Two replies that there is a spending problem, but no suggestions as to what sort of spending cuts should take place in order to deal with the problem.

It is too simplistic to say it is a spending problem, or a revenue problem. There are spending problems but looking to correct any particular spending problem will result in (unintended) consequences.

For example, let's say we spend too much on the military.
http://www.pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_defense-comparison.aspx
We spend more than the next 10+ countries combined. We should reduce military spending by X%. The consequences of this could be:

Unemployment in the defense and related industries would spike. Benefits for veterans might be slashed. Overseas bases might close. Local economies that are positively impacted by the location of these bases in the US and overseas would be devastated. Our ability to provide military support for allies would be significantly reduced. Our enemies would be emboldened. Our senior generals would not have nearly the same amount of swag with the groupies.

We have a spending problem, but how do we fix it?

Oh I don't know, how about an across the board 5 to 10 percent.

And when we are told that it's NOT possible, the sky will FALL and the planets in our solar system will be forevermore out of alignment...

Then try cutting ALL grants including those to states, cities, counties and staduim projects by 20 percent. For example ,we could live WITHOUT roadside/intersection flowers for a season or 2 right?

Then try enforcing our current laws so we actually take care of our working, tax paying class...

Does anyone have any idea how much revenue our governments have LOST by not enforcing our borders and leaving workers and families unprotected?

Attention greedy politicians: If we can't make it, YOU can't tax or TAKE it. No matter how high you raise the rates, in the end you get a greater part of a SMALLER pie which is STILL less than a little sample of a MUCH greater pie.

So what do you make of the thousands or MILLIONS of families whose earning potential was stunted for YEARS because of a premature death, caused by those who weren't even supposed to be here? Then you have the lucky ones who survive the encounter, they make marked less due to long term injury or become OUTRIGHT disabled and HELLO MEDICAID.

Then there's always the LOCAL CIDs stop taking FED/State grants until this crisis is averted...

Take Away?
Gore all ox's EQUALLY without regard to race, creed or sexual orientation.

Gee, George Bush will go down in history as the most powerful president since the founding of this country. No other president has been credited with so much power and influence to set into place the UNCHANGABLE course of our country than Bush. If all the Dems are correct, Obama will go down in history as the most weak president since he has been unable to LEAD this country in the change he promised - because as you so appropriately point out Greg, Obama doesn't have the ability to manage consequences and provide vision and direction and the leadership for moving forward.

The good news is that I have fully embraced the Democratic Party now and will forever be a loyal Dem. Just this morning during our weekly staff meeting, I blamed all our financial issues on my predecessor (even though I've been the director for four years now) and blamed any lack of success in our strategic plan on my staff (since they can't seem to get along and get the job done.) I've also reassigned responsibilities so that the more capable are doing more work and the less capable are being excused from work - but to be FAIR, I have decided to pay everyone the exact same salary. As you might imagine, there's been some issues, but I'm off for a three-week vacation in Hawaii because I'm the boss. Yes, I encourage all my former Republican friends to reconsider party affiliation - life is actually pretty good on the other side!!

Okay, Pittsburgh...that might just be the most beautiful thing I've read in a long time....

Obama could have ended all of it four years ago. However, he didn't end it, he expanded it. It's to late to blame bush any more.

Obama owns it now GregRodgers. Your great hope and change is just as much a war criminal as bush. Tastes like a sh*t taco doesn't it?

PROBLEM!!! You CAN'T spend what you DON'T have...

But if you're so inclined to buy me a hamburger today, I'll gladly pay you Tuesday...

Spending is NOT stimulative. Japan tried that crap for 10 years, and it didn't help. The government creates nothing. If the government spending stops, other spending will take its place. And it will be far more effective.

Government spending is just taking the money in with the left hand and doling it out with the right. After, of course, skimming a large percentage of it off the top.

Yep he sure did, moved it right into the Farm Bills.

Of which upward of 80 percent of the spending has NOTHING to do with actual farming per se, but providing/paying for food PROGRAMS.

"It's the end of welfare as we know it, But I feel fine..."

That's absurd.

In what way is it absurd?

Karsten, revenues are necessary to run this country whether everyone uses all the services or not. Taxes are revenues. You don't pay what is legally owed, you'll face the IRS. This is absurd: "The only money the government has is taken at gun point from the citizens. We used to call this robbery now we call it revenue." If a person has to be locked up as a fugitive from justice, guns may be employed, just not to operate the IRS. If you don't want to obey the laws here in the US, leave and go some place where you agree with all the laws. You're going to be on a long, long journey.

"If you don't want to obey the laws here in the US, leave and go some place where you agree with all the laws." And now you, as well, have lost the right to be taken seriously.

This is a tired argument. If you don't like the laws, you should change them. That's why we have the process of changing the laws. And I, like many, feel that we are already taxed too much, in many different ways. And that our government spends far more than it should.

So "go find someplace with laws you like" is an ignorant statement. At best.

Also, regarding the "at the point of a gun" comment, this is absolutely true. If you're in violation of IRS law, how do they enforce them? With guns. The government gets what it wants because it is better armed than the populace. If you don't agree to go with them to be incarcerated, they will brandish weapons, threaten you with weapons, and finally will use weapons. So yeah, laws are enforced at the point of a gun. Just like taxes are collected....

Karsten, who made you the King of all Patch threads? I don't care whether you take me seriously, but it is not for you to decide whether others do. Thought you were all about freedom? The law is the law. You don't like it, fine, break it and see if you like the punishment better than compliance. You don't get to choose which laws you get to obey without facing consequences. The guns don't come out unless you're a fugitive. Good citizens don't have to worry about govt. use of guns against them until they break the law. Well, there are some accidents, and there's war. That "point of a gun" in reference to legal taxes crap is what is ignorant.

