federal government debt that the political class has accumulated for decades was the most shocking levels, levels that may make future generations of Americans to pay. This issue was a major factor in recent midterm elections and every politician in Washington is tripping over themselves to prove that they can reduce the budget. But as they are entered in the budget mess in the first place, really, they are the right people to go
An article published in the October 29, 2010, issue of BusinessWeek does not think so. According to the article and Alice Rivlin, requirements that certain of the President of the European Commission to recommend ways to reduce government spending: – Health Insurance Commission has excluded from their discussions, analysis and recommendations, even if it is one of the largest and fastest growing part of the federal budget -. Most of the Republican Committee, died in September against the recommendations raise rates -. Panel Democrats died in September against the recommendations that the change in Social Security -.. According to Rivlin, the Commission is precluded from politics, even if the final report is due just three weeks – Given the division of the Commission, and the fact that 14 of the 18 committee members must approve the recommendation be accepted for consideration by Congress, the chances to be adopted in concept is close to nothing. Now take this discouraging news, and I think November 20, 2010 Associated Press article, where the two co-chairmen of the deficit reduction the President of the Commission show some of their current thinking on how to reduce the deficit – The article both suggest that their recommendations will be unpopular and not going anywhere in Congress. This raises the question, why even bother – One of their proposals is to increase the full retirement age to 68 in 2050 and 69 in 2075. How to disable these changes for at least forty years to solve the problem short and medium term national debt – Rich for Social Security recipients will receive smaller payments from Social Security. Good idea, but when this change will be implemented in the next century? Talk about not taking a firm stance -. The article sounds like a pretty pessimistic forecasts that article BusinessWeek, that this year if some of the committee’s recommendations will be approved by the Commission’s 14 members is necessary, as an opportunity to obtain a recommendation to Congress very low. Even if all current Commission proposals are implemented, the federal budget is not balanced in 2015, a goal the original Commission. As the Democratic member of Congress was quoted as saying: “This is not an offer I could support” the recommendations of the Committee on Social Security policy, a balanced budget goal in 2015 is quite far from reality. There are several other potential recommendations in the article that the Commission may propose, but each has a serious defect. One option is to remove all spent in Congress, an action that will save you upwards of dollars a year. However, because really dedicated to serve as a way for politicians to finance their election campaigns illegally, unless the recommendation is coupled with a major campaign to reform our politicians can not give up this source of revenue for re-election ever. Another recommendation is to remove the right to deduct an additional interest in the mortgage. However, given the terrible financial situation of the housing market today, removing the advantage of owning a home will surely ruin many other industry that is dragging down the economy. Thusis, unless you can get strong enough for the housing industry also absorbed another blow is a dead letter, at least in the short term. A third recommendation is to further increase the tax on gasoline for $ 0.15 per gallon to fund transportation programs. Two things wrong with this proposal. First, how is the recommendation to reduce the deficit? This expansion of public spending and has nothing to do with deficit reduction. Second, this proposal should be part of a broader strategy for national energy policy is much more independent and takes into account energy, global warming, infrastructure. This is a tactic in search of a more comprehensive strategy that does not exist. One last recommendation is to freeze the payment of the federal government for three years and reducing the federal workforce by 10%. Recent studies show most of the federal governments are much better paid employees with richer than private sector counterparts packages to their sound of this recommendation is consistent with the reality of today. Since the salaries of federal government significantly increased under the Obama administration and theoretically, we will reduce the size of government, a reduction of 10% of the workforce also seems fair and feasible, with the right hand, a large if. Given what we know from the Commission to the President of the deficit, both in history and the AP article, Business Week, is not fair to say that it will fail. First, politicians are already moaning about how these cuts will affect their constituents, placing the proposal in the hole year exit door. Second, it seems that there is an overall strategy behind how the Commission went about their business. These proposals all seem disjointed and disconnected. There are short term, a proposal to freeze federal prompt payment of workers, but the Commission does not receive social security for forty years. In forty years, most baby boomers will be dead, how effective is it? They want to increase the gas tax, which fits the overall lack of energy strategy and structure, very freaky. Finally, none of these potential recommendations show kind of creative thinking. In fact, many of them already in “I love my country, hate my government” However, all is not lost. Many Americans are smart, working on this issue in one form or another. They are not burdened by political office so they can arrive at good ideas, ideas are not politically acceptable. In U. C. Public Interest Group for Research and the National Union of taxpayers recently published a detailed joint report, highlighting their detailed analysis on how to reduce federal spending. Their analysis shows that if their recommendations are implemented, they will lead to more than 0 billion in cost reductions in 2015. Their activities are proposed to the government for better overall, in addition to the final withdrawal of some non-government programs. Their basic data came from a wide range of authoritative sources and their recommendations are detailed, accurate and actionable. Nowhere near all of their recommendations are listed below, but feel that their creativity, originality and detailed analysis (savings are for the period from 2010 to 2015): 1) Save the dollar program by eliminating market access, which subsidizes the promotion of private companies in the U.S. foreign markets. These companies are McDonalds, Nabisco, fruit of the loom and Mars. This is nothing but the welfare of society, companies leave themselves and their shareholders pay for the advertising itself. 2) In addition to nearly recoverable billion by eliminating tax credits for ethanol, another welfare program for big business oil companies such as gasoline blended with ethanol made from corn. Since we now have evidence width ethanol as a fuel additive that is bad economic policy and environmental remove this program immediately. 