http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Fy2010_spending_by_category.jpg
http://www.brookings.edu/multimedia/video/2010/1022_at_brookings_podcast.aspx
| Category | Amount (Billions) | Percentage of Budget |
| Social Security | $696.87 | 19.63% |
| Department of Defense | $665.27 | 18.74% |
| Unemployment/Welfare/Other | $572.62 | 16.13% |
| Medicare | $454.05 | 12.79% |
| Medicaid/State Children’s Health Insurance Plan | $290.75 | 8.19% |
| Interest on National Debt | $164.37 | 4.63% |
| Health and Human Services | $78.81 | 2.22% |
| Transportation | $72.78 | 2.05% |
| Dept. of Veteran’s Affairs | $52.54 | 1.48% |
| Dept. of State | $51.83 | 1.46% |
| Dept. of Housing | $47.57 | 1.34% |
| Dept. of Education | $46.86 | 1.32% |
| Dept. of Homeland Security | $42.96 | 1.21% |
| All other programs (each under 1%) | $312.76 | 8.81% |
| TOTAL | $3,550 | 100.00% |
Important note: The 2010 budget has a $1.42 trillion ($1420 billion) deficit, meaning the government overspent its revenue/income by that amount. To bring the budget back into balance it would have to cut spending (or increase taxes) by $1.42 trillion.
If you were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government (who was committed to cutting government spending) what would you cut? Why? How would you explain your cuts to angry voters who directly benefit from the programs you are cutting?
If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government who was committed to cutting government spending I would most definitely cut down on Social security and Department of Defense’s because the two have the highest percentage in the budget.Social security has a 19.63% in the budget and department of defense had a 18.74% . These are two high numbers and yes we do need the two for various reasons BUT we can’t be putting that much money into them there for I feel that we should cut little by little each time so it doesn’t all come at ones and really hit everyone and cause more damage to the economy and the people. I do understand that there are millions of people who directly benefit from the programs that are going to be cut but we need to look at this as a bigger picture “WE ALL ARE in bad situations so if one will help the other which in this case it will because less money will be spend on the two programs we can find ways to spread it out evenly which till now is not anywhere near happening and maybe all programs will be equal and no one will take advantage of anything.
ReplyDeleteLet me first say, from a realist perspective ever single program listed needs reform. To what it may be, I cannot provide. Since, I am a Representative committed to cutting spending; I would go for cutting Social Security and Department of Veterans. To the voters, I would explain to them simply that we are spending to much on this thing and we need to regulate things. Obviously, it affects everyone but we need to change something around in order for it to be working effectively. As far for the Department of Veterans, I deeply appreciate the work that they have done but these changes are needed. There are more urgent things that need to be funded. Education, to benefit the children's future. If they have no education, there will be no future to carry on. The fact that the Department of Veterans, is higher than Education is a little ridiculous to me. The key is, before we start cutting these programs; ideas need to be cleared, regulations & back-ups need to be made and planned way ahead of time. Therefore, if they programs are cut then we can have a plan to go by and it won't look so bad.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a Representative or a Senator, I would cut the spending on the Department of Defense. I think that we spent way too much money on the Military when clearly we shouldn’t really involve ourselves in the affairs of other countries. Even though we are protecting our country from any threats as well, we shouldn’t spend as much money as we are. I think we should cut back a little bit, bring our troops home and see how it goes from there. I feel that we should protect our country first and foremost, rather than protecting other countries before us. Another thing I would cut is “All the other programs that are under 1%”. We spent a lot of money on what probably won’t benefit us in any way. They are there because we want those programs, not because we need them. They take up less than 1%, so it doesn’t make sense to pay $312 for them all. What I wouldn’t cut are the Spending on Medicare/Medicaid, Education Spending, Welfare, and anything else on that list. Education helps people better themselves for their future career goals; Medicare/Medicaid insures people safety with their health and everything else such as transportation and Social Security are important too. I feel like cutting Social Security and Transportation would be stupid because Social Security ensures our rights and not many people have a car to travel long distances in.
