Friday, July 21, 2006

Are you a fiscal conservative?

I am a fiscal conservative. That is the main reason I left the Republican Party.

As a fiscal conservative I feel that we should NOT run annual budget deficits. Annual deficits add to The National Debt and cause future generations to pay for both the National Debt and interest on The National Debt.

Many of the people who read this blog are Libertarians; however, there are Democrats and Republicans and Independents as well.

I do not want to increase taxes. In fact, I want to eliminate a lot of taxes and I want to simplify the tax code.

To decrease taxes and not run an annual budget deficit we need to cut a lot of domestic spending. I am going to list five places I feel we can cut spending. I would ask you to do the same in the comments section!

It is hard for me to limit spending cuts to five things; but, here it goes:

1. I would eliminate all pork and earmarks from Federal and State budgets. These projects mainly exist to get politicians re-elected. This would result in annual savings in the neighborhood of 70 billion dollars a year.

2. I would eliminate all agricultural subsidies. This is America and the freemarket should dictate farm prices. Did you know that the US government was subsidizing tobacco farmers at the same time it was suing the heck out of cigarette companies? The subsidies on sugar are staggering. We have limited the number of peanut farmers in the United States. All of this must go... This would result in annual savings of 20 billion dollars per year.

3. I would eliminate the entire Federal Department of Education. It should not exist in the first place. It is a tremendous waste of money. The Federal Department of Education is the main reason the cost of tuition and public education is increasing in the US in my opinion. Remember that The Federal Department of Education imposes a huge number of laws and rules on the fifty states and these laws cost huge sums of money to implement and have not improved education in my opinion. Also realize that all of the money that we have thrown at education have caused the costs of education to skyrocket. Everytime we give more money in grants colleges raise their tuition that same amount. It is an endless cycle. This would save about 64 billion a year.

4. I would eliminate all "no bid" contracts. I do not believe in "no bid" contracts in the first place. Our government ends up paying far more for many items due to "no bid" contracts. I have no idea how much this would save us per year; but, I think it would be a large number.
I would guess, and this is just a guess, that we would save at least 10 billion dollars a year.

5. I would consolidate Federal programs. We currently have far too many Federal programs. We have around 100 Federal programs for education. We have around 60 Federal programs for low income housing. We should consolidate all of these Federal programs immediately. This would eliminate a lot of needless adminstration and it would eliminate a lot of waste. I am not sure how much savings would result from this. I have seen estimates around 50 billion a year, so I will use that. I am not sure how much money this would save...

The above five items would save us around 264 nillion dollars a year. This eliminate much of the current annual budget deficit.

Please let me know what you would cut and please let me know what you think of my five cuts...


William Larsen said...

I would eliminate the Federal Department of Education. Return control of education to the local level. Washington thinks they know what is best for our children. They pride themselves by how much they return to Indiana. Isn’t it more sensible to leave the money in our local area; let us decide what’s best and how to spend it? Though I believe they are receiving an adequate education, I feel the school system could do much better. The Federal Government takes our taxes and doles them back to our schools with strings attached. In addition sending money to the Washington is like having the added cost of a middleman one does not need. We have to pay for all that federal education bureaucracy.

Eliminate Medicare and the Rx Drug Coverage. This has unfunded liabilities exceeding $7 Trillion. It cannot pay projected benefits past 2018. Why should those working now pay 2.9% of wages into this program plus contribute 25% of the cost through General Federal Revenue Taxes and not get anything for it? This would save close to $300 Billion a year.

Eliminate the Department of Energy tax credits and subsidies. There is no reason to give ADM over $5 billion a year to develop Ethanol. All energy sources should have to compete in the open market without taxpayer handouts.

Eliminate all federal tax credits, exemptions for personal Income Taxes. All these tax credits and exemptions do is too shift taxes from one group to another. What you spend your money on is your business. By doing this, we could lower the overall tax rate and reduce the time and cost of compliance. In simple, terms these tax credits and exemptions add nothing of value to the economy.

Reduce the president's, U.S. Representatives and Senator's salary by 10% each year for every year the budge is not balanced.

The Guard said...

