• Archives

  • Topics

  • Meta

  • The Boogeyman - Working Vacation
  • Coming Home
  • Via Serica

A Modest Proposal – Errata

Note:  The first three parts of this diatribe should be read first.

OK, now that we’ve cropped big chunks out of the federal budget by cutting the military and making changes to Social Security and healthcare spending, let’s look at the smaller parts of the budget that could use pruning.  At this point, we’re taking small bites, but it adds up.

First, lets look at the agencies that I think should be totally removed from the budget.  In other words, these federal agencies have failed so badly that I don’t believe that it’s worth spending a red cent on them:

  • Education – Educating our children is not a federal matter.  The educational success of the average American student has cratered since this department has created in 1979.  The individual states know that if they want to compete with not only each other, but also foreign locations, for 21st century industries, they need to provide good  education, and will finance education from their own funds accordingly.  The federal government should get out of states business.
  • Department of Veteran’s Affairs – The functions of this cabinet level department would be put back under the Department of Defense, where it belongs.  Let today’s soldiers look after the interests of yesterday’s soldiers, and eliminate redundant staff.
  • The Corporation for Public Broadcasting – I listen to NPR.  I watch PBS.  BooBoo and I watch Sesame Street together.  I contribute to my local NPR and PBS affiliates, and would up my contribution if I knew that my tax dollars weren’t being used to finance it.  I don’t think that my preferences for media should be financed by other people’s tax money.  If the CPB were to lose federal funding, something tells me that Elmo, Big Bird, and Cartalk would be OK.
  • Drug Enforcement Agency – The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 needs to be repealed.  If the states want to regulate what intoxicants may be consumed within their borders, and by whom, that’s up to them. The “War on Drugs” is an expensive endeavor that’s continued since before I was born, and there are more drugs on the streets of America than there were during the days of the flower children.  Get rid of this useless law, and disband the federal agency that has tried in vain to enforce it. 

Now for the agencies and activities that I think could be changed or pared down:

  • Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms – This agency will go back to what it was designed to do:  issue licenses, check paperwork, and collect taxes.  It will be moved under the Department of the Treasury.  When it finds evidence of a crime, it will refer the matter to a real law enforcement agency – The Secret Service. 
  • While we’re on that subject, there will be three federal law enforcement agencies  – The Federal Bureau of Investigations, the Secret Service, and the Federal Marshals.  Everyone else gets to turn in their badges and guns.  If a crime is found by someone in government, they can go to the real cops. All the “investigators” and “operators” in other areas of the federal government get walking papers.
  • Departments of Energy and Transportation – All of the “green” research money that’s been funneled to these agencies is cancelled.  If windmills, coal-powered automobiles, and solar films are such good ideas, someone in the private sector will find a way to make them efficient and economic without government funding. 
  • Additionally, the part of the Transportation budget that deals with interstate highways will be gone through with a fine toothed comb.  Hawaii, I’m sorry, but you can’t drive to the main land.  You don’t get an interstate.  Alaska, you get to make an argument as to why you get to keep your funding, but it better be good.  As for the lower 48, here’s a hint:  A four lane road that connects two interstates within the borders of a state is not an interstate, no matter how you number it, and the federal government is not going to pay for it anymore. 
  • College Education – In addition to getting rid of the Department of Education, the Pell Grant and Federal Student Loan programs are going to be changed and reduced.  First, , what you can study and get federal aid for will be changed.  As much as I like reading English literature, our country doesn’t need more English majors.  We need doctors, teachers, engineers, and a whole bunch of other professionals whose education didn’t amount to four plus years of navel gazing.  Only those studies that have a concrete benefit to the interests of the country will be subsidized by the American people.   Students can still major in Literature or whatever else they want, but they will have to find another way to finance their studies. 
  • On that note, who qualifies for student aid will change.  Using the G.I. Bill as a template, several years of low-paid public service will be mandatory before receiving a Pell Grant or federally subsidized student loan.  Prospective students won’t have to join the military.  Positions cleaning highways, picking up and maintaining parks, and working at the bottom rung of federal agencies for 4 to 5 years will work.  But those who want to join the military will have to serve fewer years to gain the same benefits.  Participation will be available to any citizen who wants to sign up, regardless of disability.  Participation will not be mandatory.  Students can go straight from high school to college, but they will do it without public financing.  The plus of this is that less money will be spent in college by 18 year olds who have no clue what he wants to do when they grow up, and the country will benefit from having fewer marketing, communications, and business majors graduate and demand top salaries.  Also, the services provided by these minimum-wage earning volunteers will save money when unionized government workers are shown the door.
  • Transportation Security Adminstration – The TSA screeners at the airports, bus stations, train stations, and the Applachian Trail get to go back to whatever they were doing before they hit the lottery and got a government job.  The individual airlines and such will pay for security again, but will do so while meeting standards established and enforced by the TSA.
  • The law will be changed so that members of Congress and the President will not be paid until the budget is passed, and will not be paid at all if the federal government runs a deficit unless there is a declared war.  In addition, no living or travel expenses for the Congress will be paid by the government.  If a congresswoman wants to live in a multi-million dollar condo in Georgetown and fly home every weekend, it’s on her own dime.  These two won’t save much money, comparatively, but they will light a fire under Congress to get their business done, be smart about spending, and go the heck home.

