Well, off we go

[rambot]

Musk asks voters to brace for 'hardship' from spending cuts in potential Trump Cabinet role

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

The richest country ever with an oligarchy of the richest people ever has to "live within its means"? That's a LOT of means. Maybe people don't have to suffer.

Or nah. Maybe they really need to have those values made very clear.

 

[ozso]

Musk asks voters to brace for 'hardship' from spending cuts in potential Trump Cabinet role

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

The richest country ever with an oligarchy of the richest people ever has to "live within its means"? That's a LOT of means. Maybe people don't have to suffer.

Or nah. Maybe they really need to have those values made very clear.

I didn't understand that post, and the article is rather vague regarding Musk's plan. But it did achieve sounding ominous.

 

[Nithavela]

Can't get to mars if the plebs have their needs met. Priorities, people!

Usually, governments wait to actually get into power before they show their real face to their voters. But I guess two days after the election is fine, too. Not like they can be un-voted.

 

[Chesterton]

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

Leopards ate my face? This is a weird time to remind us that the Left can't meme.

On second thought, it's a perfect time.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Musk asks voters to brace for 'hardship' from spending cuts in potential Trump Cabinet role

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

The richest country ever with an oligarchy of the richest people ever has to "live within its means"? That's a LOT of means. Maybe people don't have to suffer.

Or nah. Maybe they really need to have those values made very clear.

It's like telling your wife no more manicures while you are trying to pay off her credit cards.

The term "hardship" is subjective.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Obamacare would be much cheaper for We The People if we alter coverage of pre-existing conditions. Why should we be subsidizing sick people? Why aren't they paying their fair share?

Trump has a concept of a plan, and JD Vance later offered some detail.

The Trump plan, according to Vance, is to permit insurance companies to discriminate against people with preexisting conditions.

Republicans don’t talk about this idea much any more, because the basis for it (the Obamacare death spiral) has failed to occur and because letting insurance companies discriminate against people with preexisting conditions is horribly unpopular.

Vance tries to pitch this idea in the friendliest possible way, but the idea is unmistakable. Vance explains that Trump wants to:

implement a deregulatory agenda so that people can pick a health care plan that fits them. Think about it: a young American doesn’t have the same health care needs as a 65-year-old American. And a 65-year-old American in good health has much different health care needs than a 65-year-old American with a chronic condition.

We want to make sure everybody is covered, but the best way to do that is to actually promote more choice in our health-care system and not have a one-size-fits all approach that puts a lot of the same people into the same insurance pools, into the same risk pools, that actually makes it harder for people to make the right choices for their families.

If Trump eliminates the cap on SALT tax deductions, my effective tax rate will decrease 0.6%. If we get rid of some medical freeloaders, we can enrich me while not increasing the federal deficit. That's what I call efficiency, and I bet Musk does as well.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Can't get to mars if the plebs have their needs met. Priorities, people!

Usually, governments wait to actually get into power before they show their real face to their voters. But I guess two days after the election is fine, too. Not like they can be un-voted.

They have been speaking of this for weeks -

The left makes living within your means sounds like a bad thing.

How about a balanced budget?

 

[Always in His Presence]

Here is what was not quoted from the link:

“We have to reduce spending to live within our means,” Musk said. “And, you know, that necessarily involves some temporary hardship, but it will ensure long-term prosperity.”​

 

[Yttrium]

How about a balanced budget?

Gee, that would be nice. Let's slash overall spending and raise taxes.

Oh, wait, that's not gonna happen.

Trump will slash some spending and raise it in other ways. And he'll slash taxes. So forget about it. We're not going to balance the budget again in my lifetime, and frankly I give up. Chaaaarge it!

 

[Nithavela]

They have been speaking of this for weeks -

The left makes living within your means sounds like a bad thing.

How about a balanced budget?

I don't know, the last time there was a US budget surplus was in 2001.

Anyone remember what happened in 2001?

 

[Always in His Presence]

I don't know, the last time there was a US budget surplus was in 2001.

Anyone remember what happened in 2001?

Yeah - it was the fourth straight year of budget surpluses under a Democratic President and a Strong Republican lead Congress.

U.S. Budget Deficit by President

Here are the budget deficits for each president back to Woodrow Wilson. Obama had the highest dollar increase, but Wilson had the biggest percentage rise.

www.thebalancemoney.com

 

[Always in His Presence]

Gee, that would be nice. Let's slash overall spending and raise taxes.

Oh, wait, that's not gonna happen.