Wow. "King of all Patch threads." Cool new title, thanks for the moniker...

"The guns don't come out unless you're a fugitive. Good citizens don't have to worry about govt. use of guns against them until they break the law. "

So what you're saying is good little citizens follow the laws and don't question the status quo, right? Because to do so means that you're a bad person. Got it.

Just because a law is a law does not make it a just law. Or a good law. And the government gets to enforce its bad decisions "at the point of a gun." It's up to us as citizens to question the government. It's our duty, actually. As Americans. We don't have that right just because somebody thought it would be a neat idea to be able to say whatever we want to say. It's so that we will question our leaders and keep them on the correct path, whatever that may be. So if they pass a law that is silly, such as, for example, forcing a company against its religious beliefs to supply something at its cost, then it is the duty of that company to stand up and refuse to comply.

That is what America a great country. Not the over-indulged government arbitrarily passing laws because it thinks it knows what's best for us.

Settle down, Karsten. I didn't anoint you. I asked you b/c of the comments you make declaring this or that of another poster, mind reading, etc. And you're quite proficient at twisting someone else's words or inserting them where they weren't. Example:
"So what you're saying is good little citizens follow the laws and don't question the status quo, right? Because to do so means that you're a bad person. Got it."

Nope - not at all what I said. When good citizens follow the law, then no guns are pulled. You can question all you want, campaign against, protest, petition. But until the law is changed, you must obey or suffer the consequences. Laws are challenged all the time, which is why the courts stay busy. That's also our right. But until the law is struck down by the courts or amended or repealed, it is the law. Your opinion on the law doesn't negate it or make it unenforceable. That's pretty simple. I think Grant is right, you do have a problem with logic. I'm not sure if it's that you go around in circles or you're in a spiral. You make it way too hard on yourself. I think you have a distorted view of America.

That's fine. Accuse me of not listening or talking in circles. But I've noticed that you're not really paying attention to what I say, either.

What I said was, "If you don't agree to go with them to be incarcerated, they will brandish weapons, threaten you with weapons, and finally will use weapons. So yeah, laws are enforced at the point of a gun."

And this is true. I never said that you should disobey the laws. I said that IF you did, then... This is a little different from what you said. And it doesn't make my statement untrue - in fact it goes along with our premise that we either follow the law or we face the consequences. The same thing I'm saying. My point is the terminal point of those consequences involve federal authorities with firearms....

You know full well what that "at the point of a gun" phrase in reference to taxes is meant to imply - fear. You break any law - local, state, federal, and you obstruct justice, refuse to comply, yes, you may be facing a gun. The IRS is not going to come knocking at your door with a gun to do a tax audit. Lots of people have evaded taxes and still haven't seen a govt. gun in their face.

Of course they will. And those that have evaded taxes haven't seen a gun for one of three reasons - haven't been caught, went along quietly, or complied and paid what was owed. Any other options, the guns come out.

But that's not really the point. My point was that the threat of force is what ensures compliance. There's plenty of laws that I follow because I want to. Plenty I follow because I don't feel it's important enough to me to face the consequences if I don't. And others I choose not to follow, and I'll accept the consequences should I get caught. Just like everybody else.

Really, the IRS auditors carry? As a part of their job? You're something else, Karsten. The rest of what you said,? . . . you're belatedly agreeing with me.

You and Racer remind me of a couple of little boys walking around in their daddy's shoes. You should rethink that breaking the law stuff. You might come to regret that. If you break laws (dishonest), you probably lie (dishonest), too, so it's a wasted effort to take you seriously. Not like everybody else. That's delusional. That's a sad and risky way to make yourself feel better about something you must know is wrong.

IRS does carry. Not auditors, granted, but if you don't cooperate with auditors, who do you think shows up next? Please, think before you post.

So, you never speed? At all, not one little bit? Maybe especially on roads that you think the speed limit is a bit too low for? If you find $20 in front of a supermarket, you report that to the IRS? There's lots of little examples every day. But, if you don't, you don't. Good for you. I guess you are a good citizen.

Oh, and illegal isn't the same thing as wrong. Wrong has to do with morals. I follow my morals every day. Even on things that aren't illegal that I still know are wrong. I don't always stop and ask myself "Would Uncle Sam want me to do this?" I stop and ask if God would want me to do something, and try to act accordingly. THAT is my center. Not government.

Yes, I think before I post. And, again, you're just belatedly agreeing with me on the gunpoint-tax issue.

No, I don't speed. Learned that lesson a few expensive times a couple of decades ago. Speeding doesn't get you there any faster, in most cases. Have you ever noticed, driving along and somebody flies past you. You stay steady on the speed limit, and then you pull up right behind or beside the driver in a hurry at the next traffic light? And speeding is dangerous, especially in the digital age adding more distractions. Haha. This driving talk reminds me of that old, old song, "Keep your mind on your driving, keep your hands on the wheel, and keep your snoopy eyes on the road ahead . . . "

I haven't been lucky enough to find money, but I believe I would probably donate it to the church or a charity if there was no evidence of its owner in the vicinity. I'm not perfect by any means, but if it's not mine I can't enjoy it. Report $20 to the IRS? It's a wash if you just donate it. I don't cheat on taxes.

If you're constantly asking yourself if something is wrong and whether to do it, maybe you're conflicted. You're the one who said you choose which laws to break - your confession, not my accusation. God probably wants you to obey the laws.

You're nothing if not persistent.