Slashing welfare': GOP eyes chopping $5 trillion to pay for Trump priorities — like tax cuts

[Hawaiian]

23 minutes ago, swissie said:

And more millions that need "food-stamps" to keep them from starving.

 

This is not happening in Sudan or Eastern Timbuku, this is happening in the richest country of the world.

The sad thing about food stamps is some of the things it covers, like soft drinks, sugar laden candy and cookies, etc. Before the advent of EBT cards, food stamps were traded like currency to buy illegal drugs, tobacco and alcohol.

Medical insurance is another area where there is so much waste.  People going to the doctor for minor ailments because they have cheap or free medical insurance.

Also the amount of fraud is unbelievable.

[swissie]

6 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

The sad thing about food stamps is some of the things it covers, like soft drinks, sugar laden candy and cookies, etc. Before the advent of EBT cards, food stamps were traded like currency to buy illegal drugs, tobacco and alcohol.

Medical insurance is another area where there is so much waste.  People going to the doctor for minor ailments because they have cheap or free medical insurance.

Also the amount of fraud is unbelievable.

Truly, the amount of fraud is unbelievable. Just think of all the international corporations that are allowed to pay their taxes in some exotic islands. Practically paying no taxes.

 

Therefore, I would support any effort that all employees of McDonald would be allowed to pay their taxes in the Cayman Islands.

[Hawaiian]

10 minutes ago, swissie said:

Truly, the amount of fraud is unbelievable. Just think of all the international corporations that are allowed to pay their taxes in some exotic islands. Practically paying no taxes.

 

Therefore, I would support any effort that all employees of McDonald would be allowed to pay their taxes in the Cayman Islands.

Yes, it is unconscionable that the tax loopholes exist.  The Citizens United decision has made it all the more difficult to fix.  Tons of money fighting change.

Rather doubt it if front line McDonald's workers would pay any federal income taxes and most likely little or no state income taxes.  However, I see the point you make.

[candide]

2 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

Read my post again.  I intentionally placed a comma between U.S. aid to illegal immigrants and contributions to the U.N. and it's agencies. 

I appreciate your attempt, but it does not furnish where probably most of the money is spent.

What I posted is a very broad indicator, but it shows that the U.S. is proportionally not a large contributor. There is no reason why it would be a larger contributor for a specific part of its contribution.

Unless of course you could articulate a more convincing rationale than just "probably".

[Hawaiian]

47 minutes ago, candide said:

What I posted is a very broad indicator, but it shows that the U.S. is proportionally not a large contributor. There is no reason why it would be a larger contributor for a specific part of its contribution.

Unless of course you could articulate a more convincing rationale than just "probably".

https://www.newsweek.com/illegal-immigration-costs-us-billions-biden-administration-policy-impact-taxpayer-burden/1866555

$150.7 billion is a lot of money.  NYC and the state of California alone, have spent $22 billion.

[wavodavo]

On 1/12/2025 at 10:22 PM, Lacessit said:

No surprise welfare cuts should be in the mix.

 

It's surprising how many welfare recipients had to put their hand on the stove, before finding out it was hot.

 

Work for the dole simply creates a new bureaucracy to administer it.

Work for the dole was applied  in several small country towns in Australia in  1998. In small towns where the was little employment and the council couldn't afford to employ all of the  these workers they were put to work building footpaths,reparing roads, gardening ,cleaning up the streets etc,etc. It was very successful but I think it was curtailed because of pressure from the do - gooders who said that they shouldn't have to work and it's not fair as they can't sleep in until lunchtime every day.

[The Cyclist]

On 1/13/2025 at 3:59 AM, jimmybcool said:

What exactly IS a "fair share"?  I hear the term bandied about but no one ever mentions the top 5% of earners pay the majority of income taxes. 

 

 

That is an argument that is also trotted out in the UK.

 

Which is why I am advocate of a flat rate of 20% income tax.

