National debt personified

[CosmicCowboy]

At the close of business on Jan. 20, 2009, according to the U.S. Treasury, the total debt of the federal government was $10,626,877,048,913.08. By the close of business on July 10, 2012, that debt had climbed to $15,885,854,755,351.47—an increase of $5,258,977,706,438.39.

In “Statistics of Income—2009 Individual Income Tax Returns,” which was published this year and is the Internal Revenue Service’s most recent statistical report on individual income tax data, the IRS reported that there were 81,890,189 tax returns filed in 2009 that reported taxable income.

If each of these 81,890,189 federal taxpayers were given responsibility for paying off an equal share of the new federal debt added since Obama was inaugurated, they would each need to pay about $64,219.88.

If each of these 81,890,189 federal taxpayers were given responsibility for paying off an equal share of the entire federal debt of $15,885,854,755,351.47, they would each need to pay about $193,989.72

[CosmicCowboy]

And NO, I don't blame it all on Obama.

[Sportcamper]

The obvious solution is more stimulus in 2013…
1- Ten thousand dollar federal tax refund for purchasing a new Made in America Pick up truck…
2- Five thousand dollar federal tax refund for purchasing a new Harley Davidson…
3- Ten thousand dollar federal tax refund for purchasing a new Made in America tractor…
4- Five hundred dollar federal tax refund for purchasing a new Henry Lever Action Rifle…
I know the plan is not perfect but it is a start….

[coyotes_geek]

If we put the national debt on a Capital One card we can get some really kick ass benefits.

[mavs>spurs]

yeah if obama gets reelected and does in the next 4 years what he's done in the first 4 we will see a currency collapse. believe it or not, there actually is a limit to deficit spending before the market rejects that currency and hyperinflation kicks in overnight.

[baseline bum]

^ or if Romney gets elected tbh

[mavs>spurs]

i'm no fan of romneys but i can't really say anyone else has added over 5 trillion to the damn thing in just 3.5 years, yeah obama is a worry just becuase of that reason alone. continued deficit spending WILL collapse the currency, it doesn't matter if the blue puppet or the red puppet does it.

[baseline bum]

Romney will with the tax cuts in the Ryan plan. Obama will with stuff like the ACA and not being able to eliminate the Bush tax cuts. Either way, it's going up by trillions in the next few years.

[boutons_deux]

"debt and deficits don't matter"

... Repug hero dickhead

deficit hawks were absent under dubya, are shrieking under Obama, with the intent of aborting any economic recovery.

[mavs>spurs]

this country honestly needs massive austerity, sucks to say. the past generations n!ggered us. keep spending like it won't happen but lol trust me it's not going away, no amount of looking hte other way or continuing to do what we've been doing is going to stop that. the day of reckoning will come.

[mavs>spurs]

"debt and deficits don't matter"

... Repug hero dickhead

deficit hawks were absent under dubya, are shrieking under Obama, with the intent of aborting any economic recovery.

what do you know about economics? stimulus spending loses its punch whenever you're already on the brink of bankruptcy. i think if we weren't already massively in debt, it would have worked fine. but see, the fact is, WE ARE MASSIVELY IN DEBT.

[boutons_deux]

what do you know about economics? stimulus spending loses its punch whenever you're already on the brink of bankruptcy. i think if we weren't already massively in debt, it would have worked fine. but see, the fact is, WE ARE MASSIVELY IN DEBT.

tons more than low-information right-wing turd like yourself.

[mavs>spurs]

right wing? :lol i don't play politics, i disagree with both sides equally

[CosmicCowboy]

No sense arguing with Boutox. He gets his blue team talking points e-mailed to him every morning.

[CosmicCowboy]

BTW, you probably should think about changing your handle mavs>spurs. Cuban just blew your team up. Chris Kayman your big off season signing???? :lmao

*wiping smirk off face*

sorry...:p:

[mavs>spurs]

Darren Collison, NIGGA

[TeyshaBlue]

tons more than low-information right-wing turd like yourself.

Another post rich in Vitamin I.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Darren Collison, NIGGA

:lmao
Mav fan l:loll

[mercos]

The debt is a long term problem, not a short term one. Our national debt roughly doubled under Bush, and it is likely to do so under Obama if he get re-elected. Just as we survived the Bush deficit, we will survive the Obama deficit. In the long run, taxes will have to go up on the rich and Medicare and Social Security will have to be fixed. Defense will also have to be cut.