So that’s it.  We’ve cut the military by resizing it to meet reduced requirements, changed Social Security and healthcare to save money, and cut a few of the more nickel and dime costs out of the budget.  I’m sure I’ve slaughtered a few sacred cows, but we just flat can’t keep going the way we have been since the 1960’s.  We’ve been trying to have guns and butter at the same time since before I was born, and no-one has learned that this is impossible to maintain.  We will cut our spending.  The question is whether or not we have the guts to do take the pain of doing it ourselves or wait until the rug is pulled from beneath us.

I’m curious to hear y’all’s ideas on this.  What you agree with, what you disagree with, and what you think I’ve forgotten to include.

A Modest Proposal – Health Care Spending

Please read Parts 1 and 2 of this discussion first.

OK, now that I’ve touched on military spending and Social Security, we’ll give the pitchfork and torch crowd the final excuse to test my new moat: Health Care.

This one is going to probably be one of the tougher ones to cut. Health care spending that prevents disease and stops epidemics in their early stages is a force multiplier to the country and the economy.  Also, the emotionally wrenching thought of a sick child or grandmother being cut off from necessary care because the government refused to pay for it and they can’t afford to do so themselves makes me ill.  I’m tempted to either leave this one alone for the most part, or fall back on the old saw of finding efficiencies and reducing fraud.  But I think we will be able to make at least a few cost saving measures here without violating our senses of decency.

Health Care Spending


General Thoughts:

  •  Federal employees stationed within 50 miles of the District of Columbia, to include members of Congress and their staffs, employees of the Executive Branch, and members of the Judiciary and their staffs, will get their day to day medical care from military doctors at facilities equal in sophistication, staffing, conduct, and decor to the Troop Medical Clinics at the U.S. Army Infantry School.  This will not only cut down on the amount of money spent on these individuals’ medical care, but will give them a taste of what they put our soldiers through to get decent medical care.  Use of Bethesda Naval Hospital will be on a referral basis only, and military patients get priority in non-emergency care over civilians.
  • Health care plans for federal employees and their families will provide no more coverage than the best plan that the VA offers military retirees through Tricare or its replacement programs.This is an upper limit, not a gold standard.  If we have to have public employee unions, then I expect management negotiators to get the cheapest healthcare coverage for them as they can.
  • Anyone who signs up for a government health care program of any kind, including health care insurance for federal employees, voluntarily agrees to not sue the doctors and other medical professionals that treat them under the plan, unless that professional is charged and convicted of a crime in relation to the incident in question. For example, if your cardiologist makes a mistake in reading your test results, or makes the wrong choice in a diagnosis that could go in multiple ways, you can’t sue unless she committed a crime such as criminal negligence or malicious mischief.  That alone should bring down the cost of healthcare.