 

Everybody pays the same rate @ 20% of current income. That seems fair to me.

 

That rate would also apply to those on welfare / benefits above the tax threshold. Not sure sitting on your **** picking up tax free welfare / benefits is very fair either.

[Lacessit]

1 minute ago, wavodavo said:

Work for the dole was applied  in several small country towns in Australia in  1998. In small towns where the was little employment and the council couldn't afford to employ all of the  these workers they were put to work building footpaths,reparing roads, gardening ,cleaning up the streets etc,etc. It was very successful but I think it was curtailed because of pressure from the do - gooders who said that they shouldn't have to work and it's not fair as they can't sleep in until lunchtime every day.

I have no problem with work for the dole, it's the bureaucracy that bugs me.

 

Picture yourself as a welfare recipient reporting in by phone, and having to hang on for hours listening to muzak, and chewing up their phone credit.

 

I am supposed to report going overseas to Centrelink. After waiting for 45 minutes on the phone, I said screw it and hung up. Never heard from them afterwards, so it can't be that important.

[The Cyclist]

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I am supposed to report going overseas to Centrelink. After waiting for 45 minutes on the phone, I said screw it and hung up. Never heard from them afterwards, so it can't be that important.

 

A good example of beaurocratic nonsense that costs and wastes money.

 

What is wrong with sending an email to a centrelink central email address ?

 

You now have a copy for your own records.

 

Job Jobbed, 2 minutes, costs nothing, and saves 45 minutes hanging on a phone.

 

Now multiply that crap across every single Government department.

 

Not a dig at Australia, It applies across the whole Western World.
 

 

[Lacessit]

1 minute ago, The Cyclist said:

 

That is an argument that is also trotted out in the UK.

 

Which is why I am advocate of a flat rate of 20% income tax.

 

Everybody pays the same rate @ 20% of current income. That seems fair to me.

 

That rate would also apply to those on welfare / benefits above the tax threshold. Not sure sitting on your **** picking up tax free welfare / benefits is very fair either.

What the billionaires dodge in taxes is minuscule compared to the companies they run.

 

Elon Musk pays no tax because he has no income. His wealth comes from the growth in capital value of shares in the companies he owns. In 2017 and 2018, Trump paid just $750 each year in income tax.

 

Companies are taxed on their net profit. There is any number of profit-shifting and fake loan schemes to minimize net profit.

 

What would be fair? A tax on revenue, personal AND companies. Revenue can't be shuffled off the books, or concealed.

 

A bean counter in Australia calculated a 1.5% tax on revenue would see the government debt retired in a year, with ensuing years as gravy for infrastructure.

 

I know I would have loved to pay 1.5% on my income when I was a working stiff.

 

Taxes mostly hit the middle class, they don't realize how badly they are dudded.

[The Cyclist]

19 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

What the billionaires dodge in taxes is minuscule compared to the companies they run.

 

That current tax laws are not fit for purpose, is a different argument from the wastage in monetary terms across Government Departments.

 

But to directly address your billionaires remark. Ever heard of the term " asset rich, but cash poor "

 

Which is what the majority of " The Rich Pensioners " in the UK are, and most likely all other Western Nations also.

 

But it neatly destroys the mantra of " Tax the rich more "

 

Sure, there are some obscenely rich people in the World. I don't happen to believe that those individuals should bear the financial responsibility of the **** ups caused by Governments.

[jimmybcool]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

That is an argument that is also trotted out in the UK.

 

Which is why I am advocate of a flat rate of 20% income tax.

 

Everybody pays the same rate @ 20% of current income. That seems fair to me.

 

That rate would also apply to those on welfare / benefits above the tax threshold. Not sure sitting on your **** picking up tax free welfare / benefits is very fair either.

 

Personally I am an advocate of setting a minimum level of income to survive which everyone gets to earn tax free.  Over that then a flat tax as you mention.  It means poor people aren't taxed until they emerge to middle class then they become payers and should recognize the value of controlled government spending.