ReplyDeleteWe do not want to raise taxes because we will see a 15 trillion dollars cumilative hole for the next 10 years and that would be adding 15 trillion dollars to our national det. So they should extend them for now but not to extend them permanently. I would cut transportation because thats what a lot of people use now to get to where ever they need to go. I would tell the angry voters who benifit for that to not worry you will still gain enogh money and its the better thing for the people and if your not happy with it go find another job.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Caraballo period 5
I think we are going to have to do some of both; raise taxes and cut government spending. If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government committed to cutting government spending I would cut a little from each category overall making a big impact. I would however drastically cut social security spending from 696.87 billion to 550 billion. Massive programs such as these really need to get organized because if they really had a thorough investigation of every individual with a social security number they would realize that half the people claiming they are disabled are in fact not, people all over the U.S. are getting money that they don’t deserve because they “have a bad back” and the harsh and ugly truth is we don’t have money to just throw away because people are lazy. I think this is a really big issue and every person who files for disability should be heavily investigated and annually checked up on.
ReplyDeleteThe same goes for unemployment benefits and welfare which should be cut from 572.62 to 450 billion. If a person lives with someone who has a steady high paying job why should they receive unemployment? If they are able to keep the clothes on their back, the roof above their head, and the food in their stomachs that should be enough. Why should money be spent supporting materialistic extravagant lifestyles? I am not saying to cut back from the people who really need these things, but from checking out and realizing who actually do, we can weed out those who don’t and save loads of money.
Medicaid should be cut 20 billion and Medicare should be cut 50 billion for the same reasons. Many people claiming to need Medicare who “don’t have jobs” really work off the books and have money they just don’t want to spend it on their health.
State run public housing (loosely referred to as the projects) which is government subsidized is also another one that falls into this category and should be cut by 10 billion. A lot of people who live in the projects really over qualify and are just using the free rent to their advantage.
Also, as discussed before on our blog the department of defense spends an extremely excessive amount of our budget money on unnecessary things. I think this cost should be cut from 665.27 to 550 billion. We should cut things like band sizes and weapon making. If we are supposedly getting out of a war then this number should drop a little by itself but we already have excess numbers of weapons so that production of them should be cut drastically.
I would explain to voters that only the people who are not doing the right thing are the ones who are going to be penalized and that the new cut backs are actually positive because they will create a more fair and balanced outcome in each category.
Melissa Iachetta
Period 3
I feel that all this government spending is important to keep our economy stabilized otherwise we would spiral out of control. Having said that I find there is alot of spending in the budget that is excessive and unimportant, others I find are being given to much money to fill there slot. I feel that government spending on military and homeland security has always been excessive. I understand that we always need to be ready and that we are a super power nation and need keep our military strong. However i feel like spending nearly one fifth of the nations budget(18.74%) protecting and fighting other countries is just a waste of time and resources.It should be slashed down. I do not believe in raising the American peoples taxes because we are in a recession as it is the last thing the people want to see is a bump in their taxes. I do feel that people making over 250,000 dollars should have a raise in there taxes. This will slightly help to stimulate the economy and people making over 250K will barely notice a slight raise in there taxes which I think is a win win situation.
ReplyDeletei would cut unemployment/welfare etc because it seems that its taking a large amount of money and it does not seem as much of a necessity compared to the main things that are using money.i would tell them that these cuts would benefit them later on in the future and also we would try to find ways to help them get back on track.
ReplyDeleteBecause I'm a republican, I know what I wouldn't be cutting out for sure:
ReplyDeleteSocial Security and its adminstration. Americans are way too depending on this resource and not in the near future will people let go of this hold - until the unemployment rate starts to decrease then the emphasis can be lifted little by little. Because the Republicans are in control I would say let this stay as it is for the next year - because if they do go through what they said about creating jobs then the spending can change for sure.
National Environmental Protection Agency / Energy Administration.
The Republicans have been advocating the need for the environment and energy resources to be conserved. They’ve been promising on this and cutting it off will not help the American public or the land that we continually to take advantage of.
If I were a republican in power, I would mostly focus on cutting back on two major departments:
National Space and Aeronautics Administration and Department of National Defense.
Space? Let’s be honest, the American public will shed tears knowing that there will be lost money from the space fund because that’s not what matters to the people. Going to space isn’t going to any sort of emotion from the people in fact some people will definitely be surprised that there even is money going into that when there’s so much more to worry about. Even though, I know that this department is so much than just sending people up to discover stars and space. American Public would approve of the cutting of this.
National Defense? There’s been much talk about how much defense does the United States have and I think that most people can agree that even though it is a top priority cutting the percentage by three will not bring drastic changes. If anything, that money can go to another department that truly needs money.
