Paul's Detailed Budget Plan is released

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mheslep
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    budget Plan
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Paul’s detailed budget plan, focusing on its implications for the GOP primary process and the proposed cuts to various federal departments. Participants explore the potential impact of these cuts, the necessity of budget details from other candidates, and the broader implications for government spending and efficiency.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Paul's budget plan, despite its challenges, is valuable for prompting other candidates to provide detailed budgets.
  • Paul proposes cutting five cabinet departments: Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, and Education, and stopping all foreign aid, which some participants support.
  • There is a suggestion that Homeland Security should also be cut, with some participants expressing concerns about its effectiveness and the growing power of the department.
  • Others question the necessity of the current structure of federal departments, suggesting that many functions could be consolidated or eliminated.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the feasibility of balancing the budget without increased revenue, despite the proposed $1 trillion cuts in the first year.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for wealthy individuals to dominate political positions if a salary cap for elected officials is implemented.
  • There is a discussion about the transparency of financial dealings for elected officials as a means to ensure accountability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of support and skepticism regarding Paul's budget plan and the proposed cuts. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of Homeland Security or the overall approach to federal spending and departmental structure.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various assumptions about the effectiveness of federal departments and the implications of budget cuts, but these assumptions remain unresolved and are subject to differing interpretations.

mheslep
Gold Member
Messages
376
Reaction score
714
Hard but necessary. Even if Paul has little chance there is important relevant value in this budget plan. Going forward in the GOP primary process this should force more details out of the other candidates which is a good thing. In my opinion the other candidates should have already roughed out budgets to highlight the lack of any budget details from the Democrats.

Paul cuts outright five cabinet departments - Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, Education. Stops all foreign aid, zeros Iraq and Afghanistan war funding. Block grants Medicaid to states. SS and Medicare untouched far as I can tell; they both continue to increase. Federal Reserve budget is doubled. Hah, kidding on the last one; I think Paul plans to burn the building. In total Paul cuts $1T in year one, but, and this is the amazing part, this still will not immediately balance the budget absent increased revenue.

http://www.ronpaul.com/media/RestoreAmericaPlan.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
He better close the EPA - before he burns the Fed.
 
Shouldn't we wait until we have a shortlist of real candidates? Then this thread won't be needed, IMO.
 
Evo said:
Shouldn't we wait until we have a shortlist of real candidates? Then this thread won't be needed, IMO.

That's probably the best reason to run this thread now - after the first few primaries - nobody will read it.
 
Paul, Paul... Ron or Rand? Either of them still running?

I can see why he'd want to cut those five. If it were me, I'd add Homeland Security to that as well, as they're growing ever more totalitarian the last few years.
 
Char. Limit said:
Paul, Paul... Ron or Rand? Either of them still running?

I can see why he'd want to cut those five. If it were me, I'd add Homeland Security to that as well, as they're growing ever more totalitarian the last few years.

I'm not so sure about Homeland Security - the President's changing hair color probably says a great deal about what we don't know - about security matters.
 
Char. Limit said:
Paul, Paul... Ron or Rand? Either of them still running?

I can see why he'd want to cut those five.
From his various communications I gather that Ron Paul considers that the federal government i) has no constitutional prerogative to do all that those departments do, and ii) does not do very good job in these areas even if it did, iii) the federal govt. can not afford it even if i)&ii) were wrong. At least in the case of federal Dept of Education I agree.

If you were to keep those, what would you do instead to balance the budget?

If it were me, I'd add Homeland Security to that as well, as they're growing ever more totalitarian the last few years.
Second that notion on HS.
 
WhoWee said:
I'm not so sure about Homeland Security - the President's changing hair color probably says a great deal about what we don't know - about security matters.
Ok, so 'bad things'™ are out there. What leads you to believe Janet Napolitano and the merry band of airport gropers is effective and worth the billions?
 
Last edited:
mheslep said:
Ok, so 'bad things'™ are out there. What leads you to believe Janet Napolitano the merry band of airport gropers is effective and worth the billions?

