[Murph1329]

Why is it whenever the topic of cutting government spending comes up democrats always resort to saying teachers will lose their job…oh the poor kids!
Why not cut Planned Parenthood or one of the other social government programs….or are those more important than teachers? I guess so since we already know that those programs are more important than NASA.

[Bill Watterson]

Lets see if you have any understanding of economics or politics:

Specifically, what should we cut, where, and why?

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by Bill Watterson

Lets see if you have any understanding of economics or politics:

Specifically, what should we cut, where, and why?

well according to democrats it's teachers because that's all i ever hear them say...that or cops. Maybe it's just the fear tatics but i'm pretty sure we can end some of these million social programs we now have in this country, what do you think? Or is planned parenthood more important than teachers?

The democrats I hear talk don't even answer your qestions so I guess they have no understanding of economics or politics. The problem is people are overthinking the problem. The solution is pretty damn easy cut the crap. Why are we spending 17 million a year on boat safety or 1 billion on adoption assistance? Why can't the private sector do those jobs, hell we think the private sector can handle manned space flight.

[drgonzo]

Why do they say it? Try because it's the truth! Did you miss the thousands of teachers that have already been cut? Cold, hard reality.

Take a look at any state budget, education is usually one of the top expenditures. So if you cut government you are going to see cuts in education spending. No way around it.

Time to kill this ****ing "government spending bad" bull**** meme. The government's JOB is to spend money to get things done.

[corporationpaintball]

Because our educations system is already crappy enough as it is...? Nobody is going to want to be a teacher if they keep getting fired. And what did PP do to you? If anything it's a small expense to keep social programs budgets down.

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by corporationpaintball

Because our educations system is already crappy enough as it is...? Nobody is going to want to be a teacher if they keep getting fired. And what did PP do to you? If anything it's a small expense to keep social programs budgets down.

Small numbers add up real fast, like i said before why do these types of programs have to be run by the government? If space is good enough for the private sector I think these stupid social programs are as well.

We're cutting in the wrong places. There is no need to let teachers go just cut the fat by getting rid of the funding towards some of these social programs.

Time to kill this ****ing "government spending bad" bull**** meme. The government's JOB is to spend money to get things done.

Oh and by the way, the governments job is NOT to spend money. Whoever taught you that was either a fool or trying to push an agenda, probably both.

1. Defend the country from invasion
2. Coin, not print, money
3. Run a justice system
4. Run a post office.

That's it. Nothing more nothing less. That's all the freakin body has to do. It's so basic that once you get it running like a well oiled machine you should just have to sit back and do nothing.

[ColdBlood]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

Small numbers add up real fast, like i said before why do these types of programs have to be run by the government? If space is good enough for the private sector I think these stupid social programs are as well.

We're cutting in the wrong places. There is no need to let teachers go just cut the fat by getting rid of the funding towards some of these social programs.



Oh and by the way, the governments job is NOT to spend money. Whoever taught you that was either a fool or trying to push an agenda, probably both.

1. Defend the country from invasion
2. Coin, not print, money
3. Run a justice system
4. Run a post office.

That's it. Nothing more nothing less. That's all the freakin body has to do. It's so basic that once you get it running like a well oiled machine you should just have to sit back and do nothing.

How would you do any of those 4 things without spending money?

[toolbandfan]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

Why not cut Planned Parenthood...

Well, if we ignore cost/benefit data from the program entirely, you are focusing on a tiny part of the overall government budget. I don't hear about anyone complaining about teachers losing their jobs when someone simply mentions cutting the budget, probably just when they're talking about the education budget.


Also, at least in my area, the less babies the better imo, especially from poor mother who can't afford to support their child mostly on their own. Or possible parents with other problems.

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by ColdBlood

How would you do any of those 4 things without spending money?

LOL the job description isn't spend money

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by toolbandfan

Well, if we ignore cost/benefit data from the program entirely, you are focusing on a tiny part of the overall government budget. I don't hear about anyone complaining about teachers losing their jobs when someone simply mentions cutting the budget, probably just when they're talking about the education budget.


Also, at least in my area, the less babies the better imo, especially from poor mother who can't afford to support their child mostly on their own. Or possible parents with other problems.

well subsidizing people for poor actions is problem #1
that needs to stop and you won't see so many babies being born from poor people

Programs like planned parenthood encourage poor actions by giving people an easy out. Whatever happened to actions having consequences? I'd rather be helping pay to get man on mars than abort some kid or teach the youth on how to take the morning after pill...maybe i'm a selfish bastard.

