> The Senate on Friday forged ahead with plans to give the military an additional $150 billion in spending even as the Pentagon seeks to make sweeping changes and reductions in its budget. Senators voted 52-48 in favor of a budget resolution that will unlock $340 billion in spending for U.S.-Mexico border security, energy independence, Coast Guard modernization and military investments while mandating cuts elsewhere.
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2025-02-21/senate-milita...
Worrying about small amounts of M while increasing other parts with B makes me wonder how it could be perceived that there's any actual interest in a "balanced budget." The only president to balance the budget was Clinton, and it was an economically terrible idea.
Government budgets are not like a company's budget or a family's budget, and pretending that it is, when we control the reserve currency of the world, is just plain silly and weak.
Step 2: Give 100's of billions in tax cuts to the richest
So this is hundreds of billions per year, and 4 trillion in total effect on the debt.
What we call "national debt" is just additional money supply. Instead of dollars they are bonds, that let us retroactively control the amount of them by merely changing interests rates at the Fed. Which is why they are superior to printing a ton of dollars and spending them directly.
When the world needs additional money supply, and they preferentially choose to use money denominated in dollars, that means that our economy wins out. If we are not deficit spending then we are likely leaving economic gains on the table.
Additionally, most "fixed incomes" these days are inflation pegged, so even inflation is not a burden. But it's never a tax.
But since you put it so starkly, it must be pointed out that when we do not deficit spend when we could, it is to the detriment of productive members of society that are producing all the things that those on fixed incomes need.
Such as their idea to give $5k cheques to every American with the savings which would cost $1 trillion (+ $1T to pay off debt). https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/20/trump-doge-c...
But yes I do think it is very wasteful, as the article says it can cause serious inflation issues to dump $1T into the economy like that. Not at all economically conservative nor a useful behaviour of an agency claiming to want to save money, similar to the federal firings I critiqued as non-productive in the other thread you followed me from.
Who cares that it's an act of congress that funds a given project instead of a regular budget? Your money is still being spent.
Here is an infographic from 10 years ago that shows where the money is actually going: https://visual.ly/community/Infographics/politics/death-and-...
In short: if you're not auditing the DOD you're not trying to fix anything.