3) Save 5 billion acquisition by finally implementing the reforms established by the Defense Acquisition Work bipartisan. 4) Also billion contract from Homeland Security ultimately eliminate Defense Contract Audit identified as useless and corrupt. 5) In addition to nearly billion by ending the processing This command is obsolete spare parts and consumables for the Defense Logistics Agency, save billions of finalizing the contracts that obsolete spare parts and supplies for the army, with the exception of almost billion by ending the process obsolete parts that orders parts and supplies for marine and save billions more by the end of the processing of orders that obsolete spare parts and consumables for the Air Force. 6) to reduce the backlog of federal owned buildings that are not used or are used. Currently, the federal government is staggering 55,000 buildings that are not used or are underused, worth more dollars. Rather, their excellent work in progress and eventually save American taxpayers more than 0 billion dollars. As you can see from this short list, none of these reductions will be absolutely minimal effect on the average American. They will be a painless way to possibly reduce the size of government. Promote Their other aspect is that the work of these organizations are usually two different countries in all political debates and issues. They met, despite the fact that “our organizations often differ in scope of state regulation and host of the tax police” and “we are united in the belief that we spend too much money on ineffective programs that do not serve the interests of American people. “If only our politicians can act in a responsible and mature. But they are not only intelligent people in the room to reduce the deficit. Cato Institute is the subject of a detailed, line by line, department by department review of all aspects of the federal government to find cost savings. Their work so far is remarkable. Not only can tell you what they should be cut from the federal budget, but why should I be cut, how much should be cut from one department, and who or what a child will be void if the program to support the government or gone. The list below briefly their work justice, but gives some examples of detailed analysis and recommendations: 1) Reduce the budget of the Ministry of Commerce of more dollars a year, taking a number of measures including the removal of many private programs that support this sector need to be paid by the private sector, if at all. 2) phase changes in the Ministry of Defence will ultimately save American taxpayers of about 0 dollars a year. These savings will be achieved by reducing the number of troops by a third party, while other forces may move to current and future threats to the country rather than old, outdated waves. Cato also recommends a number of foreign soldiers deployed or brought to America. 3) Remove the Federal Ministry of Education. Although he spent more than $ 7 billion years, test results and the quality of education American students are constantly deteriorating despite 7 billion. Recommending that the Department is dissolved and the budget be returned to Member 7000000000, can not make a bad job of educating the youth of America and hope to work better. 4) Cato will completely eliminate the Department of Energy, saving dollars a year. Although the 1970 oil crisis and the energy that occurred thirty years ago, the Ministry of Energy has yet to develop a rational energy policy and national strategy for the country. energy projects, the most heavily subsidized that they have funded over the years have been failures. Like transfer of energy in defense-related work in the Ministry of Defence and save the rest of the budget of the Ministry of Energy to pay the deficit. From the Department has not done anything useful or just after three decades, we can safely assume that will not change this trend of failure anytime soon. 5) study and also does a good job of quantitatively what savings would be U.S. State households. Only the economies of these four departments “will be just under 000 per year for UShousehold. None of these proposals would affect economies have many households, but almost 000 in his pockets, and each year will be a major economic revival meeting. Please see the website of the Cato fully explore the excellent work. They are probably half way through the federal Ministry of the organization chart, with more savings to come. As with the U. S. Public Interest Group for Research and National Union taxpayers’ job is working as in-depth, measurable share compared to what we saw of the Presidential Commission for the deficit reduction is simplified as a whole, and at this point nonactionable time. But wait, there’s no hope. We know from the Business Week article quoted above, that Ms. Rivlin, requirements specified in the commission chairman. However, it also has certain requirements of the various non-political committee that preceded the panel president. The focus of this panel is also reduce the deficit further and is described in the article as “lack of shade by the Commission.” It is sponsored by the Bipartisan Policy Center, contains both Democrats and Republicans, and active meeting. This shade panel is actively and aggressively deal with federal benefit programs for Social Security and Medicare and vexed question of raising taxes. Again, intelligent people ready to face difficult challenges and analysis. Just a reminder why all this work is necessary. Consider the following facts form The article Business Week: – U.S. government spending is unsustainable path of fiscal 2010 deficit of 0.3 trillion Unacceptable reporting 8.9% of the entire economy -. Between 1960 and 2000 . public debt as a percentage of GDP on average by 37%. In 2020 it will be 78% of GDP if nothing is changed -. Medicare spending is currently $ 9 billion annually, or 3.6% of GDP . It is very likely to reach 9 billion by 2020 and will be bankrupt in seven years if nothing is done to reverse current trends -. Social Security will rise from 4.8 percent to 6.1 % GDP by 2035. If these questions of debt and deficits are not treated quickly, confidence in the fiscal solvency of the U.S. government will increase, forcing the Treasury to pay higher prices for their obligations may cause another economic crisis or recession will lead to greater unemployment, which will provide long … The real question is not how to make the financial situation of the federal government. Alice Rivlin, the Cato Institute, U. of C. research of public interest groups, the National Taxpayers Union have already done the hard work and analysis. The only thing needed is the political courage to stand up, show some courage and finally leadership. This is why many newly elected representatives go Washington to solve this problem. If they can not join the current owner and president to work through this problem for the good of the country, then we must ensure that the 2012 elections in place for another bloody Bath, Y including the President. Figures are in fact, numbers do not lie. Americans want this change, I hope that politicians are smart enough first to do so.Written by “/ people / brunokorschek”> brunokorschek