With the exception of Medicare, most of our budget problems have very simple solutions. On taxes, the rich have saw their wealth grow much faster than every other income group, so logically they should see their rates go up some. Social Security can be fixed with some simple rate adjustments, or by lifting the cap on the amount of money that can be taxed for the program, which is around $100,000. There is plenty of fat to trim in the defense budget.

To me, Medicare is the trickiest part of the budget. It is an unpleasant fact that older people need more medical attention, and they can no longer earn money to pay for it. Getting rid of fraud and abuse within the system, and possibly going away from the fee for service model would help, but ultimately it is just going to cost a lot of money if we want to take care of our senior citizens.

[mavs>spurs]

^thats the thing, this rudy poo candy ass mentality of "everything will be fine!" is going to get us fucked up. just because a couple of idiots got in office and did massive damage doesn't mean that we can just keep doing it or that it's sustainable :lol

those 2 morons have just about pushed it to the limits of what we can get away with. time to pay the piper.

[mercos]

I don't think anyone is saying its going to be fine over the long haul. The two sides just can't work together to create a long term solution. Democrats don't want to fix the issues with the safety net, and Republicans want to keep cutting taxes. We will go broke if we don't fix Medicare, Social Security, and the Department of Defense. We will go broke faster if Romney's tax plan is put into place.

[Nbadan]

I don't think anyone is saying its going to be fine over the long haul. The two sides just can't work together to create a long term solution. Democrats don't want to fix the issues with the safety net, and Republicans want to keep cutting taxes. We will go broke if we don't fix Medicare, Social Security, and the Department of Defense. We will go broke faster if Romney's tax plan is put into place.

Cc's assumption is that corporations, those shinging examples
Of corporate citizenship and civil duty, continue to pay no taxes and mooch off
The rest of us with corporate subsidies and special tax breaks which aren't
available to you and I

[boutons_deux]

the deficit is a direct result conservative/Repug polices over the last 33 years, not a "natural" occurrence beyond anyone's control.

The Repugs are implementing the Norquist strategy of spending (on wars, unfunded stuff like Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage) and tax-cutting the US into a hole, then the only solution the Repugs accept is austerity through cutting spending, which is mainly on the poor, black/brown, young, sick/disabled, and seniors.

And of course, the solution to everything, eg Ryan's and gecko's strategy, is more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations which have been proven NOT be economic stimulators or job creators. and of course, more deregulation so the wealthy and corps can fuck up everything more, without penalty.

[ElNono]

what do you know about economics?

How is the US going 'bankrupt'? :lol

You know economics, you should be able to tell me.

[DMX7]

this country honestly needs massive austerity, sucks to say. the past generations n!ggered us. keep spending like it won't happen but lol trust me it's not going away, no amount of looking hte other way or continuing to do what we've been doing is going to stop that. the day of reckoning will come.

Less spending for the government will shrink the economy, not grow it, and an economy is recession will not help the deficit if jobs are cut and less tax revenue comes in as a result.

[mavs>spurs]

Less spending for the government will shrink the economy, not grow it, and an economy is recession will not help the deficit if jobs are cut and less tax revenue comes in as a result.

exactly, and that's why were in a bind. to get out of the recession, we need expansionary policy. but we're between a rock and a hard spot because the debt is approaching dangerous levels. soon there won't be any options left to turn to.

[mavs>spurs]

Less spending for the government will shrink the economy, not grow it, and an economy is recession will not help the deficit if jobs are cut and less tax revenue comes in as a result.

exactly, and that's why were in a bind. to get out of the recession, we need expansionary policy. but we're between a rock and a hard spot because the debt is approaching dangerous levels. soon there won't be any options left to turn to.

[ALVAREZ6]

It's frustrating that change takes a long time. I can't stand that the government continues to spend on things that are so unnecessary. Spend away if you're running a surplus, but it's disturbing to see year after year of massive deficits with no end in site.

[DMX7]

exactly, and that's why were in a bind. to get out of the recession, we need expansionary policy.

Ok, then why are you saying we need massive austerity?

A shit load of debt is obviously not a great thing, but the market determines how much debt is "too much" debt. Right now, the U.S., despite an imperfect credit ratings, can borrow at ridiculously low interest rates, so it makes sense to borrow and spend now while it's cheap to do so. If you want to spark the economy, then now is the time because it's only going to cost more in the future to borrow for necessary projects like national infrastructure rebuilding.

The empirical evidence supports Keynesian economics -- not austerity.

