"We're gonna have a second reconciliation package in the fall, and a third in the spring of next year...AND we're gonna have recission packages."

[acptulsa]

Trump is cutting spending...

On what? Last I heard, every penny saved on bennies for Americans buys more bombs for Nuttyyahoo. Or food he can use to lure Gazans within range of IDF guns...

 

[PAF]

And Trump cut spending.
He's going to cut even more.

Doing things cheaper because of technology/efficiency and in the hands of the Elite doesn't make the programs go away. Only eliminating the agencies will make the agencies go away.

But you, like Trump, love to Bait and Switch. For example, the new Surveillance Funding that's in your and Trump's Big Beautiful Bill.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Doing things cheaper because of technology/efficiency and in the hands of the Elite doesn't make the programs go away. Only eliminating the agencies will make the agencies go away.

But you, like Trump, love to Bait and Switch. For example, the new Surveillance Funding that's in your and Trump's Big Beautiful Bill.

He is eliminating agencies, ask USAID.

You can't make facts go away by pretending not to know them.

 

[PAF]

He is eliminating agencies, ask USAID.

You can't make facts go away by pretending not to know them.

USAID has been absorbed into the U.S. Department of State and is being replaced by a proposed new agency called the US Agency for International Humanitarian Assistance (USIHA). This change occurred after USAID was terminated on July 1, 2025.

Read the BBB for information concerning Funding for Surveillance. Then you can get back to me about pretending.

 

[Swordsmyth]

USAID has been absorbed into the U.S. Department of State and is being replaced by a proposed new agency called the US Agency for International Humanitarian Assistance (USIHA). This change occurred after USAID was terminated on July 1, 2025.

Read the BBB for information concerning Funding for Surveillance. Then you can get back to me about pretending.

That's a rumor, it's not going to happen.

And USAID is far from the only one eliminated or set to be eliminated.

 

[acptulsa]

You can't make facts go away by pretending not to know them.

But you can try -- and you do try. But you've still heard that for every puppet company and/or agency the CIA throws away, it creates two more.

Your problem is you're afraid to look at the bottom line. USAID was CIA, and Langley is suffering no cuts.

 

[Swordsmyth]

But you can try -- and you do try. But you've still heard that for every puppet company and/or agency the CIA throws away, it creates two more.

Your problem is you're afraid to look at the bottom line. USAID was CIA, and Langley is suffering no cuts.

USAID was CIA, and their loss of funds is a giant cut to the CIA.

 

[acptulsa]

USAID was CIA, and their loss of funds is a giant cut to the CIA.

But of course you don't have any more access to their funding information than any of the rest of us. So you can't possibly know that's a fact.

You sure take a lot of politics on a disturbingly religious sort of faith.

 

[CaptUSA]

And Trump cut spending.
He's going to cut even more.

Like his first term. He cut in some places to give you idiots a talking point, but increased spending in lots of other places to make the donors happy. In the end, he's spending WAY more than Biden did.

 

[oyarde]

Are you saying that federal spending in 2026 will be lower than it was in 2025?

You are right about some people. It is a mistake to make debt the critical factor rather than spending. Whether the spending is funded by debt, by income taxes, by tariffs, or by any other means, the measure of the damage done is equal to the amount being spent.

My guess is in future no way yearly spending goes down. We dont even currently ave a system conducive for it. Basically its a failed welfare system . Welfare for foriegn countries , welfare for US . Trumps most recent bill came out of Reps w/ about 4 1/2 trillion in tax cuts in 3 yrs and around 2 3/4 trillion in cuts over ten yrs to green energy scam graft , medicaid and food stamps , all not legitimate fed tax dollar spending. Senate sends back w/ 1.7 trillion in spending cuts and 4 1/2 tillion in tax cuts .Dems get power all cuts done away w/. . If I sent a bill to senate now w / 150 billion in cuts of any kind it would get no more tan 25 to 30 votes from pubs and zero votes from dems , impossible to get cuts yr over yr. 6 in ten Americans work , 2 pay more tax tan recieve , Voters vote for stuff from candidates . My guess for debt at end of 2028 is 43.8 trillion, estimates all over 1.1 per yr Im going w/ 1.94

 

[ARealConservative]

Certain functions of government are necessary for the government to do so we even have a global economy.