ObamaCare:

  • The existing legislation, good or bad, will be repealed.  I’m not going to get into whether or not it’s a good idea, we just flat can’t afford it without raising taxes to the point where I might as well be living in Helsinki.*
  • If you want to provide universal health coverage for everyone, change the Constitution to say that the government a) has that responsibility and b) has that power.   Then raise taxes enough to pay for it. 
  • Good Luck

Medicare:

For those outside the U.S., Medicare is the government program that provides a minimum level of health insurance to our senior citizens.  

  • Just as I said when I discussed reforming Social Security, current recipients and citizens born before January 1, 1950 will still be covered.
  • Citizens born between January 1, 1950 and January 1, 1965 will become eligible for Medicare on their 75th birthday.  In addition, the means testing I discussed for  Social Security will apply to Medicare as well.  
  • Citizens born on or after 1 January, 1965, warm up the lube some more.  You’re not going to get Medicare benefits either.  We get to keep paying into the system, but the amount will decrease over time as the number of Medicare recipients dwindles.  
  • To compensate for the fact that the second two groups will have increased out of pocket costs for healthcare in their later years, the cap on the amount of pre-tax income that can be put into Healthcare Spending Accounts will be lifted.

Now that we’ve established who will be covered by Medicare, let’s talk about how the program itself will change.

  • Elective procedures and therapies are not covered. Elective means “It is going to be very difficult for me to be a productive member of society without it”, not “If I don’t get this, I won’t be happy or pretty”.  I’m not saying that our seniors get a lot of Botox or Viagra, because I’m sure they don’t.  But a lot of the questionable coverage is going to have to go.
  • Only drugs that have gone generic, and are therefore less expensive, are covered. Drug companies can make their money on the non-government funded market.

Federal Medicaid Funding:

For those outside the U.S., Medicaid is the generic name for the program that provides minimal medical insurance to low income people.  It is partially financed and managed by the federal government, with the rest of the money and implementation provided by the individual states.

  • Again, the list of what services are covered by federal funding to Medicaid needs to be rigorously evaluated and thinned.  
  • Just as I recommended with Social Security, a condition of accepting Medicaid benefits will be to submit to regular, random testing for intoxicants.  If you want other people to pay for your health care, then don’t spend money on smokes, drugs, or alcohol. 
  • Again, only drugs that have gone generic, and are therefore less expensive, are covered. Drug companies can make their money on the non-government funded market.

Unfortunately, any effort to control spending on these programs will cause medications or procedures to become unavailable to the old or indigent.  While cancer treatment may cover chemotherapy or a mastectomy for a woman, due to budget cuts, it may not cover reconstructive surgery for her breast.  An orthopedist may make sure your broken back is fixed mechanically, but the length of physical therapy for the injury may not be optimal.  The dentist will make sure you have teeth in your head, but government programs won’t pay for braces.  In order to help make sure that these and other procedures that may not be absolutely necessary to staying alive, but are still important, I would encourage charitable giving by removing the cap on writing off charitable giving from individual and corporate income taxes.  Yes, I’m forcing some members of our society to go to charities for what is easily available from the government now, but I believe that charity should be voluntary, not withheld from paychecks under force of law.  Prior to 1965, the poor and old weren’t keeling over in the streets any more than they are now, and I don’t believe that asking them to go to charitable organizations for health care that isn’t absolutely essential will make it happen now.

That’s the last of the major spending areas I’ll talk about.  Next we’ll discuss the little, when compared to what that I believe could be done with military spending and entitlement programs, things that I think can be either reformed or eliminated to save just a bit more.

*Not that there’s anything wrong with Helsinki. It’s one of those places I’d run to if I ever had to leave the U.S.  It’s just not the most tax-friendly places on earth.

A Modest Proposal – Social Security Reform

In the first installment, I took a chainsaw to the military budget.  Now that I’ve cut my own favorite programs, let’s douse ourselves in salt water and jump on that third rail – entitlement programs.  Specifically, we’ll talk about Social Security in this installment.  Other programs such as Medicarewill be covered in the next installment.

