What Exactly Does "Smaller Government" Mean?

We need to spend taxes on the level of Government that makes the most sense and is most efficient.
Some are best done at the local Government, other at the state level and some at the federal
Federal level reduces duplication and can focus funding on areas of need
Exactly. Having the Federal government manage school lunches is moronic. Same with Welfare and Medicaid. The States could do those jobs much better, especially finding jobs for people to work for benefits..

The Federal government needs to focus on other Departments, excluding Education. Eliminating ED means that each state could get about $80,000,000 or the 5% overhead that ED used up. That money could be used for community colleges and job training programs.

 
So it is all a game to you.

"We owned the libs derp-derp-derp."

Meanwhile, you will go back to bitching about deficits when a Democrat is in office.

Hypocrites.
You know they're robbing you too, right?
 
So it is all a game to you.

"We owned the libs derp-derp-derp."

Meanwhile, you will go back to bitching about deficits when a Democrat is in office.

Hypocrites.
its to complicated for your little mind to explain more,,
 
So it is all a game to you.

"We owned the libs derp-derp-derp."

Meanwhile, you will go back to bitching about deficits when a Democrat is in office.

Hypocrites.
You ain't seen nothin yet, guano.
 
Democrats conveniently forget that even though the "rich" get their 2.2% tax cut extended, the middle class gets their 1% tax cut extended, or about $2,500 a year.
Tax cuts which add to the debt.

Our motto is no longer E Pluribus Unum. It's, "Gimme gimme gimmer, and make that guy over there pay for it."
 
And there is that lack of cognition I was just talking about.

Saving the US from bankruptcy...by adding $3 trillion in additional debt right out of the gate. derp-derp-derp
Stop spewing about "cognition" and start putting NUMBERS in your posts. Here is a quick math lesson for you:

1. That $4.5T in deficits by extending the tax cuts is over 10-years, call it $450b a year.

2. DOGE hopes to cut $1T or $2T a year, or is it over 10-years? $2T over 10-years is $200b a year in cuts easy-peasy

3. Trump's new tariffs will generate revenue, how much TBD. Say $250b a year, if not, find more cuts

4. So in theory, the $450b tax cut "extension" can be easily "paid for" by TARIFFS and DOGE, plus the cuts help the US economy grow, whereas increased taxes slows economic growth.
 
Exactly. Having the Federal government manage school lunches is moronic. Same with Welfare and Medicaid. The States could do those jobs much better, especially finding jobs for people to work for benefits..

The Federal government needs to focus on other Departments, excluding Education. Eliminating ED means that each state could get about $80,000,000 or the 5% overhead that ED used up. That money could be used for community colleges and job training programs.


The Federal Government does not manage school lunches, that is done at the local level.
Both state and federal can subsidize those lunches to keep prices down and set nutritional standards.

The Federal government also provides funding for things like special education, facilities for the disabled and funding for districts in poor communities
 
Stop spewing about "cognition" and start putting NUMBERS in your posts.
I did. Read the post to the end. Look at the deficit the Republicans just passed.
 
Smaller FEDERAL government means that less money will be wasted on "overhead" and more money will flow to the states, the ED department is a perfect example, cost went up and scores went down when ED was created. Taxpayers need vouchers to send their kids to the schools they prefer.

FEMA is another example, your help depended upon which politician's sign is in your front yard.

The IRS is another example, Lois Lerner punished conservative organizations. STATES can cover all of the environmental, healthcare, and other areas that the Federal government over-regulates.

The FBI went way outside their lane, investigating Catholics, investigating parents, censoring real stories like Hunter's laptop, arresting Sisters of the Poor, falsifying evidence to get a FISA warrant, operation Crossfire-Hurricane, etc...
IMG_4089.gif
 
Tax cuts which add to the debt.
Our motto is no longer E Pluribus Unum. It's, "Gimme gimme gimmer, and make that guy over there pay for it."
True, tax cuts add to the DEBT, if there are no "PAY-FORS".

See my post #29 for an example of "pay-fors" to save the US from bankruptcy.
 
3. Trump's new tariffs will generate revenue, how much TBD. Say $250b a year, if not, find more cuts
You do realize those tariffs are paid by Americans, right? You do realize those tariffs will raise the price of goods, right?

You want numbers? I've been telling you fools for YEARS that tax expenditures cost $1.6 trillion a year.

Not every decade. Every year.

Tax expenditures are a socialist redistribution of wealth UP the economic ladder.

It astonishes me how vehemently so-called "conservatives" defend tax expenditures.

We could easily balance the budget by eliminating all tax expenditures save the EITC which is the only tax expenditure proven to increase productivity.
 
When DOGE boi returns his federal subsidies, then I will believe he is honest about his goal of cutting spending.
 
I did. Read the post to the end. Look at the deficit the Republicans just passed.
Republicans did NOT pass anything with a deficit. Extending the tax cuts have "pay-fors" that you are ignoring.
 
DOGE boi said he was going to cut $2 trillion from government spending.

Yet, in December, co-presidents-elect Musk and Trump demanded the Republicans eliminate the debt ceiling. As I pointed out at the time, there is only one reason they would want the debt ceiling eliminated, and that is to allow for unlimited spending without any restraints.

Why have these two completely opposite goals not induced cognitive dissonance in MAGA world?

My guess is that would require cognition rather than blind, unquestioning devotion to the cult leader.

Smaller government? How does that explain the $3 trillion the recently passed House budget will add to the federal debt?

Why is this not ringing alarm bells in the MAGA camp? Is this all some stupid game in their minds?

It isn't a game, folks. Trump is already on track to shatter his previous debt record.

Here's a fact for you. Every president since JFK has left a better deficit situation to their successor than what they inherited. Every Republican president has left a worse deficit situation than they inherited.

House Budget Allows At Least $2.8 Trillion of Deficit Increases


The budget’s reconciliation instructions pave the way for a bill that could add at least $2.8 trillion to deficits through FY 2034, or $3.4 to $4 trillion of debt including interest costs.


.
Anyone paying attention knew disaster administration 2.0 would be one of fraud/scam/grift. A useless, weak orange bag O' shit has installed a cabinet of billionaires to feast on our government and taxpayer resources. What could go wrong?

At least DEI is gone (because that was important to the rubes), inflation will be non existent, gas/egg prices are down to their lowest levels ever, government will never run more efficiently and illegal immigration is solved because... Tariffs! That's it! :rolleyes:

Magaturds may be dumb dupes, but at least those libz sure got owned. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom