Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

At this point when we give foreign aid we are giving away money we have to borrow or easier said we don't have. Its time we stop this crap. I don't have a problem providing man power to places like Haiti for a period of time but it stops there.

And I can agree with this in principle, just like I agree in principle to the NFL paying for the SB security, and the suspension of BA/TB air shows. But, as That Guy pointed out by asking about the F-22, the list of Foreign aid/SB sec/BA-TB shows are piddling around the edges. You can cut all foreign aid 100% (reduce it to 0) and we would still be spending at a deficit. Defense (serious programs) and Welfare both need to be re-vamped and brought in line with what our intake affords, and if we need to increase our intake from the top 1%, then they need to put it in.

Question (i don't know the answer) has anyone ever thought of allowing tax dollars to be earmarked? ie you can designate %'s for major categories, defense, welfare, maybe 3 or 4 others top level line items? I imagine it would be book keeping hell but it would be interesting to see where people want their money to go, and then have a percentage off the top that is designated for SS, and Debt repayment. Even if we can't do it on the real taxes, it would be an interesting study if conducted properly. (I am pretty sure there is an internet equivalent, but I would want a solid firm conducting it if I were to trust the results)