Social Security

Here are some ground rules on my changes to Social Security:

  1. If you’re receiving it now, no changes to your benefits.  
  2. If you were born before January 1, 1950, you’re grandfathered in on the existing benefits plan
  3. If you were born between January 1, 1950 and January 1, 1965, you will receive benefits, but there are changes.
  4. If you were born on or after January 1, 1965, take a few minutes and pick out a nice lubricant, because this might be a little uncomfortable.
Details:
Current Recipients and citizens born before January 1, 1950:
  • Like I said, no changes to your benefits.  You have lived your entire lives paying into the system, and it’s not your fault you were hoodwinked by FDR and every president since then.  Plus, there isn’t enough time to build up your personal savings so that we can just dump the program entirely without pushing all of you onto an ice flow.
  • Seriously, we’re not going to rip the rug out from under the generation that survived the Great Depression, fought World War II and Korea, and made this country as rich as it is.
  • Heck, for putting up with the Baby Boomer’s and Generation X for the past 60 years or so after going through all that, you deserve better than you’re getting.  But the best we can do for you is to keep things going for you.
Citizens born between January1, 1950 and January 1, 1965
  • Anyone born between January 1, 1950, and January 1, 1965 will have their retirement age raised to 75, with no benefits for early retirement. Feel free to stop working any time you want.  You just don’t get a monthly check from the government until you’re 75.
  • When this age group reaches 65, the current retirement age, they stop paying Social Security taxes.  They also have no cap on the amount of money they can dump into IRA and 401x savings programs.  Between the two, hopefully the BabyBoomers can, as a group, make up for not making the hard choices in the 1970’s and 1980’s.
  • A couple of means tests will be applied to this age group.  First, if your average yearly income in the last 10 years of employment, age 65 to 75, is more than 200% of the poverty line, your benefits are reduced on a sliding scale.  For example, if the poverty line in the year you retire is $30,000, and you made on average more than $60,000 a year before taxes and pre-tax expenses between your 65th and 75th birthdays, your monthly benefit will be reduced on a sliding scale.
  • In addition to the test of income, if your household assets are worth more than 200% of the amount of benefits you would receive over the first 10 years after retirement, then your benefits are reduced on a sliding scale.     For the second test, let’s say you’re going to get $30,000 a year from Social Security, you would receive $300,000 in benefits in the first 10 years after retirement.  If your household assets are worth more than $600,000, your benefits will be reduced on a sliding scale.
  • It is quite possible that between these two means tests, a good percentage of this age group will receive no Social Security benefits at all.  Yeah, that sucks.  Sorry.
Citizens Born on or after January 1, 1965, (Which includes me and Irish Woman)
  • This generation will never get Social Security benefits for retirement
  • This generation will continue to pay into Social Security until all people born before January 1, 1965 have stopped receiving benefits.  As that population segment dwindles over the next few decades, the amount of tax paid into Social Security will decline.
  • To make up for the injustice of paying into a ponzi scheme that you know will leave you with nothing, the yearly cap on the amount of money that can be put into IRA’s and 401x retirement accounts will be removed.  You want to dump 75% of your income into a tax deferred account so that we don’t have to worry about feeding you when you want to stop working?  Have at it.