That has been the case since Thomas Jefferson went to war against the Barbary pirates because they were capturing our ships and taking us as slaves.

In 1964 we spent $400 per citizen per year and in 2024 we spent 19,500 per citizen per year

we don't need to go back to Jefferson to see times of sanity

 

[nikcers]

Like his first term. He cut in some places to give you idiots a talking point, but increased spending in lots of other places to make the donors happy. In the end, he's spending WAY more than Biden did.

Cuts against unfunded liabilities are still cuts. You do that by having a pro growth economy.

If all you ever cut at is the funded government then you are are missing the real goalposts.

Without growth the hidden taxes will just exponentially grow until the debt just wont matter because we wont have a country anymore because the hidden taxes will take it all away.

 

[oyarde]

GDP average from yr 2000 to 2024 was 1.9 percent , Apr and May avg in 2025 was .3 . US isnt growing its way out of present situation by any means

 

[CaptUSA]

Cuts against unfunded liabilities are still cuts. You do that by having a pro growth economy.

If all you ever cut at is the funded government then you are are missing the real goalposts.

Without growth the hidden taxes will just exponentially grow until the debt just wont matter because we wont have a country anymore because the hidden taxes will take it all away.

DERP. DERP.


Cutting government spending IS pro-growth. Spending is the real tax on the economy.

 

[nikcers]

In 1964 we spent $400 per citizen per year and in 2024 we spent 19,500 per citizen per year

we don't need to go back to Jefferson to see times of sanity

In 1964 we were 50% of a smaller country. California was 20 million people not 40 million people.

California didnt build twice as many homes and twice and many roads.

The problem isnt the money we are spending its the regulations the democrats put on in order to drive prices higher.

They put on environmental regulations which are hidden taxes and the amount of hidden taxes we are paying from having an open border and environmental regulations are several times what we paid in 1960.

The amount the government spends per person is higher because the cost of living is realistic several times what it was in 1964.

One of the modern costs is our professional military which we didnt have until the 70s when we ended the military draft. It costs more to have a professional military but we get the freedom of not being drafted.

 

[ARealConservative]

In 1964 we were 50% of a smaller country. California was 20 million people not 40 million people.

a family of 4 would have a per person cost lower than a family of 2.

we should be spending less per citizen via the economy of scale. what the fuck are you blabbering on about?

 

[nikcers]

DERP. DERP.


Cutting government spending IS pro-growth. Spending is the real tax on the economy.

Cutting government spending isn't pro growth if you don't remove the hidden taxes that are built into the government that ARE government spending.

These are the things that our supposed friends like Elon Musk were really pissed off at for losing. Like the $7500 dollars per electric vehicle that got removed in the spending bill.

 

[nikcers]

a family of 4 would have a per person cost lower than a family of 2.

we should be spending less per citizen via the economy of scale. what the fuck are you blabbering on about?

You dont spend less with more people. Things dont always cost less at a higher scale.

If I live in a house with 4 people and 4 people come over into our border if they dont build another house for the other 4 people then the price of my house is higher because there is more demand for my house.

 

[ARealConservative]

You dont spend less with more people. Things dont always cost less at a higher scale.

If I live in a house with 4 people and 4 people come over into our border if they dont build another house for the other 4 people then the price of my house is higher because there is more demand for my house.

wow - you are an economic buffoon.

a family of 4 went from $1,600 to $80,000, and your explanation is California has more people

nothing about the debt cycle.

 

[nikcers]

wow - you are an economic buffoon.

a family of 4 went from $1,600 to $80,000, and your explanation is California has more people

nothing about the debt cycle.

No the whole country has twice the amount of people compared to 1964.

I used California as an example but the whole country is like that.

I use the example of housing because its the primary expense of most of our country who lives paycheck to paycheck because housing prices have gone up so much.