Livianette Cabrera
period 3
Government spending is way over its limit, and should not stay at its current rate, because the deficit will get worse over time. People are getting taxed all the time, but it does not pay off for everything nationally, but mainly city or state wide. Things should not get completely cut off from the entire existence of a program, but reforms should be made, in order to maintain a certain order and substantial gain in some sort of money. All the things shown in the pie chart are useful to the country. Social security and welfare are two of the three top categories in the budget that are the highest in spending, since so many people need it. If I was senator I don’t think it would be wise to cut something out that is so necessary to the people. While it sets the government back a little, it is better than having more people on the street and having to deal with them. One thing I don’t like is the huge amount of spending on the department of defense. There should be some room for cuts and change in the amounts of weapons the country obtains, trades, and sells. For one thing, it is risky and dangerous to have so many weapons around, and it also keeps promoting more war, which is also something that is putting us in debt. The government does so much for these wars, and what is happening in other countries, rather than America, that they lose touch of what is important. Our defense is useful in many ways, such as not having foreign invaders attack our country, but I think we have enough to keep people out. Threatening doesn’t even work anymore with weapons, so having them around us all the time, is just more of a burden. I don’t think the voters would have a huge problem with this, unless they see weapons as a good thing, but many are upset already with the wars. I would explain that it would have too many consequences to handle for the country.
ReplyDeleteAnastasia Papis pd 5
I honestly do not think that we have the availability to be able to cut government spending. Things in the highest spending spots such as Social Security, Unemployment, Medicare, and Children’s health insurance, are all things that are extremely important and ‘out there’ right now. Unemployment has been at its highest, and their is no way we can cut budgets for that. Do you know how many people are struggling with unemployment, even with the benefits they are receiving? The people can’t afford to have that cut. Also, Social Security is an extremely important topic of budget, that is why it is number 1 spent.If we cut expenses to that, more and more people would be in need of assistance. In the video, the woman states that extending the Bush tax cuts is completely unaffordable, which means taxes will most likely be raised, not now, but later when the recession relaxes. So I am guessing that instead of cutting spending, the taxes will be raised. If people don’t want their taxes raised as much as they are going to be, they would have to deal with some cuts in the governments budgets, most likely to be health care.
ReplyDelete-Chelsea R. PD 3
My goal for the United States is to cut its deficit by half to 710 billion dollars which is still a lot but it becomes a more manageable amount. The first item that I would cut would be the budget for national defense. We are currently fighting 1 war over in the Middle East while still deploying soldiers in Iraq for “peacekeeping purposes.” Is this all necessary? Or a more important question “is war profitable?” No it is not. A truck can be used to run a shipping business while a tank is made to be destroyed. War is not profitable and the toll it takes on our deficit is 18.74%. To keep fighting the wars we have already is to fight a losing battle and as a result, it should be the first things to be cut. It should be cut to 332.63 which is still an enormous amount; in comparison it is still more than what the US spends on Medicaid. Another thing that does not need cutting but needs more reform is health care; even though the idea of health care reform has been opened up, our current health care system is still far from idealistic. The price of health care is still too high and as a result, takes a toll on Medicare and Medicaid expenses. Another cut that has to be made is Social Security which takes up 19.63% of our budget which amounts to 696.87. Right now social security gives money to everybody who is retired no matter their age; that is a huge mistake, we do not need to give money to people who is not in need of money, it’s that simple. People with the means to take care of themselves should not be given more money to take care of them when that money can go to people who is more deserving of it. I would cut social security and set an income limit to which if that person meets that income limit, they would not receive social security come the retirement age. The reason being is that the government is not the only entity who should be fiscally responsible, people should not rely on the government for benefits when they have the means to benefit themselves.
ReplyDeleteEssentially my plan is not affecting the middle class or the majority of the population much. To recap, I call for cutting of the defense budget, health care reform so health care is more affordable, and cutting of social security to people who have the means to provide for themselves. As a result, I think that can cut the budget down to 710 billion dollars or half of the current national deficit. In the years that follow and the economy recovers and revives itself, people become more prosperous and then taxes can be raise for example, the Bush tax cuts can be allowed to expire, and we will get rid of the deficit when the economy recovers.
If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government, I would cut social security because as of right now, the highest percentage of the budget goes to that program. I would explain this to the voters by arguing that it won’t hurt the program as much as it would any other program. Cutting from any of the other programs wouldn’t be too wise, as social security presently takes the highest percentage of the budget. It would only balance social security with the rest of the government programs. I would also argue that the government needs to focus on investing on the youth because they are the future of this nation. If medicaid, health insurance and/or education were to be cut it would be devastating in the long run, for we will be jeopardizing the success of our children. They will take care of the country in the future, therefore the well-being of our future leaders is of great importance.