[jesimps]

Good! Now the great American people can get back some of their money the Democrat highwaymen have taken from them, which of course has been passed on to the feckless, the couch potatoes and the incomers. Now I think we'll see more willingness to work if people know they're going to keep hold of more of their hard-earned.

If only Labour in the UK had reduced taxes instead of piling on more public debt in its budget, the country wouldn't be heading back to being the basket case of Europe which it was not too many years ago.

Europe or the US, the left never fail to make a mess of things. Their past record says it all.

[John Drake]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Slight problem with that. Modern youth are often too fat to be in the military. Better to have a separate organisation that concentrates on separating them from the blubber before they are put into the military, or perhaps not be in the military at all. Discipline and fitness are not the sole preserve of the military, and I'm not in favour of many of the youths I see being given weapons training.

 

I started first grade primary school in 1961, the same year JFK began a drive for physical fitness in the schools. Seemed to work pretty well for most of that decade. Nowadays, I don't know if it's safe to let students go outdoors for PE or other activities. No wonder they look like little whales.

[Lacessit]

18 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

That current tax laws are not fit for purpose, is a different argument from the wastage in monetary terms across Government Departments.

 

But to directly address your billionaires remark. Ever heard of the term " asset rich, but cash poor "

 

Which is what the majority of " The Rich Pensioners " in the UK are, and most likely all other Western Nations also.

 

But it neatly destroys the mantra of " Tax the rich more "

 

Sure, there are some obscenely rich people in the World. I don't happen to believe that those individuals should bear the financial responsibility of the **** ups caused by Governments.

I would not say I am a "Rich Pensioner". Comfortable, in Thailand. A part pension plus investment income. I would be struggling in Australia.

 

IMO I am entitled to any pension I can legally get, having worked for 45 years, and paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes.

 

If you want to talk about money being wasted, ASIC is a prime example of costing investors millions of dollars due to its incompetence before, during and after the GFC. If it had been doing its job, I would not be drawing a part pension now.

 

ASIC stands for Australian Securities and Investment Commission. To my knowledge, ASIC has never asked a single investor for input on their regulations.

 

I'll give one example of ASIC's incompetence:

 

Dr. John Hewson is a former Prime Ministerial aspirant, and respected financial commentator.

 

In the early 2000's, he was chairman of Elderslie Finance Ltd. He advanced a loan of $70 million to one of the directors, Peter Alexis George, with terms undisclosed to investors and shareholders.

 

George subsequently disappeared with the $70 million. To this day, his whereabouts are unknown.

 

Hewson continued to tout Elderslie to investors, while knowing it was in financial difficulties.

 

Elderslie collapsed in 2008. Receivers returned 2 cents in the dollar to investors about 6 years later, after pocketing juicy fees from the corpse.

 

Hewson was never questioned by ASIC as to what collateral George advanced for the loan. Apparently there was none. AFAIK ASIC never tried to find George.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, The Cyclist said:

 

A good example of beaurocratic nonsense that costs and wastes money.

 

What is wrong with sending an email to a centrelink central email address ?

 

You now have a copy for your own records.

 

Job Jobbed, 2 minutes, costs nothing, and saves 45 minutes hanging on a phone.

 

Now multiply that crap across every single Government department.

 

Not a dig at Australia, It applies across the whole Western World.
 

 

Bureaucracies are worse than businesses because it is harder to weed out the clock watchers and slackers. It's also tough to avoid tossing out the baby - the valuable employees - with the bathwater, as they may be less pre-occupied with self-preservation. That's the dilemma Trump and his cohorts will have after January 20 - how to keep government functioning while they slash numbers.

 

Having said that, IME the bigger a private company is, the more likely it is to accumulate competing bureaucracies, like maggots on a fly-blown sheep.

