You & I both know that the primary driver of the deficit is entitlement programs. Last I read, those are around 60% of the entire budget. So unless someone makes a tough decision (which, let's be honest, neither side will do), all future Presidents will have gigantic deficits.
I dunno, man. This isn't really how I approach this question and I think that one of the reasons this conversation's so difficult at a national level is that the two parties tend to fundamentally disagree about what government should be.
From my perspective, that 60% of federal spending goes to entitlement programs is a feature not a bug. I think providing healthcare and a social safety net is one of the core functions of government. I, of course, would like to bring more efficiency to how that money's spent, but the mere fact that the money's being spent doesn't strike me as a reason for cuts. I would expect 'entitlement' programs to be a consistently large portion of federal spending. In fact, I would expect them to grow now that Republicans are flat out lying about their stance on Medicare for All now that they realize how popular that idea is.
On the other hand, defense spending is the single largest expenditure nationally, and could almost certainly be cut. Is there anybody in America who supports perpetual war? It's not a coincidence that we haven't been revenue positive since prior to this 18 year war.
Similarly, we spent huge sums of money on Homeland Security -- sums incommensurate with the threat.
Likewise, we pay huge sums of money to imprison a larger percentage of our population than just about any country on Earth. Our crime rate has consistently declined for 4 decades, America is safer than it's ever been. The number of people incarcerated has never been higher.
Those are two obvious areas I'd focus on before cutting entitlement programs.
What do I like? Less people, less regulations and cutting of existing regulations. All of those things make a difference for everyday people and small businesses.
Which regulations were cut that you think have had a positive impact? I'm a business owner and my business operates in 45 states. I've noticed no change. Curious what you've seen.
Net neutrality was big government. Repealing it is taking the government out of the process, which I see as a good thing.
I understand this in theory but less so in practice. We've handed control to a handful of large companies in a space that lacks competition. This market is far less free than it was prior. You said you'll always stick up for the little guy whether it's small businesses, Appalachia, or the G5 programs. Who is the little guy in this scenario and are you sticking up for them?
The Space Force already exists as part of the Air Force. He's literally just doing a re-branding as a new branch. It's nothing more than a PR stunt IMO, so don't see that impacting the deficit much.
The Trump administration asked for 8 billion dollars just to handle the administrative burden of breaking the Space Force away from the Air Force. An 8 billion dollar PR stunt does not equal small government.
Also, as BillytheCat pointed out, spending is only an issue relative to revenue you raise. Raising spending and cutting revenue, as the Trump administration has done, is bad policy. That you like the fact that they've hired fewer people doesn't make their actions fiscally responsible. Remember the Tea Party? You'd think they'd be up in arms about the ballooning deficit and the fact that it's increased 18% over the last two years. Apparently though, spending is only bad when it's done by Democrats. So long as you're funding secret wars in Yemen and paying to keep 2% of the population locked up, it's cool. Just don't subsidize healthcare.