Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:55 AM
 
9,855 posts, read 15,220,413 times
Reputation: 5481

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post

There is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. For a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the above pie chart.

The Federal Pie Chart
And now let's show an honest representation of where tax money goes. As usual you selectively choose sources. Yes, military spending is a big problem, but social welfare spending is an even bigger problem than that.

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/images/stories/tax-dollars-spent-100405-02.jpg (broken link)
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,892 posts, read 26,570,898 times
Reputation: 25790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
No, it is not. "Real" simply adjusts the value according to a price index. The "CPI" is the "Consumer Price Index" which is a government figure your charts are using to normalize the data.

Even if we assume CPI was an accurate measure of prices (it isn't), price indices do not adjust for economic growth.




Because, like I said, we grow more productive and efficient every year.



Because Americans earn more than they did in 1950.

Listen, your point may be valid, that the government is growing as a share of the economy .... however these graphs are totally misleading and simply do not lead to that conclusion.
I'm having trouble finding good data, but from what I have seen, average income has increased by ~1.5x in the same time period (adjusted for constant dollars). That is a relation to productivity. Yet taxes have increased more than 3X and spending 5x.

Why should government spending per person INCREASE? If the federal government saw the same gains in productivity that the private sector has, costs (spending per person) should be going down, not up.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,974,797 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
The beast in the room that nobody wants to address of course is entitlement programs that eat away and will only get worse as baby boomers hit the rolls at 10K a day.
Actually the beast in the room is rising healthcare costs plus rising defense costs.

Here is Defense expenditures:


As health care eats up a greater part of GDP, all other costs become less relevant.

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:08 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,243 posts, read 44,979,798 times
Reputation: 13762
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post
And now let's show an honest representation of where tax money goes. As usual you selectively choose sources. Yes, military spending is a big problem, but social welfare spending is an even bigger problem than that.

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/images/stories/tax-dollars-spent-100405-02.jpg (broken link)
Social programs spending (at least 52% of the budget, if not more) is the bulk of the federal budget. National defense and security is only 21%.

A major reason social welfare spending consumes a large portion of the budget is the fact that those receiving public assistance have a birth rate 3 times that of everyone else. (More info here: https://www.city-data.com/forum/21896737-post150.html )

The welfare-dependent class is increasing exponentially, as are the costs of continuing to financially support them.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:09 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,892 posts, read 26,570,898 times
Reputation: 25790
Defense spending per person in constant dollars:

(While I support a strong defense, I don't support spending more than we did during the cold war and VN. There is room to make significant cuts. How about we retire some generals, admirals and sensitivity trainers?)



Welfare:



The 600 lb gorilla, health care.




Last but not least, pensions for federal government employees. Note that this is about equal to defense and health care spending. Think we have a problem here?




source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...s1li011lcn_00f
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:10 AM
 
3,457 posts, read 3,627,812 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
I'm having trouble finding good data, but from what I have seen, average income has increased by ~1.5x in the same time period (adjusted for constant dollars).
As long as you're adjusting by CPI, you're being misleading. You call it "constant dollars," but it is not constant dollars. There is no such thing as a constant dollar; there is no conceivable way to measure such a thing.

A better, but still flawed way to measure what you're trying to measure is government spending as a % of GDP, and government revenue as a % of GDP.

You can see that we've had our ups and downs, but generally speaking, the trend has been pretty stable.

http://nationalpriorities.org/resources/federal-budget-101/charts/general/federal-outlays-and-revenues-1930-2015-perc-gdp/ (broken link)
for example:


Quote:
Why should government spending per person INCREASE?
Because incomes have historically increased. when you make $10,000 and pay 15%, that yields less revenue and spending than when you make $11,000 and pay 15%. Where did the extra $1,000 come from over the course of the year?

Incomes increase for a wide variety of reasons; in this case I'd say it is a result of an increasing household debt-to-income ratio, but it could also be driven by simple economic growth.

Quote:
If the federal government saw the same gains in productivity that the private sector has, costs (spending per person) should be going down, not up.
Productivity isn't the only thing that drives this "growth", it is just as much a result of private-sector debt creation as anything else.

Last edited by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus; 11-29-2011 at 09:21 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,861,601 times
Reputation: 10791
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post
And now let's show an honest representation of where tax money goes. As usual you selectively choose sources. Yes, military spending is a big problem, but social welfare spending is an even bigger problem than that.
Not what I find.


http://reality-based-world.org/2011/...eral-spending/


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...n_1067167.html
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:16 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,243 posts, read 44,979,798 times
Reputation: 13762
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Not what I find.
That's not the entire budget. Discretionary spending is only approx. 1/3 of the federal budget.

Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,855,481 times
Reputation: 24863
What is breaking the bank? The FORVER WAR and the financiers and profiteers gaining from it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:21 AM
 
9,855 posts, read 15,220,413 times
Reputation: 5481
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
What is breaking the bank? The FORVER WAR and the financiers and profiteers gaining from it.
Have you read this thread? Welfare programs are 'breaking the bank' much more than war.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's not the entire budget. Discretionary spending is only approx. 1/3 of the federal budget.



I agree completely that welfare programs pose a greater financial stress to this country than military does at this time. I also, however, am a big advocate of spending cuts across the board. Dramatic non-partisan cuts to both military and welfare programs is what this country needs right now.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top