ReplyDeleteMariela Ortiz (period 3)
If I was a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government, I would like to cut Social Security, because this cost the highest amount of money in all of the spending programs. Government has been talking about Social Security issue for several years. According to Social Security: Bankrupt System Will Impact Markets Sooner than Expected, (http://seekingalpha.com/article/134542-social-security-bankrupt-system-will-impact-markets-sooner-than-expected) the Social Security system is bankrupt already. If government doesn’t cut the money, there will be no Social Security system in 2032. As time passed by, Medical techniques have been improving and it keeps people away from death. Most of the elders live until they are 80 years old. One man is not only paying the taxes for one elder. They may pay the taxes for two elders and the number of elders will keep growing. I believe if we start to do something for it, the problem won’t be that bad in the future. People will rather get less pay than nothing.
ReplyDeletePd 5
If I was a Representative or Senate in the U.S. government, and I was committed to cutting government spending I would want to see the categories that so much money is going towards being the ones cut. It was be easier to make cuts on these spending, such as social security (19.63%) and the Department of Defense (18.74%), than it would be to cut things that we don’t spend very much money on. For example: The dept. of Homeland Security and the dept. of Education. By cutting these slightly, it wouldn’t have as great as a loss as it would be for the lesser categories. I would explain my cuts to angry voters by trying to help them understand that by making cuts to these categories their taxes will not have to be raised and ensure them that they will still be receiving the care and protection that these things promise as they did before.
ReplyDelete~Sarah Bianchi
I think if I were a Representative or a Senator in the U.S Government I would cut government spending and raise taxes. If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government committed to cutting government spending I would also cut a little back from each category. I would cut back on the categories that we spend a lot on, such as, unemployment and welfare programs because some people actually claim that they need to be on welfare plans when they are making enough money to support themselves and a family. I think I would also cut back on the Department of Defense programs because the amount should start to decrease a little if we cut back on weapon making and if we are supposed to be getting out of war. I would first start telling angry voters that if they thought about the future generations of America then they would understand than they wouldn’t want to continue to place additional burdens on our children and grandchildren with the excessive spending we are doing now.
ReplyDeleteShazia Rahaman prd 3
Dep. Of Defense I believe the economy can regulate with-out it. My opinion also is that since it is known for ‘safe guard security for the US’ & such & so is ‘homeland security’ than it’s clearly a waste of money for both.
ReplyDeleteDepartment of Housing- people receive money from welfare & such now it’s like meeting half way. Welfare pays for livable matters now it’s time for people to also take matters into their own hands & figure something out with welfare. I understand that this is what welfare gives but there should open up more job opportunities for people that have welfare & some jobs specifically for them so they can be able to get out of the projects and make everything more standardized, & beneficial for both the economy & the people that live in the project. It will give them a safer environment for those who actually try to make a living for themselves under hard circumstances; as for those who don’t try & just live off of anything welfare gives them, They’ll need to live and learn and figure out how they’re going to survive because it’s not right for our taxes & money & even people that are struggling to have to pay for those who are lazy, or drug addicts, etc. Its- people who try vs. people who don’t.
Georgina Papazafiropoulos
Period:3
I think that cutting anyone of these would affect our government roughly. Instead of cutting down, I would increase the taxes for a while until the government is where it needs to be economically. Many people would be upset with this, but in the long run it would be doing the country good, so it will have some sort of positive out come in the end. As opposed to cutting them; would directly affect our government in a negative way. And people would complain. So either way the people won't be happy, and logically increasing makes better sense.
ReplyDeleteSHARON KAHN
ReplyDeleteAs a representative or Senator in the U.S government I believe that government spending and budgeting must be cut drastically before we decide to raise taxes again. The government is spending money at an uncontrollable wait and our entire economy is being affected by it. As much as I hate to say it, I believe that we have no other choice but to cut back on spending for Social Security. As important and beneficial as social security is, it makes up nearly twenty percent of our government budget, which is a little more than we can afford right now. It's extremely difficult to decide where else to pull money from and cut budgets because each of the items listed are so important to our citizens. I figure that the only place really appropriate to cut budgets would have to be "all other programs each under 1%). These programs are most likely the least important as they only make up less than 1% each of our budget as it is. Cutting budgets here could potentially save our economy approximately 312.76 billion dollars. As difficult as it will be to gain followers that benefit from these cuts I will inform them of the crisis that we are in now. I will ensure them that these cuts are not permanent and are only temporary. Once our economy can stand on its on two feet again, these items can go back up to taking up more of our budget. In the meantime this is our only option and cutting back on funding for these items will save the American people from higher taxes.