[ALVAREZ6]

It's like the massive US of A works just like a Goldman or JP Morgan. The government seems to think we're too big to fail, just like the investment banks that are levered at insane ratios. Spend away, throw billions, annually, towards projects that have basically zero return, and everything will be fine. This country has already peaked in standard of living, for those of us in our 20s or so we'll be the first generation in who knows how many to not see our standard of living improve in this country. A portion of that is not directly attributable to the government, but the gov is definitely contributing.

I also don't affiliate myself with either party, both like to throw away money but only focused in different areas. There's just no end in site, not one realistic president for the next 2 terms will move us in the right direction.

[ElNono]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-12/treasuries-remain-higher-after-bond-auction-at-record-low-yield

[DMX7]

It's like the massive US of A works just like a Goldman or JP Morgan. The government seems to think we're too big to fail, just like the investment banks that are levered at insane ratios. Spend away, throw billions, annually, towards projects that have basically zero return, and everything will be fine. This country has already peaked in standard of living, for those of us in our 20s or so we'll be the first generation in who knows how many to not see our standard of living improve in this country. A portion of that is not directly attributable to the government, but the gov is definitely contributing.

I also don't affiliate myself with either party, both like to throw away money but only focused in different areas. There's just no end in site, not one realistic president for the next 2 terms will move us in the right direction.

There are two elements of a deficit. You've been conditioned by the right-wing to think that only spending contributes to a deficit. They "starve the beast", then tell you we need to privatize social security and medicare in addition to slashing any other welfare program conceivable.

[ALVAREZ6]

Of course. Given the circumstances I think the uber-rich should pay higher taxes than the rest. I give props to those groups of millionaires that lobby for this and actually want to pay higher taxes.

I wonder what the quality of life difference is between Millionaire A, $850m net worth, and Millionaire B, $800m net worth.

[DMX7]

Restore the old provisions of the estate tax as well.

YA2OvA1wcO0

[Wild Cobra]

In the long run, taxes will have to go up on the rich and Medicare and Social Security will have to be fixed.
This is not the answer. we could confiscate all the wealth from the rich, and it wouldn't do much. the government needs to stop spending so much money on social programs. The government needs to be made smaller. We have too many bureaucrats, who are nothing more than peanut counters, finding new ways to count peanuts and justify expansions of their roles.

I say taxes don't need to go up. we need more people paying taxes and less people using government assistance.

[lakerhaterade]

And NO, I don't blame it all on Obama.

Yeah you do. :rolleyes

[DMX7]

This is not the answer. we could confiscate all the wealth from the rich, and it wouldn't do much. the government needs to stop spending so much money on social programs. The government needs to be made smaller. We have too many bureaucrats, who are nothing more than peanut counters, finding new ways to count peanuts and justify expansions of their roles.

I say taxes don't need to go up. we need more people paying taxes and less people using government assistance.

lol @ "expand the base"

Who is it that's not paying federal income taxes that's going to "do much" to fix the deficit if they do start paying taxes?

[boutons_deux]

"we could confiscate all the wealth from the rich, and it wouldn't do much"

You Lie

the estate tax cuts (aka tax expenditures) alone are well past $1T+ and continuing.

Corporate income taxes paid are at all time low as %age of national income.

The concentration of wealth (15% tax rate paid, just for the income they haven't been able to hide, like Gecko's offshore tricks) in the 1% with the concomitant restriction on the incomes of the 99% means the 99% have less to spend. The 1% don't spend all their wealth like the 99% does, so consumption is down, and the US economy is rigged to be a consumer economy.

[mercos]

This is not the answer. we could confiscate all the wealth from the rich, and it wouldn't do much. the government needs to stop spending so much money on social programs. The government needs to be made smaller. We have too many bureaucrats, who are nothing more than peanut counters, finding new ways to count peanuts and justify expansions of their roles.

I say taxes don't need to go up. we need more people paying taxes and less people using government assistance.


We have no choice but to tax the rich at this point, because they have such a large portion of the wealth in this country. I'm not one of those people who hate the successful, but I am disgusted by the way the wealth in this country has been stolen from those that helped contribute. There is no good reason that CEO pay should have skyrocketed the way it has compared to ordinary workers. They have not gotten better or more efficient that regular workers. The imbalance is far worse in this country than it is in other industrialized nations. The only people I see defending this heist are those that are executives themselves, or are delusional enough to believe they will be one day.

[Th'Pusher]

The only people I see defending this heist are those that are executives themselves, or are delusional enough to believe they will be one day.