Hey, it's so cool to actually have you on my side!
 
  • #10
mheslep said:
Ok, so 'bad things'™ are out there. What leads you to believe Janet Napolitano the merry band of airport gropers is effective and worth the billions?
I enjoy a good groping, but considering how rarely I fly, I suppose it's not worth spending the billions on HS. :wink:
 
  • #11
Homeland Security is many things. It includes customs (this is a HUGE concern), immigration (also a HUGE concern), they are also things I can't discuss because I am under non-disclosure with the DHS.
 
  • #12
mheslep said:
Ok, so 'bad things'™ are out there. What leads you to believe Janet Napolitano the merry band of airport gropers is effective and worth the billions?

I can't defend Napolitano, certainly didn't appreciate stripping down my bare feet the last time I flew and agree there has to be waste and duplication. However, I wouldn't want to second guess people in the know on this one - or get it wrong.
 
  • #13
Evo said:
Homeland Security is many things. It includes customs (this is a HUGE concern), immigration (also a HUGE concern),

But of course these could be done by other departments. Customs was once part of Treasury, and INS was part of Justice, I think.

If I were emperor, I'd cut back enormously on the number of federal departments. There are 15 cabinet members, plus 7 cabinet-level officers. Having a meeting with 23 people ensures you'll never make a decision. I would have:

  • Treasury
  • Justice
  • Defense (foreign relations, shooting)
  • State (foreign relations, non-shooting)
  • Interior (everything else)
 
  • #14
Vanadium 50 said:
But of course these could be done by other departments. Customs was once part of Treasury, and INS was part of Justice, I think.

If I were emperor, I'd cut back enormously on the number of federal departments. There are 15 cabinet members, plus 7 cabinet-level officers. Having a meeting with 23 people ensures you'll never make a decision. I would have:

  • Treasury
  • Justice
  • Defense (foreign relations, shooting)
  • State (foreign relations, non-shooting)
  • Interior (everything else)

Don't forget the "czars".:wink:
 
  • #15
Vanadium 50 said:
But of course these could be done by other departments. Customs was once part of Treasury, and INS was part of Justice, I think.

If I were emperor, I'd cut back enormously on the number of federal departments. There are 15 cabinet members, plus 7 cabinet-level officers. Having a meeting with 23 people ensures you'll never make a decision. I would have:

  • Treasury
  • Justice
  • Defense (foreign relations, shooting)
  • State (foreign relations, non-shooting)
  • Interior (everything else)
But you're just changing the names of the departments again.

I say to save money we place a cap of $40K per year for all elected officials. And that's based on a minimum 40 hours per week, less than that, pay will be docked. Income will be taxable. No perks. All financial accounts and monetary transations will be public record. This includes their business dealings. They're supposed to be public servants, let's start treating them as such. :biggrin:
 
  • #16
I'm also getting rid of 11 Secretaries of This and That. I also think there is value in putting most of the domestic spending in one place.

The problem with the $40K cap is that it will attract people who are already wealthy and want power.
 
  • #17
Vanadium 50 said:
I'm also getting rid of 11 Secretaries of This and That. I also think there is value in putting most of the domestic spending in one place.
Agreed.

The problem with the $40K cap is that it will attract people who are already wealthy and want power.
Not when every penny that goes through their hands (personal and business) is public knowledge and closely scrutinzed, as well as activities such as trips, and unexplained new "assets", anything of value that has not been paid for by them.

I know it will never happen.
 
  • #18
mheslep said:
Hard but necessary. Even if Paul has little chance there is important relevant value in this budget plan. Going forward in the GOP primary process this should force more details out of the other candidates which is a good thing. In my opinion the other candidates should have already roughed out budgets to highlight the lack of any budget details from the Democrats.