[The Cyclist]

37 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

would not say I am a "Rich Pensioner". Comfortable, in Thailand. A part pension plus investment income. I would be struggling in Australia.

 

The point that I was making, for the UK. The pensioners are considered " Rich " because they own a house. The concept of " Asset rich, cash poor " escapes the mentalists that cry " Tax the rich.

 

40 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

If you want to talk about money being wasted, ASIC is a prime example of costing investors millions of dollars due to its incompetence before, during and after the GFC. If it had been doing its job, I would not be drawing a part pension now.

 

Investors. I was brought up in an era when the mantra was " Your Investment could decrease as well as increase " You pays your money, you takes your chances.

 

What Private Companies &  Private investment firms do with money is the concern of them, and the investors. Which is a totally different animal to Governments and the criminal waste of taxpayers money.

[Lacessit]

11 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

The point that I was making, for the UK. The pensioners are considered " Rich " because they own a house. The concept of " Asset rich, cash poor " escapes the mentalists that cry " Tax the rich.

 

 

Investors. I was brought up in an era when the mantra was " Your Investment could decrease as well as increase " You pays your money, you takes your chances.

 

What Private Companies &  Private investment firms do with money is the concern of them, and the investors. Which is a totally different animal to Governments and the criminal waste of taxpayers money.

There is asset rich, and there is asset ridiculously rich.

 

In Australia, when people are eligible for the age pension, the family home is exempted from asset testing criteria.

 

It is quite possible for a couple living in a $20 million mansion to be eligible for the full age pension.

 

OTOH, a non-home owner with $947,500 in assets gets zero pension.

 

IMO that's cockeyed, the couple in the mansion is extracting the urine.

[simple1]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You seem unaware that the US is supposedly a capitalist country. If you want it to be a socialist country that would require a change of government policy.

 

Most Western countries are capitalist in nature and have policies in place to support the less fortunate. For some reason it appears more than a few US citizens resent assisting the less fortunate. IMO hardly the attitude to Make America Great Again which was once crystalised by the Marshall Plan.

[simple1]

15 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

It would be interesting to see the statistics that compare how much the U.S. contributes in aid to illegal immigrants, the U.N. and its many agencies, and international disaster relief, to other G20 countries.  Have I missed any other similar contributions?  Maybe this might shed some light on where all the money is going to.

 

 

So far as I know the US doesn't contribute international funding for "illegal immigrants", but for asylum seekers, refugees and humanitarian relief efforts.

[Hawaiian]

9 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

So far as I know the US doesn't contribute international funding for "illegal immigrants", but for asylum seekers, refugees and humanitarian relief efforts.

Never mentioned international funding for that purpose.  You took it upon yourself to interpret it that way.  Seems you failed you read ALL my posts regarding this issue.

[The Cyclist]

17 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

It is quite possible for a couple living in a $20 million mansion to be eligible for the full age pension.

 

OTOH, a non-home owner with $947,500 in assets gets zero pension.

 

IMO that's cockeyed, the couple in the mansion is extracting the urine.

 

A $20:million mansion cannot buy you food, which is a bit of a problem if you do not have any, or only a small amount of income.

 

$947,500 in cash, buys you lots and lots of food.

 

But it does highlight quite nicely the concept of ' Asset Rich, cash poor '

 

 

 

[simple1]

7 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Never mentioned international funding for that purpose.  You took it upon yourself to interpret it that way.  Seems you failed you read ALL my posts regarding this issue.

 

Oh...from your post "compare how much the U.S. contributes in aid to illegal immigrants" what have I misunderstood?

[wwest5829]

On 1/12/2025 at 7:29 PM, candide said:

I have posted information showing that, contrary to MAGA beliefs,  Republican voters are also beneficiaries of welfare. It's true that there are more Dem recipients than Republican recipients, but Republican recipients are concentrated in rural counties which are critical for the GOP.