  • When this generation reaches 75, they may start taking money out of their private retirement accounts without penalty, but will pay taxes on it.  If that’s enough to stop working, congratulations.  Otherwise, we get to work until we can’t do it anymore.  
One exception to these rules is the Social Security benefits given out to people who are disabled to the point that they cannot work, regardless of age. This one is thornier.  The hard hearted part of me says that those who do not work, do not eat, but I know that there are members of our society who deserve to live, but are unable to provide for themselves.  I can honestly say that I don’t see this segment ever being moved completely off of government benefits, including Social Security.  A residual tax on the working portion of society will probably continue ad infinitum to pay for this.  But the criteria for being declared disabled to the point that you need government funding needs to be tightened, and a yearly evaluation of what someone on disability can and can’t do needs to be done.  For example, someone I know was in a horrific car accident several years ago.  To be honest, if she’d had the accident 10 years ago, she would have died.  Thanks to the miracle of modern medicine, and the fact that the ambulance took her to the hospital that’s used to treat injured drivers from the Indianapolis 500, she made it, but is physically and mentally impaired to the point that she’s on 100% disability.  In the intervening years, she’s continued to improve in both realms, but as far as I can tell, no evaluation of her abilities has been done, and no pressure is being put on her to find employment.  Situations such as this need to change.  Americans are an overwhelmingly charitable people, and we are more than willing to provide for those who are truly disabled.  But as someone’s situation improves, they should be motivated to find employment that meets their abilities.   I don’t have a good solution for this one.  But if we reform the retirement side of Social Security, I think the hard decisions on who is or isn’t disabled, and to what degree, can be answered by those who know more about medicine and employing the disabled and still come out ahead fiscally.
A few more thoughts before I end this too-long-already post. 
  1. You’ll notice I always say “Citizen” when I’m discussing these changes.  I sincerely believe that if you’re not a citizen of our country, or at least a legal immigrant who is working towards citizenship, then you shouldn’t be eating from the communal trough.  Is this unfair to illegal immigrants who work under assumed names and Social Security numbers and therefore pay into Social Security?  Probably.  But if you want to stop being a sucker and paying into someone else’s retirement plan, become a legal immigrant and start paying into your own.  Otherwise, feel free to return to the country of your birth, work hard there, and retire using their social safety net.
  2. For those using Social Security in order to survive while disabled, a regular, but randomly timed and selected, test of recipients for nicotine, alcohol, and other intoxicants needs to be done.  We’ll talk about ending the “War on Drugs” later, but if you’re asking the rest of us to make sure you have a roof over your head and food in your belly because you can’t work, you have no business buying drugs, booze, or smokes.
  3. I also believe that if someone who is receiving Social Security benefits, either for old age retirement or disability, is convicted of a felony, they need to stop getting money from the rest of us.  Yes, I know it’s easy to commit a felony these days, but we’ll talk about trimming a few of the more BS sets of laws later.  If you want to get a check from the rest of us, you’ve got no business breaking the law.
Now that I’ve pissed off the VFW and the AARP, I’ll get the AMA all riled up next time when I discuss healthcare spending.

