The budget proposal no one is talking about....

It is not a black and white answer. I would rather see smaller deficits through a reduction in out of control government spending, and reform of entitlement programs that are too expensive. I'd be happy with a smaller federal footprint in our lives and an economy that moves and grows with fewer government contstraints.

 

okay, fair enough. let's take a look at your wish list:

"I would rather see smaller deficits through a reduction in out of control government spending...."
The budget control act of 2011 cuts roughly 1.5 trillion dollars from the debt over the next ten years. Small potatoes compared to out entire debt but a good start. The fiscal cliff bargain, whose proper name escapes me, raised roughly 1.9 trillion over the next ten years, 1 trillion of which is designated toward deficit reduction. Lastly, the sequester cuts were another 1.1 trillion in cuts to defense and discretionary spending (pet's of both parties). This accounts for roughly 3.5 trillion dollars in debt reduction over the next ten years. Will this, coupled with good growth, be enough to eliminate our debt altogether? Of course not, but it is the amount that most economists, from both sides of the aisle, agree that can be cut from the budget without sending the economy back into a tail spin.

"and reform of entitlement spending programs that are too expensive..."
This portion of our deficit reduction has not been addressed as of yet.....but it needs to be. I honestly look for some unanimity of belief to gather around raising the retirement age of social security and medicare. I would really like a serious audit of the disability roles because folks who got kicked off of welfare in the 90's quickly figured out that they only need to get a doctor to say that they were disabled in order to keep getting their checks. Further, it didn't take some crooked doctors long to figure out that if they call someone disabled they essentially gain a patient for life. I see this ugliness every day in my business as people try to finance a mattress or mattress set and they are on disability but there isn't a damn thing wrong with them. I've even watched them limp to my front door and stop limping once inside and pick up the limp again as soon as they walked out the door. Fucking pathetic and it makes me even more angry because people like that make it hard to defend these programs for the folks who genuinely need the assistance.

"I'd be happier with a smaller federal footprint in our lives...."
Agreed. Between warrantless wire tapping, eaves dropping on emails or using drones to monitor Americans here in America, there are several issues where the federal government has usurped it's power IMO and needs to be checked. Since this has gone on through a Rep and Dem administration we need to assume that this is a problem for all Americans, regardless of their political stripes. My one exception for this would be Obamacare. Flawed as it may be, it is a step in the right direction.

"and an economy that moves and grows with fewer government restraints...."
I think what we need is an economy that moves and grows with smarter government restraints.....I say this because we saw the effects of taking away all rules and regulations from 2000-2008 and, frankly, I don't think anyone wants to go back there.

 

Yet it keeps going up...and up...and up.

It's bigger government...more entitlement based...larger federal footprint...and not smarter government. How can you be opposed to these yet still like Obamacare? It doesn't make sense.

 

Obamacare will, in the long run, save us all money. As I indicated it is not a perfect bill and even Obama has admitted that some changes will need to be made along the way.

The speed with which government expenditures have grown have slowed since Obama was elected, which says a lot considering the break neck speed that the Bush Administration was racking it up. You will recall that the vast majority of government spending that has caused problems was the result of Bush and the Republican congresses he enjoyed. For Obama to have come into office and immediately cut that spending would have meant that we had to immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, which would have created power vacuum's in both countries and likely sealed their doomed fate, and immediately take away medicare part D, which millions of seniors use to buy medication, as well as the host of other government spending initiatives that Bush created. To have done so would have meant immediate doom to the economy and no reasonable person, regardless of politics, would have done that.

 

I'd like to know how the fuck you know this.

The idea of Obama care was to put more people on the system to lower costs.

"For those who already have insurance, the Affordable Care Act is expected to increase premiums by 14 percent. That makes sense when you think about some of the people likely to enter the market: Those who previously found coverage too expensive to buy a health plan, perhaps due to a health condition."

"If you’re one of those uninsured Californians, by the way, the Affordable Care will actually lower the cost of insurance (compared to life without Obamacare) by 14 percent."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...are-hit-premiums-lets-break-down-the-numbers/

 

So basically, the way it is playing out, if you had health insurance, you are now getting screwed twice.

How?

We will subsidize those that couldn't afford it in the first place.

 

You and I and every other person who currently has health insurance have been footing the bill for the people who do not have insurance for many, many years. It is part of the reason that our health care costs have sky rocketed: when uninsured people got sick they still went to the emergency room for treatment and then never paid the bill. The hospitals don't just eat those costs, they pass them along to everyone else who does pay.

 

I guess you don't understand that under Obama care we are still subsidizing them........ Thats the point.

Obama care mandates certain coverage. Poor people are still poor. Obama care doesn't make them not poor.

Our premiums will now go up because they are forced onto a system. Guess whose paying for that.. Me and you, again.

 

United States postal service. Amtrack. Social Security. Medicaid/ Care. Government has a great history of success. Health care will be no different. The more government gets involved in something, the quicker it goes to shit.

 

Pelosi?...Reid? Are you trying to pretend Bush had control of everything?

Your boy Obama had the Oval Office, House, and Senate and still couldn't pass a budget. I also like how those on the left omit the "stimulus" when they discuss spending. This was a huge failure for which we'll be paying for decades.