81artmonk Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I would eliminate the SSI program for everyone except those who it was intended for. Retired people who paid into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I would cut healthcare for every Republican member of congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Is this a joke? No, not at all. I'm completely serious. I would cut them. (sike) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Welfare and other similar social programs (hahahaha) What would the AIG exec's do???? No spa excursions?? No hunting trip to jolly ole England?? Perish the thought!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 No, not at all. I'm completely serious. I would cut them. (sike) WHY?! I mean, yeah, there are people out there taking advantage of welfare but that happens with just about everything in life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 No, not at all. I'm completely serious. I would cut them. (sike) Nice try . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 jeez. better question - what govt program WOULDNT you cut? disease research, space exploration, military, education. most everything else...cut cut cut cut cut cut cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
81artmonk Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Be out of work for an extended period of time and see how "pointless" it is. He has a point. If you look at welfare on it's simpelest level and it is paying money to people for doing nothing. It's a FREE handout. I understand what the program does, but how far should the govt go in helping people who don't have a job?? What role should the govt have in keeping these people afloat?? In all honesty I believe that welfare should be for people who have lost their job and are actively looking for another. Not for single moms who aren't working and having multiple kids. Or for families who choose not to work and push out babies. As with most govt programs, the system is being abused and not used for what it was intended. I am sure there is a lot of pork that can be cut out of welfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 He has a point. If you look at welfare on it's simpelest level and it is paying money to people for doing nothing. It's a FREE handout. I understand what the program does, but how far should the govt go in helping people who don't have a job?? What role should the govt have in keeping these people afloat?? In all honesty I believe that welfare should be for people who have lost their job and are actively looking for another. Not for single moms who aren't working and having multiple kids. Or for families who choose not to work and push out babies. As with most govt programs, the system is being abused and not used for what it was intended. I am sure there is a lot of pork that can be cut out of welfare. I can agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 He has a point. First of all he's joking. If you look at welfare on it's simpelest level and it is paying money to people for doing nothing. Hmmm, now this sounds familiar... Getting things we don't deserve even though we need them, being helped in our time of need by those who have the resources to assist us....now what does that sound like.....oh yeah...grace. I'm sure glad that God is not a Capitalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raub Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 DEA. There, I just saved you 2.5 billion in direct costs and probably a few more billion in the indirect costs of jailing people for possession. That was easy. Next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Are you sure that the government does that well?A lot of the cuts that both McCain and Obama want to make are from wasteful military spending: Smarter Defense Spending John McCain has worked aggressively to reform the defense budgeting process to ensure that America enjoys the best military at the best cost. This includes reforming defense procurement to ensure the faithful and efficient expenditure of taxpayer dollars that are made available for defense acquisition. Too often, parochial interests - rather than the national interest - have guided our spending decisions. John McCain supports significant reform in our defense acquisition process to ensure that dollars spent actually contribute to U.S. security. John McCain also feels strongly that our nation's military spending, except in time of genuine emergency, must be funded by the regular appropriations process, not by "emergency" supplementals that allow defense to be funded outside the normal budget cycle. This process gives Congressional committees less ability to closely scrutinize defense budget requests to ensure military funding is being budgeted wisely. It makes possible Congressional pork-barrel spending that diverts scarce defense resources to parochial home-state interests. And it allows the administration to add spending above that set by budget caps, bloating the federal deficit. Budgeting annually through emergency supplemental appropriation bills encourages pork barrel spending. The American taxpayer has a right to expect us to get the most out of each and every defense dollar, especially at a time when those dollars are so critical. Throughout his career, John McCain has fought pork-barrel defense spending that diverts scarce defense resources to parochial, home-state projects rather than addressing the needs of service personnel. He believes that unauthorized earmarks drain our precious defense resources and adversely affect our national security. John McCain will continue to fight pork-barrel spending to ensure that military funds are spent where they are needed most - in support of our military personnel and our national defense. http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/054184f4-6b51-40dd-8964-54fcf66a1e68.htm I'm the first to ask you to name just 1 thing the government does well. We are way overbloated with military spending. But, for what it is and what it does, it's well done. I mean come on, it could probably hold it's own against the entire rest of the world. Can't really knock that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Tech Boy,The Constituion does provide for a few more departments. For example, Commerce Department runs the Census. Department of Justice does kind of blend into the Supreme court as well. Yeah, I agree that the DoJ and Commerce Department would have to stay in some form. I was just being general and sweeping, and I actually left out what I would cut first, which would be corporate welfare and farm subsidies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoles11 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 No, not at all. I'm completely serious. I would cut them. (sike) you should have to have a family then lose your job for a period of time before you get to have an opinion on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoles11 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 The War on Drugs. Waste of time, money, and resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 WHY?!I mean, yeah, there are people out there taking advantage of welfare but that happens with just about everything in life. Why can't it be a local issue? Let's take the federal government out of the welfare business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Brave Little Toaster Oven Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 you should have to have a family then lose your job for a period of time before you get to have an opinion on this. try losing a father who was the only source of income...:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 you should have to have a family then lose your job for a period of time before you get to have an opinion on this.Been there with myself as an adult and when I was growing up.I would love for the Federal gov't to not have anything to do with welfare programs. Let the states take care of it. But, that's probably never gonna happen...so I propose that you can get welfare benefits for max of 2 years then you are ineligible for 10 years. Exceptions can be made only if the case is investigated and deemed legitimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renaissance Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 The War on Drugs. Waste of time, money, and resources. ACW? Is that you?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 2 years huh? Foster kids are technically on welfare, no? Kind of hard to grow up in that time. You really want to investigate the number of kids in the foster system in MD? Can't say I love the thought of more red tape over the hoops we already jump through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 2 years huh? Foster kids are technically on welfare, no? Kind of hard to grow up in that time. You really want to investigate the number of kids in the foster system in MD? Can't say I love the thought of more red tape over the hoops we already jump through. Obviously I was being overly simplistic gbear. Sorry you didn't pick up on that. Are foster children funded by the Federal gov't? (I'm asking because I don't know) EDIT: a thought just occured to me. In light of Obama crushing McCain in the polls and almost certainly going to win, why doesn't he cancel his 1/2 hour primetime slot infomercial and take those millions of dollars and help some orphans and foster children? Or buy some people some healthcare? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dockeryfan Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Department of Education - worthless NOAA - horribly run. Waste out the yingyang NIST - no reason it cannot be rolled into NIH NIMH - Same. Department of Agriculture - Roll it into Dept of the Interior. Or vice versa. Department of Commerce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toe Jam Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Obviously I was being overly simplistic gbear. Sorry you didn't pick up on that. Are foster children funded by the Federal gov't? (I'm asking because I don't know) EDIT: a thought just occured to me. In light of Obama crushing McCain in the polls and almost certainly going to win, why doesn't he cancel his 1/2 hour primetime slot infomercial and take those millions of dollars and help some orphans and foster children? Or buy some people some healthcare? So with that logic why doesn't McLame sell six of his seven houses and pay off some poor folks mortgage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 So with that logic why doesn't McLame sell six of his seven houses and pay off some poor folks mortgage?Good question. I wish he would. I don't like him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Foster kids are covered by medicaid. Medicaid is state level federal funding...sort of. Kind of like much of welfare. The other parts are usually state programs, but many of the state programs get federal funding or are federall mandated which is sometimes worse. I hate unfunded mandates with a passion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.