If you wanted progress in society you'd agree with me.

Instead you want to support programs that encourage people to stay where they are, which is the opposite of progress.

[ColdBlood]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

LOL the job description isn't spend money

But you do need to spend money to provide any of those four services. So in order to do their jobs they need to spend the money they collect. It sounds like the government's job is to spend money doesn't it?

[victimhere]

If the other 51% that the MSM claims doesn't pay taxes would pay taxes, we wouldn't need to cut much of anything.

However, to answer your question, imo, cut everything a little, instead of trying to cut out one thing, just a little from everything (except bureaucrats cut 90% of them), that would probably help the most.

Another thing to work on, not really what you were asking for, but why not cut the corruption, not just within the government, but the people, as in your/our neighbors, there are so many people taking advantage of the system that it weights it down far more than what we can or should have to handle. I am sure that there is a long, long list of examples, a few on my list would be the food stamp industry, planned parenthood, medicaid, College funding, tax breaks for the oil industry( who needs a tax break when they clear $284 million in a year?).
Now read this well before responding, I'm not saying cut these, I'm saying stop the corruption within them.

[Murph1329]

Originally Posted by ColdBlood

But you do need to spend money to provide any of those four services. So in order to do their jobs they need to spend the money they collect. It sounds like the government's job is to spend money doesn't it?

wow you really don't get it do you?

Spending money is a means to an end for the federal government, well for anyone or anything for that matter. The day it becomes their "job" is the day we should revolt.

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

...

Time to kill this ****ing "government spending bad" bull**** meme. The government's JOB is to spend money to get things done.

lol, keep ****ing spending! Spend more money you don't have, then raise taxes so you can spend even more than that. All the while, you misappropriate funds like a drunken sailor.

There is a problem, and it isn't a revenue problem.

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

Time to kill this ****ing "government spending bad" bull**** meme. The government's JOB is to spend money to get things done.

Oh, ok then.

[inkjt510]

Originally Posted by Murph1329

well subsidizing people for poor actions is problem #1

No, problem number one is the fact that we are spending trillions on sending thousands of American soldiers to go die in some sandy ****hole.

Problem number two is that we are also killing innocent civilians of other sovereign nations while doing so.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by victimhere

If the other 51% that the MSM claims doesn't pay taxes would pay taxes, we wouldn't need to cut much of anything.

1. The MSM doesn't claim that, nor does anyone credible. Only right-wing deceivers and the people they mislead say that. There is no statistical income group that doesn't pay taxes.

2. The distribution of income in this nation is so disparate that the bottom 50% of earners account for just about 18% of its income (2007). Total income of everyone in the US is about $7.723 trillion (2007), making the entire income base of the bottom 50% under $1.4 trillion. Even taxing them at exorbitant rates won't get it done, you can't address the deficit on the backs of the poor.

Originally Posted by ColdBlood

But you do need to spend money to provide any of those four services. So in order to do their jobs they need to spend the money they collect. It sounds like the government's job is to spend money doesn't it?

Yup. When you look at the function of government, its entire operation is predicated on the collection and expenditure of money. It's high time we got rid of the idea that expenditure of money by the government is a problem in and of itself, because the government MUST spend money to do anything.

Demonizing the expenditure of money by the government doesn't make sense and isn't a productive viewpoint.

[chodeyg]

What I want to know is why do the poorly informed always assume social programs are where all our money is going?

[victimhere]

Originally Posted by drgonzo

1. The MSM doesn't claim that, nor does anyone credible. Only right-wing deceivers and the people they mislead say that. There is no statistical income group that doesn't pay taxes.

hey, I looked it up and found out that you might be right, if the new york times is a good source for you. they claim its not 51%, its more like 3-10%, after all the math is done http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/bu...leonhardt.html

But I don't listen to right wing deceivers, lefts wingers either( I don't trust either side), I got that info from my local news cbs or abc, can't remember who just remember the numbers and though it was astounding.
With that being said, I still believe our government spends entirely to much on everything, mostly the programs that I stated in my original post.

[cessna210 (Banned)]

we need to completely get out of the middle east and completely cut off foreign aid.
that's where all the money's going. we should have more social programs to create more jobs too.

[Wango_Tango]

the fact that people go after Planned Parenthood never ceases to amaze me. Strong stupidity in their heads.