Paul cuts outright five cabinet departments - Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, Education. Stops all foreign aid, zeros Iraq and Afghanistan war funding. Block grants Medicaid to states. SS and Medicare untouched far as I can tell; they both continue to increase. Federal Reserve budget is doubled. Hah, kidding on the last one; I think Paul plans to burn the building. In total Paul cuts $1T in year one, but, and this is the amazing part, this still will not immediately balance the budget absent increased revenue.

http://www.tbf.org/uploadedFiles/tbforg/Utility_Navigation/Multimedia_Library/Reports/InformingTheDebate_Final.pdf

why are you linking a pdf about boston schools?
I n f o r m i n g t h e D e b a t e : C o m p a r i n g B o s t o n ’ s C h a r t e r , P i l o t a n d T r a d i t i o n a l S c h o o l s
 
  • #19
Char. Limit said:
Hey, it's so cool to actually have you on my side!
Yep, common cause. I'll play in any band that want's to cut spending.
 
  • #20
Proton Soup said:
why are you linking a pdf about boston schools?
Because I knew that's what you really wanted to read. :devil:
Sorry.
http://www.ronpaul.com/media/RestoreAmericaPlan.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #21
Evo said:
I say to save money we place a cap of $40K per year for all elected officials. And that's based on a minimum 40 hours per week, less than that, pay will be docked. Income will be taxable. ...
As I thought, it's Evo the Ron Paul supporter:

Paul Budget said:
To stand with the American People, President Paul will take a salary of $39,336, approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.
http://www.ronpaul.com/media/RestoreAmericaPlan.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
WhoWee said:
I guess the Evo/Paul ticket won't be in favor of this plan then?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ernment-to-hire-all-unemployed-americans-for/

"Rep. Jesse Jackson Calls on Government to Hire All Unemployed Americans for $40,000 Each"

Great, another Chicago politician. Of course he would be the one to say: "I hope the president begins to continue to exercise extraordinary constitutional means based on the history of Congresses that have been in rebellion in the past."

One of these days he's going to recognize that at the end of the day it is only by means of piece of paper called the Constitution that Presidents or insipid Congressman like him exist at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #25
Char. Limit said:
Oh god, Jesse Jackson... I had hoped he had gone away...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson,_Jr."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #26
mheslep said:
Yep, common cause. I'll play in any band that want's to cut spending.

Mind if I play along? A trio is more harmonious. :)
 
  • #27
mheslep said:
As I thought, it's Evo the Ron Paul supporter:
I also eat, sleep and breathe air, same as Paul. Please don't make dumb jokes, knowing that I am completely against that crackpot (IMO). He's currently making $174,000 a year.
 
Last edited:
  • #28
Evo said:
I also eat, sleep and breathe air, same as Paul. Please don't make dumb jokes, knowing that I am completely against that crackpot (IMO). ...
Yes I know that, so do most I suspect, that's why it was a great joke, IMHO. o:)
 
  • #29
Evo's $40K idea is a great one, though in the context of expenses in DC, I'd peg it quite a bit higher. Still, I would forbid the spouses and children of any congressional rep (having served within the last 10 years or so) to work for any lobbyists or political "pollsters" or public-relations firms.

DC is far too corrupt. When a "public servant" takes office, and in a few years has accumulated wealth far in excess of his/her compensation, shouldn't we be just a bit concerned? You can't swing a cat in Congress without hitting a multi-millionaire.

I can sympathize with Paul's "hands-off" libertarian approach in some of his saner moments, but I would couple that with increased diligence when overseeing the actions of our elected officials, and strict limits on their sources of income. So far, there is no candidate conservative enough to propose such a thing.
 
  • #30
mheslep said:
Yes I know that, so do most I suspect, that's why it was a great joke, IMHO. o:)
You're bad. :-p
 

Similar threads

News Welfare now 21% of Federal Budget
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
11K
News Did Obama's Budget Proposals Hide His True Economic Plan?
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
News Psssttt, the deficit's shrinking
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
News Is the Tax-Cut Strategy a Con to Dismantle Government Programs?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
News Polarized America & Class War Politics
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
News Is George Bush Misusing Taxpayer Money for His Re-Election Campaign?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
News Is a Major Overhaul of the US Government Possible? Feedback Wanted!
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
News Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
28K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K