Entitlements cost quite a bit of money to fulfill.

Quibbling over terminology doesn't erase the point - that a significant portion of the Federal budget is money virtually everyone agrees shouldn't be touched much.

▲

mattmcal 19 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You're not wrong, I edited my comment. That said, I think it is important to use clear terminology that doesn't blur the lines between spending that can theoretically be reduced, versus spending that requires an act of Congress to modify. DOGE and the executive have already flouted that line with their attempts to shutter programs and spending already approved by Congress.

▲

bigbadfeline 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>Entitlements cost quite a bit of money to fulfill.

Entitlements are funded by separate (FICA) taxes which form a significant portion of all federal income, they are called entitlements for that specific reason.

> Quibbling over terminology doesn't erase the point - that a significant portion of the Federal budget is money virtually everyone agrees shouldn't be touched much.

Quibbling over quibbling without mentioning the separate account for FICA/Social Security taxes is a sure sign of manipulation. As is not mentioning that the top 10% are exempt from the tax after a minuscule for them amount.

Oh, and guess what - realized capital gains are not subject to Social Security tax - that's primarily how rich incomes are made. Then, unrealized capital gains aren't taxed at all - that's how wealth and privilege are accumulated.

All this is happening virtually without opposition due to rich-funded bots manipulating any internet chatter about it. Is it then surprising that manipulation has reached a level of audacity that hypes solving the US fiscal problems at the expense of grandma's entitlements?

▲

dragonwriter 13 hours ago | parent [-]

> Entitlements are funded by separate (FICA) taxes which form a significant portion of all federal income, they are called entitlements for that specific reason.

No, they aren't, categorically, and no, that’s not what the name refers to. Entitlements include both things with dedicated taxes and specialized trust funds (Social Security, Medicare), and things that are normal on-budget programs (Medicaid, etc.)

Originally, the name “entitlement” was used as a budget distinction for programs based on the principle of an earned entitlement (in the common language sense) through specific work history (Social Security, Medicare, Veterans benefits, Railroad retirement) [0], but it was later expanded to things like Medicaid and welfare programs that are not based on that principle and which were less politically well-supported, as a deliberate political strategy to drive down the popularity of traditional entitlements by association.

[0] Some, but not all, of which had dedicated trust funds funded by taxes on the covered work, so there is a loose correlation between them and the kind of programs you seem to think the name exclusively refers to, but even originally it was not exclusively the case.

	▲	bigbadfeline 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> No, they aren't... You aren't following the conversation in this thread, my reply wasn't about the definition of "entitlements" but about the separate taxes and the significant tax income from them, which is true for the real entitlements - Social security and Medicare. More precisely, the question is about the tax structure that results in a shortfall, it seems strange to argue about cutting Social Security and Medicare when both corporate profits and the market are higher than ever while income inequality is at astronomic levels. I can't say much about Medicaid but I know the cost of drugs and medical care have been going up faster than anything else, so there might be some other way of addressing that spending. I'd be perfectly fine with demanding a separate tax for Medicaid and discussing it separately, that would be the prudent way of doing it.

▲

thfuran 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But fulfilling obligations isn't inefficiency or fraud, and that's what DOGE purported to be attempting to eliminate.

▲

ceejayoz 14 hours ago | parent [-]

Musk promised savings of $1-2 trillion. (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdj38mekdkgo)

That's more than the entire discretionary budget. Cutting that much requires cutting entitlements, even if the government stopped doing literally everything else.

	▲	10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]