To uselessness? We out spend Russia, China, and most of Europe combined! We have congressmen adding billions of dollars on to the already over bloated military budget to purchase stuff the Pentagon didn’t even ask for in order to bring home more pork barrel spending. I’d say “Welcome to what the Republicans want,” but we’ve been living that for decades.
Maybe Congress will vote on Obama’s budget. The one time they did do that he got less support for his budget proposal than the Japanese got after they bombed Pearl Harbor….One thing about Obama’s proposals is they are consistently the delusions of someone who knows nothing about budgets. Maybe that’s because Obama has no experiance in his lifetime with one…
The president submits a budget, but it’s Congress’ budget they end up with. If there’s some tax and spend going on, they should look to their own house. When they aren’t trying yet again to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
So far, Democrats are Tax and Spend. Republicans are Borrow and Spend. Both parties spend. And spending is the problem, which both parties readily agree upon.
But they both spend. If we have to spend, it’s better to spend money we have, rather than what we have to borrow. But the best answer is to stop spending so much. Good luck on that one.
Social (welfare, AFDC, food stamps, etc.): this should be temporary. People should be given the opportunity to get on their feet, then they should stand on them. I am not familiar enough with the details of the laws/regulations that allow for people to continue to get benefits for life, but this cannot continue as it has in the past. Means testing must be done, and the bar needs to be set higher each time a “renewal” comes up. There has to be a point where the government says: you’ve had enough help. Good luck in the future.
Subsidies for corporations and industries need to have a sunset clause. All industries could use help to get started. The oil companies no longer need billions in subsidies/tax breaks. Neither does agribusiness. Not to say that it wasn’t helpful when first proposed, but some programs outlive their usefulness.
Military: the Pentagon wants too much. But the Congress often approves programs that the Pentagon does not want or need. Those programs should be dead before they hit the ground. Not to say the Pentagon should get everything they want, but if THEY don’t want it, I believe it is superfluous.
Cuts to the military should not be related to personnel but to weaponry: types and numbers. What has been a problem in the past is that when people say they want the military budget to be cut, the proposal is to cut spending on troops or troop benefits. This has the effect of blunting any effort to cut, since no one wants to cut that.
But I believe the biggest problem is lack of accountability. Just as in the private sector, if you don’t perform as expected, you do not keep your job. Whether you are demoted, transferred to another department, or fired…if you can’t do the job, move over and let someone better qualified do so. Certainly this is nickel-and-dime stuff, but nickels and dimes add up. A good example was the retreat for Internal Revenue agents in Las Vegas, complete with professional videos for entertainment, and lavish accommodations. Or the head of the Department of the Interior updating his office with a shower and a freezer in the bathroom. The total cost for the upgrade was over a quarter million taxpayer dollars. At a time when people have problems paying the rent, this is inexcusable. Heads should roll. A couple high-profile firings may make civil “servants” pay attention.
That’s a start. Let the nay-sayers have the floor starting……now.
Jason Allen about 10 years ago
To uselessness? We out spend Russia, China, and most of Europe combined! We have congressmen adding billions of dollars on to the already over bloated military budget to purchase stuff the Pentagon didn’t even ask for in order to bring home more pork barrel spending. I’d say “Welcome to what the Republicans want,” but we’ve been living that for decades.
DaveBNM about 10 years ago
I thought he “said” he quit smoking?
Enoki about 10 years ago
Maybe Congress will vote on Obama’s budget. The one time they did do that he got less support for his budget proposal than the Japanese got after they bombed Pearl Harbor….One thing about Obama’s proposals is they are consistently the delusions of someone who knows nothing about budgets. Maybe that’s because Obama has no experiance in his lifetime with one…
jespence97 about 10 years ago
He’s not Bush.
ossiningaling about 10 years ago
The president submits a budget, but it’s Congress’ budget they end up with. If there’s some tax and spend going on, they should look to their own house. When they aren’t trying yet again to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
Independent Thinker and Voter about 10 years ago
Lisa prefers the republican plan of “Borrow and Spend.”
And it’s congress, not the prez, who controls spending.
You should try reading the constitution sometime, Lisa. You will learn a lot about how our government is structured.
I Play One On TV about 10 years ago
So far, Democrats are Tax and Spend. Republicans are Borrow and Spend. Both parties spend. And spending is the problem, which both parties readily agree upon.
But they both spend. If we have to spend, it’s better to spend money we have, rather than what we have to borrow. But the best answer is to stop spending so much. Good luck on that one.
I Play One On TV about 10 years ago
You asked:
Social (welfare, AFDC, food stamps, etc.): this should be temporary. People should be given the opportunity to get on their feet, then they should stand on them. I am not familiar enough with the details of the laws/regulations that allow for people to continue to get benefits for life, but this cannot continue as it has in the past. Means testing must be done, and the bar needs to be set higher each time a “renewal” comes up. There has to be a point where the government says: you’ve had enough help. Good luck in the future.
Subsidies for corporations and industries need to have a sunset clause. All industries could use help to get started. The oil companies no longer need billions in subsidies/tax breaks. Neither does agribusiness. Not to say that it wasn’t helpful when first proposed, but some programs outlive their usefulness.
Military: the Pentagon wants too much. But the Congress often approves programs that the Pentagon does not want or need. Those programs should be dead before they hit the ground. Not to say the Pentagon should get everything they want, but if THEY don’t want it, I believe it is superfluous.
Cuts to the military should not be related to personnel but to weaponry: types and numbers. What has been a problem in the past is that when people say they want the military budget to be cut, the proposal is to cut spending on troops or troop benefits. This has the effect of blunting any effort to cut, since no one wants to cut that.
But I believe the biggest problem is lack of accountability. Just as in the private sector, if you don’t perform as expected, you do not keep your job. Whether you are demoted, transferred to another department, or fired…if you can’t do the job, move over and let someone better qualified do so. Certainly this is nickel-and-dime stuff, but nickels and dimes add up. A good example was the retreat for Internal Revenue agents in Las Vegas, complete with professional videos for entertainment, and lavish accommodations. Or the head of the Department of the Interior updating his office with a shower and a freezer in the bathroom. The total cost for the upgrade was over a quarter million taxpayer dollars. At a time when people have problems paying the rent, this is inexcusable. Heads should roll. A couple high-profile firings may make civil “servants” pay attention.
That’s a start. Let the nay-sayers have the floor starting……now.