[sammyg2]

I got the projected 2015 shortfall to $418 billion and the 2030 shortfall to $1,355 billion with 11% savings from taxes and 89% from spending cuts, BUT...................

The 800 pound gorilla, the elephant in the room, was suspiciously missing from the NY times game.
No, not really. It is not surprising that the bleeding heart liberal rag did not mention anything about welfare cuts. Not a darned thing.

Throw in a reasonable amount of welfare cuts and the budget is balanced, maybe even a surplus.
No one should be on welfare for life. No one. Social security and private charity are supposed to take care of that.
I say welfare for three years and the benefits start shrinking down until after 5 years they are over. And no one can receive more than 5 full years of benefits in a lifetime.

That'd create one hell of a surplus and it's teach people to work.
Not only would it help the federal deficit, it'd help the states out too, at least the bleeding heart liberal welfare states like California. 12% of the population in the country but 32% of all the welfare recipients.
That's because the morons in Sacramento like to increase benefits so the low-lifes move here and get a raise.
California is a dead-beat magnet.
It's also totally broke, heck of a co-inky-dink, isn't it?