A Modest Proposal

Larry Correia is letting off a bit of steam about taxes and the disaster that our country calls a federal budget.  I agree with just about everything he says.  Go read the whole thing, and then come back.

I have a few ideas of where spending can be cut over the next few years.  I’ll start by goring my own bull, then move on from there.  Some of these may seem short-sighted, and I’m sure that like everything else in life, there are negative unintended consequences to everything I propose.  But guys, we’re beyond eating the seed corn here.  We’ve eaten the seeds, forced the kids to have babies, and now we’re prepping our kids and their kids for the smoker.  Somethings gotta give, and we can deal with the consequences later.

Military Spending

I’ll start here because this will probably cause the biggest uproar amongst my readers.  It’s probably the part of government spending that’s nearest and dearest to my heart.  I know these were the hardest things for me to accept.

General Military Spending:

  • Get us the hell out of Iraq and Libya.  Iraq has had years to get its collective act together, and Libya isn’t our fight at all.  Afghanistan has two years to come to some kind of agreement with itself and then we go home. We leave both Iraq and Afghanistan with a promise to not be very delicate with who we send to paradise if we ever have to come back.  In that event, we will make a desert and call it peace.
  • Draw down all of our forces in Europe except for a skeleton crew at Ramstein and Rhein Main Air Force Bases, along with two small Navy bases each in the North Atlantic and the Meditteranean to be named later.  All, and I say again, all Army personnel come home.  
  • Each and every other military mission and installation that’s been sprinkled across the globe over the past 60 years and still remains gets re-evaluated with one question:  Is this activity showing any real, direct results towards providing security to the United States?  If the Sultan of the United Emirates of Goats and Sheep can’t get whatever forces he needs to stay in power without our help, then he shouldn’t be in power and we shouldn’t be stationing troops in his rich little craphole to prop him up and try to train his mob of goat herders to shoot straight. Some guide-ons will be rolled up doing this, and that’s not a nice thing to think about, but we can’t afford to play super cop anymore, and we won’t need as many units.
  • All personnel slots for officers over the rank of O-6 and enlisted over the rank of E-7 who aren’t in command slots (Commander or Senior Enlisted Advisor Roles) have to be re-justified.  Emphasis will be on elimination of unnecessary staff slots or re-keying them to take personnel of lower rank. 
  • Elimination of a lot of overseas staffs will save money, but we also need to look at the units that we have here at home and eliminate them if they can’t be justified.
  • Reduction In Force – Yeah, this sucks.  People we want to keep will jump ship as soon as they can for better opportunities.  People who should really be shown the door will fight tooth and nail to stay.  But we have to reduce the size of our military to what we can afford, and by closing overseas bases and telling the third world to take care of itself, we’ll be able to secure our borders and critical sea lanes with a smaller force.  It’s possible we can buy off some people approaching retirement and cut back on recruiting to soften the blow, but this one is gonna hurt.
  • All remaining military bases must cut 25% from their operating costs while still being able to accomplish their core mission.  If this means the golf courses, rod and gun clubs, and whatever else on-post activities that don’t support the core mission and don’t pay for themselves get closed, so be it. 
  • Each and every military research and development effort is to be reviewed and eliminated if it doesn’t look like it’s going to show a fielded combat or combat support system in two years.  That means new tanks, new airplanes, and new ships will have to wait for a while.

Air Force:

  • F-35 – We’re too far in the hole for another new, shiny fighter jet
  • New Tanker Fleet – I’m not going to cut this one back because in the event that we have to send troops or planes overseas, we’ll have to fuel the planes.  Bought from Boeing or another American company. If we’re going to spend any money, it’s going into American pockets.  But they get their initial cost estimate and not one penny more.  Cost overruns get eaten by the nice people in their corporate offices.  If they don’t like it, then we can just not spend any money at all until our fiscal situation improves. 
  • New UAV‘s – Gone.  We can continue UAV research after the bills are paid. 

 Army

  • Future Combat Systems, or whatever they’re calling it these days.  We’ll have to make due with the tanks, trucks, radios, and computers we have now.  It’s not like this one delivered much of use anyway.  Some money can be spent to repair/replace existing hardware, but no new development.
  • Yeah, there are a lot of problems with the M-4, but we can’t afford new rifles right now.  This one goes on the “When we can afford it, do this first” list.
  • New UAV‘s – Gone.  We can continue UAV research after the bills are paid. 

Navy and Marine Corps

  • Littoral Combat Ship – Gone.  Good idea, definitely will be done when the money isn’t as tight, but we can’t afford it.
  • Floating Tank – Like the Army, the Marines are going to have to make due with what they’ve got.  Some money can be spent to repair/replace existing hardware, but no new development.  Otherwise, the Marines are left alone.  They’re usually the firstest with the mostest for our military, so I’m letting them keep doing what they’re doing.
  • Annapolis football team – Bye bye – Just kidding!

You’ll notice I didn’t cut out any mobility or force projection projects.  If we’re bringing most of our troops home, we’ll need ships and planes to get them back overseas if someone gets frisky and it impacts our vital interests.  That may mean creating more places like Diego Garcia, where we stash military hardware for use in case of war, and just fly in the soldiers.

I also didn’t put any cuts to veteran or military pay and benefits.  Veterans, especially disabled veterans, are owed a debt of honor and blood, and I’m not going to try to balance the budget on their backs.  Same for the troops still on active duty. They deserve more than we can afford to pay them, but at least we won’t take away from them.

These are my ideas for the military.  Since this is getting into TLDR territory already, I’ll put the rest of this into separate posts