Keep a watch on Arizona Election Politics

Andrew Kaduk said...

William and Mike,

You'll have to watch your verbiage, there are certain morons who will without hesitation soundbyte your ideas as:

1. They hate children and want them to all be stupid.

2. They hate poor and old people and want them to all die of preventable disease.

3. They hate the middle class and want them to be without power in their homes and automobiles.

4. Again, they hate the middle class and wish them to pay dearly in taxes each year.

5. They hate the government and wish elected officials to be paid so poorly that no one of any intellectual worth will run for office.

6. Mike hates farmers and wants them all to starve and succumb to debt and poverty.

7. Mike hates our local governments as they are usually the windfall beneficiaries of legislative pork.

Basically, Mike's idea to eliminate no-bid contracts is the only one that will pass without criticism from the socialist morons, as they all hate Halliburton and they think that the government owes each and every one of us all of lifes necessities. Your other bullets challenge that ridiculous belief.

It's sad that your collective ideas have the potential to create a balanced budget and a slim, agile and effective government...but they will only see the light of day under the most robust of criticism from the socialist idiots. What a crock of shit.

Vote Wise said...

My idea is a little different. I will violate your 5 things rule in the interest of stating my position. In the interest of getting the ball rolling in the right direction, I would like to see negative growth in the budget. We should do away with baseline increases each year and seek actual negative growth in the Federal Budget over a period of years. Based on 2006 budget projections this would save at least $1,500 Billion dollars by 2010, and move us a long way towards cutting the size and scope of the federal government.

Of course individual departments could and should be cut further.

1)I would halve the size of the Department of Education, and send the savings to the states with 3 strings (sorry William, nice to meet you by the way) i)States must effectively teach U.S. history, Government(including state and local), and civic responsibility. ii)States must pass through 90% to schools, and States must cut taxes to property. iii)States must allow school vouchers.

2)As far a subsidies, the family farmer is got it tough enough, and I'm not for pulling the rug out from under them. Having said that building a business on government subsidies should not be allowed. Farm operations over a certain not yet determined size should be able to stand on their own 2 feet and be inelligbale for subsidies.

3)I would cease foreign aid to countries who act against our interest. They deserve none.

4)I would re-deploy our cold war troops. Europe does not need our troops to protect them anymore, and some of those countries are more likely to help our enemies today than us.

5)I would reduce staffing by attrition in all Federal departments

Jeff Pruitt said...

Nothing easier than propping up your own straw man and then knocking it down huh andrew?

William Larsen said...

The problem as I see it is we have walked into a minefield. The dilemma is we have been walking blindly for seventy years. We add programs to help people, but we do not want to pay for them. We say we want to help seniors with their Rx drug coverage, but we do not want to pay for them and so we borrow money to do so. We say we want education, but again we do not want to pay for it and borrow more money. We say we want an energy department, but again we do not want to pay for it and borrow even more money.

We are so hooked on borrowing money that no one can just say no anymore.

So how do you get out of a minefield? You back track the way you got in following the same footsteps you took to get in.

Like wise, how did we get into this fiscal dilemma? We got into it by spending more than we should have, borrowing the money from the future, which added to our present economic growth now. Now we have a big problem. 45 cents of every general revenue federal tax dollar goes to pay interest on the National Debt.

Each year congress buys some other groups support with a tax credit here and an exemption there. It is time to eliminate all of it and get back to basics, which made this country great.

Medicare, Social Security, Energy Department did not make this country great. It was the American dream where in a land of opportunity a person can work had and prosper.

I am sorry, I do not want to fix the problem by passing it onto my children or yours. I say we cut it now. Pay me now or pay me more later is the saying.

Andrew Kaduk said...


What's the matter, did I steal your thunder?

Straw man? I see it more as deflating your tires before you get a chance to leave the starting line.

I can literally spend a couple of fun and easy hours pointing out where each of these arguments has been employed in public discourse by leaders of the Democratic party.

As a matter of fact, I shall do exactly that...but not today, as I have plans with my kids. Maybe later this evening, if the urge strikes me.

Anonymous said...

That's a great story. Waiting for more. » »

Anonymous said...

Looking for information and found it at this great site... »