Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Pubs looking to trim Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc. to fund Trump Tax Cuts.

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by GatorJMDZ, Nov 21, 2024 at 7:03 AM.

  1. GatorJMDZ

    GatorJMDZ gatorjack VIP Member

    24,950
    2,621
    1,868
    Apr 3, 2007
    Well, if you didn't see cuts to safety net programs coming, you weren't paying attention. I mean someone needs to pay for those private jets for his donors, why not the poor, the hungry and the seriously ill.

    "President-elect Donald Trump’s economic advisers and congressional Republicans have begun preliminary discussions about making significant changes to Medicaid, food stamps and other federal safety net programs to offset the enormous cost of extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts next year."

    "Among the options under discussion by GOP lawmakers and aides are new work requirements and spending caps for the programs, according to seven people familiar with the talks, many of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Those conversations have included some economic officials on Trump’s transition team, the people said."

    "House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) told reporters Wednesday that a “responsible and reasonable work requirement” for Medicaid benefits resembling the one that already exists for food stamps could yield about $100 billion in savings. He also said another $160 billion in reduced costs could come from checking Medicaid eligibility more than once per year."

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/18/gop-targets-medicaid-food-stamps/

    Extending Trump's tax cuts is estimated to increase the deficit by $4 trillion dollars over the next 10 years. These cuts are a way to offset some of that increase. While Medicaid is administered by the states, it is heavily subsidized by the states. They are looking to cut Medicaid by $500 billion dollars.

    If you receive these benefits and voted for Trump, you literally bit and chewed off the hand that feeds you. My advice to those Trump voters? Deal with it. Just like we are going to have to deal with the consequences of your vote.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. slocala

    slocala VIP Member

    3,061
    739
    2,028
    Jan 11, 2009
    Painful. SNAP and feeding kids is such an important program. It’s too bad that kids who had no choice of their parent’s economics will be burdened with hunger.

    Likely a growth in private foundations to feed kids. It is going to be bumpy.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. gatorpa

    gatorpa GC Hall of Fame

    11,613
    1,105
    698
    Sep 5, 2010
    East Coast of FL
    We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

    Federal budget ballooned during covid and never retreated. Biden just kept increasing it.

    Go look at Federal Budget from 2018-2023.

    Government NEVER cuts back on spending once it increases. Never.

    The answer is always we need more money and we need it to give you guys more stuff..
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,059
    2,594
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    I think these types of cuts are just the beginning. We’ve all pointed out the massive deficit. Something needs to be done. Trump has decided he will address the budget through cutbacks—painful and meaningful cutbacks to those in real need. Conversely, there will also be tax breaks to those who are high-income producing.

    Voters will decide whether this strategy works for them in 2 years.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. jhenderson251

    jhenderson251 Premium Member

    3,389
    553
    2,043
    Aug 7, 2008
    While you're not wrong, cutting support for the poor and for children to fund tax cuts for the most wealthy is not fiscal responsibility.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    11,594
    2,558
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    I am very excited to enjoy my tax breaks and increased dollar value from lower deficits at the expense of the needy. It is what they voted for so who am I to not enjoy their wishes?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    11,594
    2,558
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    Government spending as a percent of GDP is pretty flat. Now, entitlements are up... and it is ALL healthcare.

    upload_2024-11-21_8-42-41.png
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2024 at 8:51 AM
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    8,844
    869
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007

    Federal spending did actually decline after COVID. By nearly $700B from ‘21 to ‘23.

    U.S. government - Outlays 2029 | Statista

    Although it’s fair to say there was a “step up” in the trend line. Not sure how much that is COVID related spending that stuck around, vs the fact a long overdue infrastructure bill was passed and other domestic subsidy stuff like the Chips ACT. The reality is ‘probably a bit of both’.
     
  9. Trickster

    Trickster VIP Member

    9,943
    2,428
    3,233
    Sep 20, 2014
    Aren't the Trump tax cuts a form of spending, beneficial to only an extremely few? And what kind of society are we that takes from the "least among us" for the benefit of the "money changers"?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. PITBOSS

    PITBOSS GC Hall of Fame

    7,802
    819
    558
    Apr 13, 2007
    You mention “you guys” but I doubt many here use snap.

    And per op, “more stuff” is ongoing food and medicine to help the poor and their children.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2024 at 9:52 AM
  11. VAg8r1

    VAg8r1 GC Hall of Fame

    20,996
    1,741
    1,763
    Apr 8, 2007
    A good part of the increase in federal spending has been driven been demographics not by irresponsible decisions on the part of the administration or Congress. Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security combined represent close to 60% of the budget. More and more "boomers" are becoming eligible. Even if it were possible to hold the level of benefits per recipient constant spending for those programs would increase. Even more so than the total number of eligible recipients is the increasing age of recipients. Although they represent a relatively small percentage of total Medicare recipients, recipients over the age of 85 represent a disproportionate share of Medicare expenditures and that cohort is increasing at an even greater rate than total number of Medicare recipients. Similarly, roughly 35% of Medicaid expenditures are for indigent elderly in nursing homes.
    upload_2024-11-21_9-27-25.gif
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,819
    1,067
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    Thought we would see some kind of decrease or blip on the trendline due to COVID’s disparate impact on the elderly.
     
  13. FutureGatorMom

    FutureGatorMom Premium Member

    10,808
    1,233
    808
    Apr 3, 2007
    Florida
    I'm not opposed to some of this. But NOT to be used to pay for a tax cut for the rich. Clinton mandated the job idea, and I agreed with that. Hand up not a hand out.
     
  14. GatorJMDZ

    GatorJMDZ gatorjack VIP Member

    24,950
    2,621
    1,868
    Apr 3, 2007
    Tax cuts for the wealthy create revenue problems, any tax cut does as you just cut your revenue. That one's pretty damn basic.
     
  15. g8trjax

    g8trjax GC Hall of Fame

    5,194
    450
    293
    Jun 1, 2007
    I think the doge is there to shine some light on the crazy shit we waste money on, it's all just talk until congress pulls the trigger one way or the other...should be fun to watch.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. ajoseph

    ajoseph Premium Member

    7,059
    2,594
    2,998
    Jan 15, 2008
    I’m interested to see the report. The fat we pay for needs to be exposed. I’d prefer that we get a politically neutral report (like from a Big 3 Accounting audit/study), because everything Elon and Vivek say will be scrutinized as politically motivated. But I’m looking forward to exposing waste. It’s time.
     
  17. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    It's not going to be lower deficits though. The spending cuts for the needy will be offset by spending increases elsewhere and by lower revenues due to all the tax cuts.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2