cuts should be - congress salary, president salary and all their

[2Design]

benefits and retirement - they are cutting us - while giving themselves raises and increases all the time

cut congress

[soothsayer]

1. yeah, that sweet retirement and health care. cut it!

[durablend]

2. Why do you hate Amerikkka?

It's HARD WERK being the presssinent!

:crazy:

[GetTheRightVote]

3. Well many of those who voted for * are getting their knife in the back now

:kick:

[sam sarrha]

4. Minimum wage, make'm use public transportation ONLY, public health care,

public schools for their children.. and live in PUBLIC HOUSING..

after all they are PUBLIC SERVANTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! let's treat like one. :hurts: :nopity:

[woodsprite]

5. Biden and Carper us Amtrak - I guess not for long n/t

[elehhhhna]

6. No yacht, no new Helicopters, no secret service men, no NOTHING.

[bunkerbuster1]

7. I've never fallen for that line of argument.

Yeah, it's fun to fantisize about heartless pols being forced to suffer, but in reality if you were to cut back their salaries, it'd only intensify the unhealthy attraction corrupt, evil men already have for political advancement.

There ought to be incentives for our best and brightest to go seek political office. If you're a US rep or Senator, you need to be able to maintain two households (and the one in DC ain't gonna be cheap, even if it's a modest apartment within walking distance of the Metro).

Another quick case-in-point and I gotta run. Locally, we have an elected school board that controls $1½ Billion (yes, with a B) in tax dollars every year. The board members earn eight grand (yes, $8,000) per year for their work.

Nope, no influence-peddling going on there, nossir!

[2Design]

20. when government was a place to serve and go home - not for

lifers - you had enough turn over to please the people - not congress trying to keep their jobs because of the fluff they get from all the corporations - they had more integrity

since they did not make a lot of money - they did what was right - they had a calling - and then they went home to other jobs

they aren't in dc that long and yet collecting salaries for the whole year - if they had less money they would have incentive to get the job done and out

[MadHound]

8. Better than cutting these items

Why not cut the military? We spend entirely too much on the military these days. How many damn nukes does one nation need? How many new computerized weapons systems? Why continue to fund a Star Wars scam that isn't going to bring results for at least twenty years? Do we truly need a military force that is stronger than the next twenty eight nations' military might combined? Can't we cut this number down to oh, say, greater than the next ten combined?

Our "leaders" apparently haven't learned anything from the collapse of the Soviet Union, a nation undone by overspending on their military in the face of increased US might. We have allowed that once dreamt of peace dividend slip through our hands, and now using the "War on Terror" as the new excuse, the merchants of death are finding willing customers once again on Capital Hill. Meanwhile, our debt increases each year, the poorest and most helpless in our society are neglected and forgotten, and the middle class is slowly sinking into poverty, unable to continue treading water, much less get ahead.

It is high time that we address the issue of military spending rather than going after marginal cuts in the budget that produce more headlines than savings. Currently our military spending takes up at least half the annual budget, and possibly much more, given the emergency funds Bush likes to call for and that the compliant Dems go along with. Also, there is a whole section of "black budgets" that we don't know the details of, money that goes to intelligence agencies and military divisions. Meanwhile, programs like welfare, that take up 0.8% of the federal budget get "reformed". Well, let us go after that largest of culprits before we cut further. I say it is high time we cut the military budget in half. Put that peace dividend back to use for the good of all Americans. And a probable side benefit would be that with a reduced military budget, it would make our "leaders" think twice before going on crusades for blood and oil. For the good of this country, before it is too late and we spend this country into oblivion, cut the military budget in half.

[DistantWind88]

9. "Currently our military spending ,

takes up at least half the annual budget..."

I think your math is just a tad off...

[MadHound]

10. No, not really friend.

If you take the amount that we spend directly on the military each year, along with the amount paid out to service the military induced debt, and the ongoing costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, you come out right at 49%. And that isn't even figureing in black budget costs that go to the CIA, the Pentagon's OSP, and other military and quasi-military programs. Here is a link that will perhaps better demonstrate<http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm>

[DistantWind88]

11. Well since the budget called for this year

is $2.5 trillion (not the $1.76 trillion your link cited), and the DoD budget is $419 billion; I disagree with you.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/08/BUDGET.TMP

http://www.taxfoundation.org/ff/FY2005perspective2.html

[MadHound]

12. And again, look at my link

Are you including the amount of military induced debt that we're having to service? No. Are you including the "black budget" spending that our government blindly hands out with no accountability? No, you're not. It is best friend to count the full amount of what we spend, rather than just the service amount that the government gives out.

Servicing that military debt is a major drain, one that we're going to be feeling for the next quarter century, and possibly beyond.

[DistantWind88]

13. Your link

is $800 Billion off just to start.

[MadHound]

14. Yes, my link is a bit outdated, sorry, the budget came out yesterday

And they probably haven't had a chance to update yet:eyes:

You are haggling over this minutiae though friend, and is getting absurd. My question to you, straight out, is do you favor cutting the military budget, yes or no. And if not, why not?

Please don't beat around the bush, just answer straight up, thanks. I'm trying to promote a dialogue on this concept of cutting the military budget, and it doesn't need to be bogged down on issues of little ulitmate import. Thanks.

[DistantWind88]

15. $800 B is minutiae to you?

WOW!

Yes, we can cut scores of billions from the military budget. There is a LOT of waste in the DoD budget. There is a lot of waste in the budget overall.

[MadHound]

16. Well, nice to see you come to the point

And nice to see that we agree. That is the stepping off point. And yes, I think that in this case wrangling over sources is minutiae. But just to keep playing the game, how do you arrive at that 800 billion dollar figure?

More back to the point, do you agree with cutting defense programs, such as cutting back on Star Wars tech, stealth tech, and other weapons programs?

[DistantWind88]

17. Your link said the budget was $1.7T

My link said it was $2.5T (so does the Wa Po right in front of me); that's a $.8T difference.

[MadHound]

18. Like I said before,

My source is a year out of date. It is referring to the Fiscal Year 2005 budget. The budget that Bush proposed yesterday is for FY 2006. Fiscal years run from July 1-June 30 every year.

[DistantWind88]

21. Their numbers were still wrong; no way was the budget for

FY05 $.8T less than the one proposed for FY06. And fiscal years (for the Federal Government) run from 1 Oct-30 Sep every year. 0-2.

[ProfessorGAC]

19. How About Means Testing, For Members Of Gov't?

They seem to bring that up every now and then, when it's apropos social programs. How about, if you're a multi-millionaire, you get a lower amount for being in Congress or prez? That wuold shake 'em up.
The Professor