So you're in favor of sharp cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, Defence and Social Security, right? Cuts larger than the tax cuts you're proposing---so that the national debt is reduced too, right?
Absolutely. We may disagree on how much needs to be cut from what particular parts of the budget.... and given a wider mandate, I'm certain that there would be plenty of creative sausage making.
I for one would seek broad cuts on the first three, and going hands-off on Social Security (while seeking a means to either privatise it outright, or convert it into a tightly regulated, VOLUNTARY personal investment account, leveraged against a portfolio that would mirror an existing plan the Federal government provides for the military and federal civil service employees, the Thrift Savings Plan
The TSP functions as an additional benefit on top of any service pension or FERS (Federal Employee Retirement System).
As for Medicaid/Medicare, these need to be reined in, as do medical costs in general; healthier living options for the younger should be encouraged. Allowing for more cross-state-border competition would help drive prices own.
And the military? Ideally, cutting back the standing forces to about 750,000 personnel between all services, with a drastically reduced Army set to patrolling our borders, a mothballing of about half our carrier fleet (starting with the oldest CVNs in the inventory) and a mild expansion of our nuclear sub fleets and ASW (anti-sub) surface fleets, and a re-aligning of the USAF more towards cyber-warfare and counter-counter satellite operations, standing down some of the air mobility missions (mostly supporting deployments) and focusing our ability to deliver global reach right from the US, we could save substantial money.
If we can cut back from having to secure the Middle East and contain Iran (and to a lesser extent, Israel and her neighbours) we'd be far better off - we could keep our troops at home, our reduced Navy patrolling sea lanes of strategic interest, and still provide a deterrent to potential Chinese and Russian naval expansionism.
A mixed-solution approach (methane clathrate harvesting, oil-producing algae farming, solar convection towers in the desert, sea-based hydroelectric production... and harvesting shale oil and coal to oil conversion - guess who has the most shale and coal reserves - and we could easily scale back our dependence on M.E. oil.
Also, since Iran and North Korea will very shortly (within the next Presidential election cycle or two) have ICBM nuclear capability. a one-legged if not still very dangerous threat, but still not enough to offset a full (or even a substantial partial) retaliatory nuclear response from the US, to say nothing of the stability of a nuclear triad.
Force reductions (for my taste) would likely see most base closures overseas, primarily in Europe (methinks it is time the Bundeswehr and Armées Françaises resumed primary interest in the defence of the Continent), as well as getting completely out of Southwest Asia.
It might be best to maintain a US-defence presence (albeit reduced from current levels) in South Korea and Japan, unless the Japanese can stand up a larger army without destabilising relations with either Korea or China, and likewise until deeper trust can be built with the Chinese regarding Japan and Taiwan.