what route they took.

the Pentagon's budget.

The military-industrial complex is the biggest threat this nation faces.

Is that we're not a true nation. We are a diverse group of people who quite frankly don't like each other and who really only have in common sports teams, a currency, television, music and a military.


My god, you can even go into a small state that everyone assumes is monoculture like my native Mississippi and divide it into mulitple areas that would be happier if they were governing themselves and not linked to the rest of Mississippi in anyway beyond reduced tuition to Ole Miss and so forth. Every native Mississippian knows what these regions are and this is true of most states in the country excepting for maybe outliers like Utah and West Virginia that exist precisely because a cultural group established their own state.

It's just the way it is. When you have a country of diverse cultures and opinions you can only hold it together when people have home rule and don't try and force their values on the rest of the country. We once had home rule. Cultural decisions made at the state level and even though it did shut some people out there was at least an equitability to it. But now, both sides of the political spectrum want to force their will on the entire country no matter what they say about it. Needless to say that's what has people pissed and its why we are more divided at any time since the 1850s.