Trump eyes 10 percent spending cuts, 20 percent slash of federal workers

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/17/trump-eyes-10-percent-spending-cuts-20-percent-slash-federal-workers.html

 

Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.

Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.

At least two so-called "landing teams" in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.

The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.  SNip

[Dashinka 23,211]

Time to refresh the resume.  Good thing all those car companies are creating new jobs.

[OriZ 3,157]

Considering the Federal Gov employs 2.8 million people, he'd have to bring back a hell of a whole lot of companies to make up for that

[bcking 3,157]

 

11 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Considering the Federal Gov employs 2.8 million people, he'd have to bring back a hell of a whole lot of companies to make up for that

If there were a 20% job cut, he'd have to "bring back" over 500 "Carriers".

[OriZ 3,157]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

 

If there were a 20% job cut, he'd have to "bring back" over 500 "Carriers".

You would be correct, just to break even lol

 

Funny thing is the headline said 20% but in the article it says " spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, "

 

Far from across the board it seems

Edited January 17, 2017 by OriZ

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

that may affect weekday posting on Chest 

[Póg mo 1,749]

So to recap, Trump is going to cut spending on services that Americans may actually use, increase spending on the military, cut taxes for the wealthy, all while bringing the deficit back to Dubya Bush administration levels. 

[TBoneTX 43,021]

I'm still trying to identify the "nonessential government personnel" who are told that they don't have to report to work when D.C. is hit by a hurricane or major blizzard or similar.

 

I would like to see the 10% and 20% cuts affect some of these agencies that do nothing but devise ways to burden our lives and business.

Edited January 18, 2017 by TBoneTX

[OriZ 3,157]

9 hours ago, Póg mo said:

So to recap, Trump is going to cut spending on services that Americans may actually use, increase spending on the military, cut taxes for the wealthy, all while bringing the deficit back to Dubya Bush administration levels. 

 

I'm sure you didn't mean it but you're basically saying he will cut the deficit by half, because during Bush it was half of what it is today, not sure how that makes sense. More likely he will add a couple more trillions to it.

[Dakine10 5,452]

4 hours ago, OriZ said:

 

I'm sure you didn't mean it but you're basically saying he will cut the deficit by half, because during Bush it was half of what it is today, not sure how that makes sense. More likely he will add a couple more trillions to it.

  

   I imagine the deficit he's talking about is the annual budget deficit. The total amount we owe is the federal debt. So by increasing military spending and cutting taxes, Trump will likely run bigger budget deficits than we presently do, thus increasing the federal debt even more than we have been. As we saw previously, that trend began with Reagan. 

Edited January 18, 2017 by Dakine10

[OriZ 3,157]

27 minutes ago, Dakine10 said:

  

   I imagine the deficit he's talking about is the annual budget deficit. The total amount we owe is the federal debt. So by increasing military spending and cutting taxes, Trump will likely run bigger budget deficits than we presently do, thus increasing the federal debt even more than we have been. As we saw previously, that trend began with Reagan. 

 

And......my argument still stands. It was twice as high with Obama.

 

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html

 

https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-by-president-what-budget-deficits-hide-3306151

Edited January 18, 2017 by OriZ

[Dakine10 5,452]

1 minute ago, OriZ said:

 

And......my argument still stands. It was twice as high with Obama.

 

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html

 

https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-by-president-what-budget-deficits-hide-3306151

 

   Reagan actually doubled the existing federal debt at the time, which was unprecedented. However we shouldn't miss the big picture.  Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending and increased the annual budget deficits. Bush 1 and 2 did, Obama did too. Clinton cut military spending and increased taxes and saw the annual deficits start to decrease.

 

  I don't think it's easy, but it's not rocket science either. Leaving his predecessors out of the equation for a moment, Trump is trending in the wrong direction on this one. 

[OriZ 3,157]

23 minutes ago, Dakine10 said:

 

   Reagan actually doubled the existing federal debt at the time, which was unprecedented. However we shouldn't miss the big picture.  Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending and increased the annual budget deficits. Bush 1 and 2 did, Obama did too. Clinton cut military spending and increased taxes and saw the annual deficits start to decrease.

 

  I don't think it's easy, but it's not rocket science either. Leaving his predecessors out of the equation for a moment, Trump is trending in the wrong direction on this one. 

 

Right, and I wrote weeks ago already that I expect another trillion added in the next year or two just with the plans we already know of. I try to be as fair and balanced as I can, I mentioned it in different threads including my own and anyone who believes otherwise is clearly not doing their homework. However, other people who are clearly not doing their homework is anyone who actually believes Bush added more to the deficit than Obama did. That's simply false, false, false fake news type stuff. And that was all I was referring to with my comment.

[Póg mo 1,749]

23 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

Right, and I wrote weeks ago already that I expect another trillion added in the next year or two just with the plans we already know of. I try to be as fair and balanced as I can, I mentioned it in different threads including my own and anyone who believes otherwise is clearly not doing their homework. However, other people who are clearly not doing their homework is anyone who actually believes Bush added more to the deficit than Obama did. That's simply false, false, false fake news type stuff. And that was all I was referring to with my comment.

Okay, I'll admit I was wrong. However, when Obama took office, the economy was tanking, the amount of money the government actually spends increased every single year under Bush, and Obama wasn't really responsible for the 2009 deficit. When it peaked at 10%, which is also the same year, Republicans decided that deficits do indeed matter. Strange that. The 2017 US deficit is forecast to be 2.6℅ of GDP. Also under Obama, total US government spending growth has actually been flat. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

50 minutes ago, Póg mo said:

Okay, I'll admit I was wrong. However, when Obama took office, the economy was tanking, the amount of money the government actually spends increased every single year under Bush, and Obama wasn't really responsible for the 2009 deficit. When it peaked at 10%, which is also the same year, Republicans decided that deficits do indeed matter. Strange that. The 2017 US deficit is forecast to be 2.6℅ of GDP. Also under Obama, total US government spending growth has actually been flat. 

Prime rule 1 a chest . Never Never admit you are wrong. Deflect Blame a MDL or MDL and drive on