I don't think WC is delusional enough to believe that he will be a CEO or even wealthy enough to be affected by Obama's proposed tax increase on the top 2%. He's just been brainwashed into doing the bidding for the people it will affect in the name of liberty.

[ALVAREZ6]

We have no choice but to tax the rich at this point, because they have such a large portion of the wealth in this country. I'm not one of those people who hate the successful, but I am disgusted by the way the wealth in this country has been stolen from those that helped contribute. There is no good reason that CEO pay should have skyrocketed the way it has compared to ordinary workers. They have not gotten better or more efficient that regular workers. The imbalance is far worse in this country than it is in other industrialized nations. The only people I see defending this heist are those that are executives themselves, or are delusional enough to believe they will be one day.

It's certainly absurd :tu.

[CosmicCowboy]

Y'all realize that "taxing the rich" isn't enough don't you?. The middle class is where the big money is and that's who will end up paying for this gluttony one way or another.

[coyotes_geek]

Y'all realize that "taxing the rich" isn't enough don't you?. The middle class is where the big money is and that's who will end up paying for this gluttony one way or another.

Yep. Just letting the Bush tax cuts expire for people making over $250k still leaves us with a $trillion dollar defecit.

[mercos]

If you've read any of my previous posts, you would see that I have constantly mentioned entitlement reform. Unlike Republicans though, I stress the word reform, and not cuts. I believe our entitlement system can provide benefits and promote upward mobility if run correctly. I envision a system that invests in human capital, helping in the development of citizens that can become productive members of society. The current system promotes dependability, which is neither cost effective nor sustainable.

[coyotes_geek]

If you've read any of my previous posts, you would see that I have constantly mentioned entitlement reform. Unlike Republicans though, I stress the word reform, and not cuts. I believe our entitlement system can provide benefits and promote upward mobility if run correctly. I envision a system that invests in human capital, helping in the development of citizens that can become productive members of society. The current system promotes dependability, which is neither cost effective nor sustainable.

Okay, that sounds all warm and fuzzy, but can you be more specific as to what that's going to look like? How would you "reform" the system to reconcile the projected $100 trillion differential between SS & Medicare promised benefits and expected revenues without cuts? Just make all that up on the tax side?

[Th'Pusher]

Y'all realize that "taxing the rich" isn't enough don't you?. The middle class is where the big money is and that's who will end up paying for this gluttony one way or another.

Yes, I realize that, but I'm concerned increasing taxes on the middle class right now will send us into the same austerity trap we are seeing in Europe right now. People making 250k (although I may raise that number to $500k) can afford the tax increase right now whereas the middle class cannot. Once the economy is back on track we can talk about raising taxes on the middle class. This all needs to be in conjunction with entitlement reform. Entitlement reform and increased taxes should all be on the table.

[Bill_Brasky]

Of course. Given the circumstances I think the uber-rich should pay higher taxes than the rest. I give props to those groups of millionaires that lobby for this and actually want to pay higher taxes.

I wonder what the quality of life difference is between Millionaire A, $850m net worth, and Millionaire B, $800m net worth.

I hate how the right cries and moans about giving tax breaks to the rich....these pieces of shit lobby for tax breaks, and then when they get them instead of passing it down to their employees/hiring more they pocket the extra money....

[Th'Pusher]

Okay, that sounds all warm and fuzzy, but can you be more specific as to what that's going to look like? How would you "reform" the system to reconcile the projected $100 trillion differential between SS & Medicare promised benefits and expected revenues without cuts? Just make all that up on the tax side?

As mercos mentioned the difficult issue is paying for medical care for our seniors. Ultimately we have to decrease the cost of healthcare to address this issue. I have little faith that the ACA will do that. Ultimately we need to move away from the fee for service system. Too many entrenched finacial interests to see any reform there so I would address the core issue, which in my opinion is money in politics. I think Lawrence Lessig has some good thoughts on how to reform this issue he outlines in Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress--and a Plan to Stop (http://www.amazon.com/Republic-Lost-Money-Corrupts-Congress/dp/0446576433) it

[mercos]

Okay, that sounds all warm and fuzzy, but can you be more specific as to what that's going to look like? How would you "reform" the system to reconcile the projected $100 trillion differential between SS & Medicare promised benefits and expected revenues without cuts? Just make all that up on the tax side?

Lol, nothing warm and fuzzy about it. It is simply the most logical way to tackle the problem. As for specifics, Social Security is an easy fix. The growth in wealth at the top margin has taken a lot of money out of the reach of Social Security. Remove the cap at which Social Security fees are collected, and the problem is solved. Means tests should be implemented as well, as there is no point in giving money to those that don't need it. Millionaires should not be collecting Social Security checks. Once the baby boom generation has passed, Social Security will be in much better shape.

