Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/12/2018 8:08:52 PM

This brief exerpt from a WP article on the budget seems to against everything you like to tell us what is wrong with the Left. Trump is proposing debt and more debt and cut benefits to the old and disabled to pay for the tax cut. 

"Remember Trump’s boast that he would “get rid of the $19 trillion in debt . . . over a period of eight years”?

Odin’s beard! He just hammered that promise to pieces. His budget would add $7 trillion to the debt over a decade — $2 trillion in the next two years alone — and even those numbers are based on the peculiar assumption that the economy will never again go into recession.

That promise has gone up, up and away. Trump proposes to cut $554 million from Medicare — health care for old folks — and some $250 billion to Medicaid, which provides health care to the poor."

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/12/2018 10:51:31 PM

Since you had no response to my post about the National Debt( Subject:Conservatives Love Debt-2/9/2018 8:25:58PM), and my post to you where you questioned my belief on "protection of freedom"(Subject: Hey Buteye- 2/11/2018 1:50:07 AM), I don't see any need to keep reminding you that your pal Obama added $10 trillion dollars to the National Debt for which the country received nothing in return, and now President Trump is being blamed for taking action to refurbish the infrastructure, rebuild the military, build the wall, and carry out many other needed changes expressed by the voters. I have yet to see you justify Obama's addition of $10 trillion dollars to the National Debt(more debt than all previous Presidents combined) and explain to the people what the country actually received from such a massive expenditure of money that has been unheard of in previous administrations. Most of the things that are being budgeted now(such as infrastructure, milltary, wall, etc) should have already been completed.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/13/2018 12:01:03 AM (updated 2/13/2018 12:03:16 AM)

Buteye

My comment regarding your serving in the military was in response to your comment 

 “If "all" Democratic leaders resigned due to sex, there wouldn't be any left. What a blessing that would be!” You seemed to be advocating for one party rule which I found surprising for an ex military man. That's all.

In 2015, Congress finally passed an infrastructure bill that Obama wanted for $305 billion. Obama had proposed $478 billion. During the Obama years, Mitch operated under a policy of not supporting anything Obama proposed. Obama ran up deficits to improve the economy on the theory that once the economy was booming tax revenues would begin to pay down the deb while Trump ran on a platform of reducing the debt not addinng to it.

"Congress scored the first of what could be a series of bipartisan year-end victories late Thursday night (2015)with the final passage of a $305 billion measure to fund roads, bridges, and rail lines.

The five-year infrastructure bill is the longest reauthorization of federal transportation programs that Congress has approved in more than a decade, ending an era of stopgap bills and half-measures that left the Highway Trust Fund nearly broke and frustrated local governments and business groups. President Obama will sign the bill into law, as it fulfills his long-running push for lawmakers to pass an infrastructure bill even though it is significantly less than the $478 billion he sought in his own plan earlier this year.

The Senate approved the highway bill on an 83-16 vote. All but two Democrats—Senators Elizabeth Warren and Tom Carper—voted for it. Among the 14 Republican opponents were three of the four presidential candidates serving in the Senate: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul. (Senator Bernie Sanders missed the vote.) The House cleared it, 359-65, earlier on Thursday. It won unanimous support from Democrats and opposition mainly from conservatives."

Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/13/2018 10:04:47 AM

one could probably cut a billion or 2 from most medicare/medicaid simply by eliminating waste/duplication//fraud, etc etc

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/13/2018 11:46:08 AM

I deleted my original response because I thought the post was about the two-year budget deal.  While I wanted to fill the obvious gap in your education as it relates to the budget deal, I will instead focus on the Trump budget.  First reminder, Congress holds the purse strings when it comes to the federal budget.  So all the POTUS budget proposal means is to communicate to Congress their priority.  The vast majority of the time it is almost totally ignored as they work out their own deal and ask him to sign it.  He can sign, not sign or veto.  That's pretty much it.

The reality is that in the Senate they need 60 votes to get to cloture so they need at least 9 Democrats voting in favor of any budget deal.  Sadly, as we saw with the two-year deal the only way to get those votes is to bribe the Democrats.   Unless and until we can tackle entitlements we are going to see deficits as far as the eye can see.  Apparently far too many Republicans and every single Democrat have the Keynsian view of deficit spending......we'll all be dead before the bill has to be paid so le bon ton roulet!   [Note:  I added the last part in honor of Fat Tuesday].   

So like Obama before him it appears that Trump will have to pile on the debt because there is no alternative given the situation in the Senate.  Deficit spending is an equal opportunity issue for both parties.  The main difference is that there are a good number of Republicans that want to reduce deficits....on the Democrat side there is not one.  So until Democrats start to elect deficit hawks they have no moral authority to criticize Republicans because they have to bribe Democrats to get a budget passed.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/13/2018 5:33:02 PM

I think that the big issue is what we are getting for what we go into additional debt for.  You know I am a huge supporter for Defense, but I question whether we need such a huge increase.  There are a lot of unacounted for funds - both from our Afghanistan nation building (reportedly millions of money provided to commanders to give to village elders), to a very expensive gas station, and the $8M that DLA seems unable to account for.  I'm sure there is much more that has yet to be discovered.  I can't figure out if the new increases are going to the renewed nuclear program, or for current programs in acquisition or maintaining what we have.  It's impossible to cut current acquisition programs no matter how much they are costing us, because Congress will simply not allow jobs to be cut in their districts.  