Trump will slash some spending and raise it in other ways. And he'll slash taxes. So forget about it. We're not going to balance the budget again in my lifetime, and frankly I give up. Chaaaarge it!

Why not just slash the ridiculous amount of spending going on?

Budget for the mandatory spending as designed by Congress and keep discretionary spending in line.

 

[Yttrium]

Why not just slash the ridiculous amount of spending going on?

Budget for the mandatory spending as designed by Congress and keep discretionary spending in line.

Dream on.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Dream on.

If the Democrats control the purse strings - it is but a dream.

 

[Palmfever]

Musk asks voters to brace for 'hardship' from spending cuts in potential Trump Cabinet role

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

The richest country ever with an oligarchy of the richest people ever has to "live within its means"? That's a LOT of means. Maybe people don't have to suffer.

Or nah. Maybe they really need to have those values made very clear.

It's been a little over a week since the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget sent a letter to Kamala Harris and Donald Trump suggesting they get serious about "skyrocketing" national debt, which now exceeds $35 trillion.

Washington is spending $1.8 trillion more than it collects annually.

"Our publicly held debt will soon surpass the entire size of the U.S. economy, and debt is projected to exceed its previous record, 106 percent of GDP, in 2027," the letter warned. "At a projected cost of $892 billion this year, our nation already spends more on interest on the debt than we do on both national defense and all federal spending on children..."

...
Because really, the only way to eliminate the money gap and put federal spending on a sustainable path would be to address entitlement spending. But you don't hear either candidate talking about fixing Social Security or Medicare. Instead, you hear about how they want to give away more money they don't have.

Part of the problem is there is no crisis, just more red ink every year; our finances resemble the frog in the pot on top of a fire.

But it's also true that with no crisis, this would be a perfect time to course-correct. The economy is strong enough to absorb the cost of what needs to be done.

Shortly after MacGuineas and I spoke, The Wall Street Journal reported that JPMorgan Chase Chief Financial Officer Jeremy Barnum said on a conference call that after a recent interest rate cut, the U.S. economy is in a "kind of Goldilocks" situation.

Inflation is at 2.44% right now. But when interest rates climb, the cost of paying off the mountains of U.S. debt will climb as well.

So this would be a great time to right the ship, except that it's an election year, and neither party wants to talk about paying the piper.

Republicans aren't talking about cutting government to right the ship, MacGuineas noted, and Democrats aren't pushing for the broad tax hikes necessary to pay for their programs.

I asked MacGuineas: What should voters be pushing for?

A pledge from candidates, MacGuineas responded, and it's simple: "No new borrowing until they fix this situation, barring emergencies."

That makes so much sense, you know it won't happen.

https://www.newsmax.com/debrajsaunders/national-debt-donald-trump-kamala-harris/2024/10/15/id/1184098/

 

[RileyG]

It's like telling your wife no more manicures while you are trying to pay off her credit cards.

The term "hardship" is subjective.

Priorities, people, priorities.

 

[johansen]

A pledge from candidates, MacGuineas responded, and it's simple: "No new borrowing until they fix this situation, barring emergencies."

how is anyone going to cut 1.8 trillion dollars out of the budget per year?

so they have to continue borrowing money.

 

[Palmfever]

how is anyone going to cut 1.8 trillion dollars out of the budget per year?

so they have to continue borrowing money.

Like a child refusing to complete chores.
"It's to hard. Can I just have my allowance?"
"I'll take out the trash next month, I promise. If you give me $20 I pick up some room deodorizer.
Thanks mom. You're the best."

 

[Paulos23]

how is anyone going to cut 1.8 trillion dollars out of the budget per year?

so they have to continue borrowing money.

Or, you know, rase taxes to help pay for it while you look for ways to cut it.

 

[eleos1954]

Musk asks voters to brace for 'hardship' from spending cuts in potential Trump Cabinet role

i wonder how many Leopards ate my face stories and how quickly we will be hearing them.

The richest country ever with an oligarchy of the richest people ever has to "live within its means"? That's a LOT of means. Maybe people don't have to suffer.

Or nah. Maybe they really need to have those values made very clear.

Our debt .... likened unto a credit card .... at some point in time the "credit card" debt becomes unmanagable ... paying off huge debt is not a easy task .... we (America) have been living on borrowed money for quite some time ... it won't be easy to get it under control. How that is pursued remains to be seen. No doubt there is significant government waste and lack of accountability transparency in spending ... it would seem to me this should be their first avenue to pursue (wasteful spending). Ending the wars and ending the mass migration are other areas that can significantly reduce spending. Government spending must be reduced .... there's a lot for them to consider.