If I were a representative or senator of the United States I would cut the Department of Defense, which is the second highest expensive. The Department of Defense costs us $665.27 billion and takes up 18.74% of the budget. Of course we need a good defense system to keep our country and our people safe, but I think cutting it back a little wouldn't hurt anyone. If we cut back on the Department of Defense we would have more money to spend on other things that we need, such as maybe some day being able to pay off the National Debt. I know that many people would argue that we need the Department of Defense to be strong and steady but if we don't cut back on that we could be setting ourselves up for disaster.
ReplyDelete-Chrysanthe Thomatos pd. 3
Government spending is necessary and important to our economy, it stabilizes and controls our economy. Although I do believe much of the spending is excessive and unimportant. Too much money is being given, for example government spending on the military and home land security. Yes we are a very powerful nation and need to be prepares but spending one fifth of the nation’s budget on protection of our country is unnecessary, it is a waste of time and money. To be spending so much money on something that seems to unimportant compared to other bigger issues. War is not profitable, things are made just to be destroyed, to use this money just to watch it get destroyed is ridiculous. This should be the first thing to cut. I do not believe that taxes should be raised for the “working class” because it is hard as it is for some to even make enough money to last a week, a rasie in taxes would only make things more difficult, and may even make people loose hope at our economy or society to ever get better. Although I do believe that people making over 250,000 dollars should pay higher taxes. Of course the old argument of “this isn’t fait” or “this is not equal” will come into play. But really whars right is right and what will work will work. They have the money and although this may cause a loss of jobs which I doubt because the raise in taxes will be barely noticable, it will slightly help stimulate the economy.
ReplyDeleteKatelyn Disalvo
If I was a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government, i would cute out the social security and welfare are the two of the three top categories that are the highest in spending, because so many people are in need of it. I feel that all this "government spending" and the "spending cuts" are fairly more important than anything, to keep our economy stabilized. I don’t understand why we need to keep giving the government our money, so he can provide more weapons, to support our troops, and military forces. I feel that the military is strong enough, and it has enough power. As far as the bush tax cuts, they are completely unaffordable, therefore that means that the taxes will most likely be raised higher. I believe that if we do something about this spending cuts, the people would rather like to get paid, than have nothing.
ReplyDelete-ariana medunjanin period 3
If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government (who was committed to cutting government spending) I would cut the department of Defense. That is the second highest expensive percentage. The department of Defense costs $665.27 billion dollars which takes up 18.74% I think that this is one of less imporant departments. If we cut this spending we can gain money and use it for more important things in the US such as social security or insurance. Most of the other departments shown above on the chart, are hard to make decesions on cutting because they are so important in our lives in the United States but for the defense, we could defintely cut that government spending.
ReplyDeleteALEXA KANE
PERIOD 3
How would you explain your cuts to angry voters who directly benefit from the programs you are cutting?
If I was a Representative or a Senator in the U.S government and was committed to cutting government spending, I think I would cut Social Security and Department of Veterans. I would explain to the public how we are spending too much on these departments and we need to start regulating programs. The immense amount of money that is being put into these two departments makes up about almost 40% of the budget. The fact that almost half of money from the government is going to two programs that don’t need much, is ridiculous. There are programs on the list that need more such as Education, and even Transportation. Although I believe that money should be taken out a little at each time, because if you take out all the money at once it could possibly make the economy worse.
ReplyDeleteKim Hanlon Period 5
The health insurance plan has got to go. There’s no question that once that’s done and out of the way, not only will we have more money to work with, but less programs will have to suffer as much as they do now, being under the health care plan. I don’t think there’s any more we can do to the education system, so that’s in the clear. I am sure as hell not cutting the veteran’s funds (for obvious reasons), so obviously all the other programs are going to get little cuts. Once we find our way out of the recession, I promise I’ll restore all the
ReplyDeleteVittorio Rivera period 3
As a representative or Senator of the U.S I believe that government spending must change before taxes are raised again., although in our economy’s financial situation, people are dependent on such government resources.