 

My point is that GOP politicians who have been elected in such counties may not be eager to shoot themselves in the foot, despite the dominant political discourse. 

I’m thinking those GOP politicians will just do what they always do … flip the script. Blame the Democrats for forcing a cut in welfare because it is a burden on the working middle class taxpayer (completely ignoring the proposed tax cuts favoring the wealthy, military spending or government business subsidies. Seems to work for them …

[Lacessit]

55 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

A $20:million mansion cannot buy you food, which is a bit of a problem if you do not have any, or only a small amount of income.

 

$947,500 in cash, buys you lots and lots of food.

 

But it does highlight quite nicely the concept of ' Asset Rich, cash poor '

 

 

 

The motivation is to leave an inheritance. And milk the pension system.

 

No one needs a $20 million home. A $1 million home is sufficient for most people.

 

Of course, there would then be tax on the income arising from investing the $19 million freed up.

 

IMO it's pure greed.

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

https://www.newsweek.com/illegal-immigration-costs-us-billions-biden-administration-policy-impact-taxpayer-burden/1866555

$150.7 billion is a lot of money.  NYC and the state of California alone, have spent $22 billion.

 

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

 

Oh...from your post "compare how much the U.S. contributes in aid to illegal immigrants" what have I misunderstood?

ALL my posts.

[The Cyclist]

45 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The motivation is to leave an inheritance. And milk the pension system.

 

There is no milking of the system. If you have had money deducted through tax and National Insurance throughout your working life on the provisio that you will receive a State Pension.

 

That was the rules, imposed by Government ( certainly in the UK )

 

Don't blame Government **** ups in not recognising a Ponzi Scheme and taking measures to rectify it, by trying to blame people for claiming a Pension that  the Government mandated in the 1st place.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

 

 

ALL my posts.

thanks for clarification. So currently roughly US$150 billion p.a. for "illegal immigrants'. Surely any cost cutting efforts impacting US citizens . refugees, asylum seekers etc should not b e impacted by the cost to US taxpayers for "illegals". Looking in from the outside I would assume US Administrations will be dealing with illegals for years to come. Personally I think the arrest / deport them all from MAGA would is not feasible unless government to government arrangements are negotiated, resources funded and so on  One assumes it will take more than an Administrations term to make any meaningful difference until the root causes are addressed.

[Hawaiian]

19 minutes ago, simple1 said:

thanks for clarification. So currently roughly US$150 billion p.a. for "illegal immigrants'. Surely any cost cutting efforts impacting US citizens . refugees, asylum seekers etc should not b e impacted by the cost to US taxpayers for "illegals". Looking in from the outside I would assume US Administrations will be dealing with illegals for years to come. Personally I think the arrest / deport them all from MAGA would is not feasible unless government to government arrangements are negotiated, resources funded and so on  One assumes it will take more than an Administrations term to make any meaningful difference until the root causes are addressed.

Not widely known is deportations are already underway.  Many Republican and some Democrat members of Congress have already indicated they are behind Trump's push to deport illegal aliens with criminal records.  If I am not mistaken, some countries have said they will accept deportees.  Have to wait and see how this comes down. 

I agree mass immigration will not happen although once the process begins it will accelerate.  At what speed is anyone's guess.

[candide]

8 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

https://www.newsweek.com/illegal-immigration-costs-us-billions-biden-administration-policy-impact-taxpayer-burden/1866555

$150.7 billion is a lot of money.  NYC and the state of California alone, have spent $22 billion.

Oooops! Sorry, I initially misunderstood your question.

 

However the thread is about the federal budget.

I looked further and found that “The federal government spent over $66 billion on illegal immigrants in 2023." (From the same committee)

https://budget.house.gov/press-release/the-cost-of-the-border-crisis-1507-billion-and-counting

 

So let's assume illegal immigration is reduced by 2/3, it's an spending cut of about $44 billion. However, there must also be a cost of preventing illegal immigration but I have no information about it.