Medicare is a tricky problem, as I've stated in previous posts. This is another problem that is going to be exacerbated by the baby boom generation. You ultimately have to attack the cost of health care itself, which is to high. Scrapping the fee for service system is a good start. Reforming the medical patent system could lower the cost of prescription drugs. Medicare is the biggest problem we face because of the fact that seniors need the most medical care and they are the group that can least afford it. Ultimately, no matter how many reforms we do this program is going to be costly. Broadening the tax base through true entitlement reform that creates tax paying citizens would be my broad goal to help cover those costs.

[Das Texan]

So many fucking geniuses running this nation.

I still cant understand how you can run not one but two 'wars' and not come up with some way to fucking pay for them.

This all fucking started when this war mongering started and at the same time someone figured it would be an incredibly smart idea to also lower the money coming into the federal government by enacting various tax cuts.

Made perfect sense then, makes perfect sense now to not raise the tax rate for all.

[mavs>spurs]

Be that as it may, Obama gonwax dettt GOP ass yet AGAIN this November

:rollin

you're blindly proud of that as if it's going to help your life or something

[boutons_deux]

this country honestly needs massive austerity,

Like 1% who say the same, the austerity hawks, the "shared sacrifice" hypocrits, you of course exclude yourself from massive austerity, right?

[mavs>spurs]

maybe i said that wrong, austerity means reduction in government spending right? my idea is to take it right out of the defense budget, cut that sucker in half. bring home all troops from abroad. we don't have the money to play world police anymore.

point is, we have to stop the deficit spending.

[ElNono]

this country honestly needs massive austerity, sucks to say.

This country needs honest politicians... lots of talk about cutting spending and what not, but then the bills fly with pork everywhere benefiting politician's buddy-buddies... that's why lobbying is a billion dollar business...

[mavs>spurs]

"In economics, austerity refers to a policy of deficit-cutting by lowering spending often via a reduction in the amount of benefits and public services provided."

Yeah austerity doesn't have to mean cutting back on public services, I should have been more specific. My proposed budget cuts would come from several areas:

bring home all the troops and stop paying to police the world.

cut back defense spending to what's necessary to protect the homefront and R&D. the only spending should be to feed the troops and to develop better weapons. we could do this with about 1/3 the current defense budget.

cut down needless government programs where peanut counters are finding more creative ways to count peanuts to keep getting govt funds. cut back on all the needless programs and get rid of the TSA. they aren't needed under a government that doesn't use fear mongering to start overseas conflicts.

reform education: we spend tons of money on education and our schools suck. it's not a spending issue whenever kids dressed in rags in the pakistani mountains with no running water or electricity in their schools outperform our own students. reform education to where we are getting twice the results with half the funds. kids don't need big ass fancy schools and multimillion dollar athletic facilities to learn.

Last but not least, get rid of all the govt spying agencies that use our tax dollars to create huge data storage warehouses and fusion centers to spy on us. stop spending money to arm the police with tanks and drones. this is all a huge waste of our money.

[ElNono]

^ I don't disagree. I'm just stating that you would need honest politicians to pull that through.

Every law these days that goes through Congress transmogrifies from "perhaps a good idea" to a Frankestein with completely unrelated BS (http://consumerist.com/2008/10/bailout-bill-includes-wooden-arrow-tax-break.html) tacked to it.

[Clipper Nation]

m>s: Right about dem spending cuts...

[mavs>spurs]

the biggest money saver of all would be to legalize drugs. the prison industrial complex in this country is huge, and far outpaces all other developed nations. millions of people go to prison for petty drug related charges, where they are then educated by the prison system. this in turn creates more criminals and more crime, meaning more spending to police the crime. we spending billions and billions of dollars annually to police something that can't be policed, people are going to do what they want to do. if you choose to put poison in your body, that's your choice. but the insurance companies should also reserve the right to cancel your policy if these substances are determined to be in your system when you go to seek treatment. you know the risks whenever you do dumb shit.

this way we stop spending an insane amount of money to house and feed millions of inmates yearly. saves a ton of money in court costs as well. no more DEA, no more highway checkpoints, no more millions of cops out on the streets acting as revenue generators to keep the beast going. In reality, these services add nothing of value to society except for policing, which has diminishing returns past a certain point. find the point where MR = MC and cut it off there.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

yeah if obama gets reelected and does in the next 4 years what he's done in the first 4 we will see a currency collapse. believe it or not, there actually is a limit to deficit spending before the market rejects that currency and hyperinflation kicks in overnight.