ReplyDeleteThe highest contributions to our spending is Social Security, Unemployment, Medicare, and Children Health Insurance. All of these are very important in today’s world. With so many people out of work, a budget cut for unemployment is unthinkable. Also, by cutting Social Security, Medicare and Children Health insurance, more problems would later on occur. This would lead to only more people needing assistance. People can not afford to have such benefits taken away.
According to the video, extended the Bush Tax Cuts will have to raise taxes, because continuing on as so is unaffordable. To prevent the taxes being raised, some cuts will have to eventually occur, which I believe would most likely happen towards Health Care.
- Amanda Paolotti
If i was a Representative or a senator of the United States i will cut on the Department of Defense which is costing us $665.27 and percentage budget of 18.74%.I would cut this program because cutting the defense for a while isnt going to harm anybody because weve been fine after all this time. We already have a lot of supplies to defend our selves if any little problmes are going to start but i highley dought any thing will happen now. This is the second most budget that people are spending on. We will be fine for sometime without supporting them for a while.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Caraballo period 5
If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government I would have to cut the two most highest categories it would have to be social security and department of defense because they are the most expensive and were most of are money is going. For social security is 696.87 billion dollars and the percent of that is 19.63 and the department of defense is 665.27 billion dollars and the percent is 18.74 of the budget. Yes it is effect people who are collecting social security and the people who are police. But if you have to cut spending you should start with the highest cost in the budget and see if you can cut it somehow. Yes people will be upset with this decision but we are in a bad place and we need help and we have to cut were it would be most effective. Even though the people wont be happy they have to look at this problem from a different stand point and understand that we are only trying to help get the country back on track and get out of debt.
ReplyDeleteErin O’Driscoll Pd.5
If I were a Representative or Senator in the U.S. government (who was committed to cutting government spending) I would cut a little from each othe categories. I would do this becauase cutting a little from each, will all together make a big impact on society. However, I would cut the Department of Defense more so than the others because if we cut it down from $665.27 billion to $565.27 billion that is anoher 1 billion dollars in savings and wouls still be enough to contribute to the Department of Defense. I would also cut the Department of Veteran Affairs because it is important, However, it is not important as the other categories that which could help cut government spending and help America. I would explain to angry voters that in my eyes, these are the least two important categories and we are not cutting all spending with these departments, we are just taking out more money then we are of the other categories. And as for what I first said, I believe that taking out a little bit from each category wont effect each category drastically yet it will still make a huge differnce altogether.
ReplyDelete-Vincent Gatto
Sarah Han
ReplyDeleteperiod 5
If I was a representative or senator in the United States government who is committed to cutting government spending, I would probably cut all of the other programs under 1%. Because we do not need other programs as much as we need home land security, social security, dept. of education, dept. of housing etc. it is not necessary to raise taxes in order to pay back the government’s overspent revenue. they just need to watch how much they are spending or better yet next time plan on how much they want to spend and see how that works out. Americans should not be blamed for the government's fault.
By cutting any of these taxes, our government would be be affected. I think it would benefit the government by increasing our taxes, or at least for people with a higher income who can afford it. Our government is in a lot of debt right now that they will be trying to pay for a long time if we do not step up to the plate. This effects all of us and we need to work together by paying taxes to make things better. Although the higher class people would not be pleased to hear they have to pay more taxes then everyone else, it will help out everyone in the long run.
ReplyDelete-Jessica Morales
I would cut the two highest programs. Social security and the department of defense are two things that we should cut. Lets be honest here if you cut the department of education then how are weall supposed to learn. Every job out there you need a college degree, well cut the spending of education and most people aren't going to college. If you cut those two programs that leaves a litle but more. I agree with Kim though that we would have to take a little bit out at a time so that the economy doesnt worsen. People would also have to get used to the fact that we cut those two things.
ReplyDeleteI think that cutting anyone of these would affect our government roughly. If it was totally necessary, I would cut the Department of Defense. It is the second highest expensive. The Department of Defense costs us $665.27 billion and takes up 18.74% of the budget. I do believe that we need a good defense system, but the majority of the money being used isn't being used for training or military. It is being used to help fight unnecessary wars, like the one currently going on in the Middle East. The money being used to fund these unnecessary wars could go in to other things like social security or things that are more beneficial to the U.S citizens, instead of using it to promote violence, and more corruption.
ReplyDelete