I agree with Fly that there are probably millions to be found in public assistance and social security/medicaid/medicare fraud. I suspect there are likely at least a billion that Defense can't account for.  

Maybe the govenrment needs to hire IBO to come in and audit one department at a time, to see where the money is going.  

I don't care which political party we have in the WH and majority in Congress, debt is still debt that will be with us much longer than any administration.  We're still carrying the debt from Obama and GW Bush.  I'm not saying that this country shouldn't have any debt, because that would be impossible.  But remember when we were all saying that Obama was mortgaging our kids and grandkids futures?  Nothing has changed now that it is a Republican vs. a Democrat.  They all worry about their legacy, but not about the debt.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/14/2018 8:36:49 AM

All other spending outside entitlements are not quite a drop in a bucket but pretty close.  Social security is ~25% of the annual budget, health insurance (Medicare, Medicaid, CHP, etc.) accounts for another 26%.  Safety net type programs outside SS and the insurance programs amounts to around 10% of the annual spending. Interest expense from prior administrations is currently at 6% of the annual spending and will rise dramatically if rates go up.   So entltlement programs and mandatory interest payments account for two thirds of the total budget.  Defense is around 16%.  Even if you took defense and every other discretionary spending program to zero we would still run a deficit or just about break even.  And we know that will never happen.

I am all for getting rid of waste in all government programs but quite honestly when you take away the profit motive and add in the vote buying motive I am not sure that any government can be run efficiently.  There's just no real motivation to do so.  Regardless, we are not going to see any real change in the deficit spending unless and until they can tackle entitlement programs.  Unfortunately that is never going to happen if Democrats have any say.

The objective reality is that the only way for Republicans to get a budget passed in the Senate is to have at least 9 Democrats on their side.  There isn't one Democrat in favor of balanced budgets or fiscal sanity, let alone nine.  So they have to bribe them to get a budget passed or the govt shuts down and everyone bitches and moans and we have to listen to the nonstop whining of the media and the sob stories from people that know ahead of time all they are getting is more paid vacation.  I have little patience for all the sudden blaming Republicans for the deficits when we know that Democrats are the real reason.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/14/2018 12:57:03 PM

I have no real problem with cutting down on some of the entitlement programs - for me, it's more about how they do it.  The tendency is to salami slice it, rather than if it makes sense to cut one area over another.  And don't forget that people paid into social security and medicare (even I paid into medicare), so I am not sure that doing away with these programs that people paid into and counted on.  They would have to start with people early enough that they would realize that these programs won't be there - but then they are what is paying into social security and Medicare benefits that are currently being paid out.  I just don't think you can pull the rug out from under people.  I don't know if you saw it, but there was a recent case where the court found that "promised" pension benefits are not guarenteed under the law.  The case involved state workers whose pensions were being slashed and they sued  

I have no vested interest in SS, because I never paid in enough quarters to get anything, but I see so many people that are counting on it for their retirement.  Should they have saved? yes, but if you pull it from under them, you'll see your public assistance numbers swell.  No good politics in seeing a lot of elderly people suddenly homeless and living on the street. 

I personally think that we need to go back to what Kennedy/LBJ had in mind with public assistance and Medicare/Medicaid.  The rules have been changed over a period of time to make it easier to fraud the systems.  Unwed mother's that pop out babies and then say they can't work because they have no one to watch the children and can't afford daycare - well, why couldn't the govenrment build or support day cares for these children and make these people work?  With the money we're about to pour into infrastructure - make them work and learn a skill.  

For me, the debt question goes back to it depending what we are getting from borrowing the money and really doesn't have anything to do with political parties.  

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/14/2018 1:48:02 PM

As for SS, the only answer is to combine means testing, gradually raising he eligibility age to future recipients and allow younger people to opt out all or a portion of their contribution in exchange for not taking any benefits.  Also need to clamp down on doctors with the phony disability claims.  If I operated a retirement fund like the Feds operate FICA I would be in prison.

Same goes for Medicare/Medicaid, etc.  What will bring them back to solvency is to lower the trajectory of costs over time.  Means testing and raising elgilbility requirements is the only way.  Death panels and ratcheting down on doctors and big pharma will not do the trick.  And it needs to be done gradually and with lots of notice so people can plan appropriately.  

But you be the politician to propose that and the ads with you pushing granny off a cliff in her wheel chair or wearing a white robe and burning a cross will come very quickly from the Democrats.  They like more people to rely on some form of govt help.  That's the way for them to buy votes.  So in essence it isn't ever going to happen and as long as Democrats stay to the left of Chairman Mao the only way we get budgets passed is to bribe them for their votes.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Buteye Help Me or Martini Help Me
Date:	2/16/2018 11:02:44 PM

I don't have a problem with a phased in reduction.