No offense, but you're not going to get to the truth of the problem by looking at a graph.  I would bet that in every one of those larger slices is a few percentiles that go to pet projects and other BS spending.  Not to mention people abusing the bureaucracy and charging far too much to the government.  Still remember the story of the couple hundred dollar hammer a contractor charged to the government.  And of course, nothing was done about it.

So yes, you probably could find a few small cuts here or there in the defense budget.  Of course, I would never support cutting soldiers pay or benefits, but I bet there is some overcharging in that department, too.  Don't get me wrong, there needs to be something done about Social Security and Medicare.  Especially since it really isn't a kind of trust, but more a tax that government feels they can spend how they choose, regardless of what they say its for.  However, this Congress and this president lack the stomach for it.

In the end, we'll be much better when people take personal responsibility for their life choices, we shrink the federal government greatly and put the power back where it belongs, in the states.  Though, a lot of states need to start looking at their spending habits, as well.

Thismeintiel, ear marks are actually a very, very small portion of the budget. That's what the Other Non-Discretionary Off Budget Spending piece of the pie is.

The overspending on purchases, I'll agree to that. The GAO is supposed to curb that stuff but obviously doesn't do a very good job. But it would also require thousands of people working round the clock monitoring every monetary military transactions but we'd end up spending the same amount just in salaries to those overseers that is wasted in overcharges. And even then they are a small portion of the military budget compared to the overall spending. Doesn't matter how much you get charged for a hammer or a warhead, war isn't cheap. But overcharging is a common theme in any 3rd party paying system. Go to the hospital and get charged $5 for a single Tylenol and you'll see what I mean.

Quick question.. if they are going to remove benefits such as Medicare and Social Security, does that mean I will no longer be required to pay out that money on my checks? I'd have a good chunk of my monthly salary back if that were the case.

But most likely they just want to drop the benefits but keep the taxable income... our government sucks.

NightSurge, they are not removing the entitlements.


Ron Paul has a plan that would allow people to opt out of the entitlement programs so you would keep your money but your retirement would be solely up to you.

As it should be.

So you are telling me that Ron Paul has a plan where I can take 7.65% of my income and make it into my own retirement instead of putting it into a government retirement that I completely and totally don't trust?  Sign me the hell up.

(Not making this much currently...only 19 years old, but the point is still being made) 7.65% of $100,000 is $7,645 per year.  Since this income is already taxed, if you would take $5,000 of it, and put it into a Roth IRA each year, making an average of 8%, you could come out with a sweet $1,259,282.50.  That amount of money is worth the equivalent of ~$386,000 today figuring in 3% inflation per year for those 40 years.  So if you have a health insurance plan costing you $10,000 per year (with today's dollars) once you retire, you could be taking $20,000 out for 20 years, and then your money would finally be gone.

With 10% interest and 3% inflation, you would instead have ~$675,000 (present value), and that $10,000 health insurance plan and the $20,000 "pension" would actually lead to you having well over $1 million after 20 years.

I guess the point I'm trying to make, I think I could turn $7,645 per year into a retirement plan so fucking much better than medicare and social security that it really would take me about 2 seconds to make up my mind if I was given the choice.

Now you see why Ron Paul has gained a lot of traction with young voters. His plans just makes so much sense that they seem so obvious once you hear them.

Like his debt ceiling plan. If we just freeze the budget for next year to this years level, we shave off $1 trillion from next years budget. Boehnor's plan and Obama's plan don't shave anything off next years budget at all.

I agree with this line of thinking completely, but the problem is that when the public sees the government taking 5-10% more taxes than it needs, the public demands tax cuts. Even when the budget is in deficit, there's always huge political pressure for tax cuts.

It's easier to convince the public that the state needs to pay off a debt than to convince them that the state needs to save for the future. And when you consider how hard it is to convince the public to pay off debt...

This. Plus my current employer does profit sharing which lands me roughly 20% of my income in an added retirement "bonus". Right now I'm only 22 and I only have a salary of 35k, but that's still $7,000 a year into a retirement plan without touching my income. That's basically the same as if I made 42k and instantly invested 7k of it.

I would SOOOO rather have that extra 7% back on my income.

Not to mention, this would help the economy by creating a higher demand for accountants and investment firms for personal retirement plans.

Social security is for people who can't afford to plan for retirement...

and forcing them to do it anyway.

Sure most other people could do a better job. (Though a couple would blow it).

Get rid of social security... and chances are the poor people who can't afford it, instead will spend that money on bills and crap and probably still go bankrupt...

and then it will take more government money to spend on them anyway. 

Honestly if anything, social security should work like an actual investment fund, where the money is invested.

Rather then being used by the US to buy bonds for itself so it can spend that money elsewhere.

It would be like if I was your investment broker, and I took your money and bought "bonds" from myself stating that when you retire i'll pay you the money back +5%.

There really isn't anything backing it.

Denmark is making like 10%+ a year with their investments.