I read more old cliche conservative nonsense from you than anyone else. Hyperinflation was supposedly a problem 20 years ago. I remember all the rhetoric from the Clinton years.

[ElNono]

the biggest money saver of all would be to legalize drugs. the prison industrial complex in this country is huge, and far outpaces all other developed nations. millions of people go to prison for petty drug related charges, where they are then educated by the prison system. this in turn creates more criminals and more crime, meaning more spending to police the crime. we spending billions and billions of dollars annually to police something that can't be policed, people are going to do what they want to do. if you choose to put poison in your body, that's your choice. but the insurance companies should also reserve the right to cancel your policy if these substances are determined to be in your system when you go to seek treatment. you know the risks whenever you do dumb shit.

this way we stop spending an insane amount of money to house and feed millions of inmates yearly. saves a ton of money in court costs as well. no more DEA, no more highway checkpoints, no more millions of cops out on the streets acting as revenue generators to keep the beast going. In reality, these services add nothing of value to society except for policing, which has diminishing returns past a certain point. find the point where MR = MC and cut it off there.

You forgot to add getting free healthcare... this is how upside down this thing is... your honest average citizen busts his butt working and can't afford health insurance... crooks land in jail and get it for free...

[mavs>spurs]

I read more old cliche conservative nonsense from you than anyone else. Hyperinflation was supposedly a problem 20 years ago. I remember all the rhetoric from the Clinton years.

so you believe currency collapses are just a fairy tale myth and it doesn't happen whenever you run massive out of control deficits?

Okay. And i'm not only conservative morally, not economically. I don't support the republican party in any form or way, I think they're crooks like the left.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

so you believe currency collapses are just a fairy tale myth and it doesn't happen whenever you run massive out of control deficits?

Okay. And i'm not only conservative morally, not economically. I don't support the republican party in any form or way, I think they're crooks like the left.

Using the model of post Versailles Germany and the various African states that have experienced hyperinflation we have yet to see parallels here.

Perhaps if I saw some currency palatable to both Western countries and major trading partners then I could see the world market turning away from the dollar. As it is the yen is a thing of the past which used to be used as the scare tactic and the European and Chinese currencies have stagnated or regressed.

All I see is regurgitation of rhetoric. Defaulting paying the interest because of how shitty our legislative system is is the concern.

[boutons_deux]

"In economics, austerity refers to a policy of deficit-cutting by lowering spending often via a reduction in the amount of benefits and public services provided."

Yeah austerity doesn't have to mean cutting back on public services, I should have been more specific. My proposed budget cuts would come from several areas:

bring home all the troops and stop paying to police the world.

cut back defense spending to what's necessary to protect the homefront and R&D. the only spending should be to feed the troops and to develop better weapons. we could do this with about 1/3 the current defense budget.

cut down needless government programs where peanut counters are finding more creative ways to count peanuts to keep getting govt funds. cut back on all the needless programs and get rid of the TSA. they aren't needed under a government that doesn't use fear mongering to start overseas conflicts.

reform education: we spend tons of money on education and our schools suck. it's not a spending issue whenever kids dressed in rags in the pakistani mountains with no running water or electricity in their schools outperform our own students. reform education to where we are getting twice the results with half the funds. kids don't need big ass fancy schools and multimillion dollar athletic facilities to learn.

Last but not least, get rid of all the govt spying agencies that use our tax dollars to create huge data storage warehouses and fusion centers to spy on us. stop spending money to arm the police with tanks and drones. this is all a huge waste of our money.

Defense and NatSec aren't gonna get cut. Even DoD can't stop systems they don't want because Congress refuses.

Here's a highly effective defense "cut":

BRAC changes didn't yield projected $35.6B stockpile

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/military/article/BRAC-changes-didn-t-yield-projected-35-6B-3706109.php

There 100s, maybe 1000s, of fantastic public schools with high graduation rates and high rates of college attendees, and 10s of 1000s of acceptable public schools.

Bitching about education and Dem-voting unonized teachers is led by Repugs who don't GAF about education, only about destroying a Dem financial base, and privatizing education into for-profit, right-wing/"Christian" indoctrination "schools".

TX cut $5B from public school budget several years ago, to push TX even lower in the $/pupil ranking. Anybody notice any IMPROVEMENT? Yep, just about as much improvement as delivered by TX tort reform/$250K cap.