• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Spending cuts (1 Viewer)

What spending cuts would you enact? (you can select more than one)

  • Total voters
    10
Welfare, especially after Clintons 96 welfare reform worked so well. I think it was something like 4.7 million folks that got off, and stayed off, that's a very good start IMHO.
 
What? No option for subsidies, the war on drugs or recycling?
 
I might also add, the department of education, you might as well just go ahead and kill that entire thing, what a waste!:roll:
 
Deegan said:
I might also add, the department of education, you might as well just go ahead and kill that entire thing, what a waste!:roll:
Click to expand...
IMO, the DOE is a neccesary dept. The problem is that it, like most other depts., would be better off ran by private parties. While there is some benefit derived from the DOE, it needs to stop being a platform-based dept. and get back to being result-based. This is where the private sector excels. Give them predetermined goalsand base their compensation on the level of success in accomplishing those goals and they will either find a way to accomplish them or stay far, far away from them. As a private corp. they would be far less predisposed to engage in activism because activism costs money and takes away from the end result of accomplishing the goals set for them.
 
faithful_servant said:
IMO, the DOE is a neccesary dept. The problem is that it, like most other depts., would be better off ran by private parties. While there is some benefit derived from the DOE, it needs to stop being a platform-based dept. and get back to being result-based. This is where the private sector excels. Give them predetermined goalsand base their compensation on the level of success in accomplishing those goals and they will either find a way to accomplish them or stay far, far away from them. As a private corp. they would be far less predisposed to engage in activism because activism costs money and takes away from the end result of accomplishing the goals set for them.
Click to expand...

I hear ya, if the states actually listened, it might work, they don't, so neither does this bureaucracy, unfortunately.
 
Deegan said:
I might also add, the department of education, you might as well just go ahead and kill that entire thing, what a waste!:roll:
Click to expand...
To some extent I agree. Bureaucracy in general is a complete waste of money - my money.
The gov today is getting too fat.
Other areas I would cut, government employees. What's the ratio at now? 15 government employees doing the same work that 1 private sector employee does? total waste.
Another funding to be cut, government subsidies for energy companies, agriculture, farming, and so on. If these institutes can not be competitive in the free market, they do not deserve to stay in business. As I stated in another thread. Why should I ahve to support a failing enterprise?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom