A 'Modest Proposal' to cut 18% from the federal budget

[nate]

Oh yeah, I am just saying they never get to that point because they get to the petty politics right off the bat.

 

I have a friend that works for the Navy, I am sure you have heard stories like this but at the end of the year, they make sure to spend all the money they have budgeted because if they don't they have their budget cut.  So on like Dec 15 they spend 15 million dollars on new networking/computer equipment that they have no need for.  That stuff drives me mad.

[arch stanton]

Oh yeah, I am just saying they never get to that point because they get to the petty politics right off the bat.

 

I have a friend that works for the Navy, I am sure you have heard stories like this but at the end of the year, they make sure to spend all the money they have budgeted because if they don't they have their budget cut.  So on like Dec 15 they spend 15 million dollars on new networking/computer equipment that they have no need for.  That stuff drives me mad.

It's actually Sep 15 since that ends the FY but it runs to every level. We used to wait til then to buy new tools, furniture, paint and cleaning supplies, etc. Put up new awnings. Replant the grass. Just don't leave any cash unspent.

 

I can see them eventually changing military pensions. At least cutting the percentages.

[nate]

Ah ok 9/15 yea I just know they would buy all new networking hardware that costs millions of dollars to replace the stuff they bought the year before and there was no justification for it other than spending the rest of the budget.

[Tank]

Not just pork though, everything.  There is plenty of stuff the military could do better and more cost efficeintly.  There is plenty everywhere in the budget to cut down waste.  Bottom line is nobody wants to do the work.

 

when we had the northridge earthquake in '94, senator robert byrd of west virginia attached a rider to the emergency relief bill asking for $10 million for a new transportation center in his home state. his rider was one of many that made their way on to a bill to help people who were devastated by a huge disaster. this is wrong, but i get that it's how the system has evolved ("hey i'll vote for your earthquake bill if you'll add my rider for $xxx for a new _________ in my state"). 

 

byrd was a crooked old man and i was so upset with what he did that i wrote him a strongly worded letter of protest. i never mailed it because he struck me as the kind of guy that would give the IRS a call and ask how my taxes looked for the last ten years.

[Lhalo]

Ya Byrd should have been in YK's landfill.

[TobiasFunke]

"I'm here to talk about serious cutting of the budget to save this country for generations to come...and that is getting rid of NPR" - Politician X

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Oh yeah, I am just saying they never get to that point because they get to the petty politics right off the bat.

 

I have a friend that works for the Navy, I am sure you have heard stories like this but at the end of the year, they make sure to spend all the money they have budgeted because if they don't they have their budget cut.  So on like Dec 15 they spend 15 million dollars on new networking/computer equipment that they have no need for.  That stuff drives me mad.

 

I have worked for state agencies in which this is the case. One agency in Oklahoma sent us on a spending spree at the end of the year because if we had anything left in the budget it would be returned to the general fund and our budget would be reduced by a corresponding amount for the next fiscal year. Agencies are punished for economizing, so therefore they don't. It seems to me that the better thing to do would be to let the money carry over and let the agency spend it on a more pressing need or an unforeseen emergency the following year. I have participated in many budgeting conferences and I now compose a biennial budget myself. I have never known an agency head to deliberately pad a budget, and I never have done it myself. If we don't need something, I don't put it in my budget request just to see if we can get the money.

[nate]

"I'm here to talk about serious cutting of the budget to save this country for generations to come...and that is getting rid of NPR" - Politician X

 

Yep exactly.

[mp170.6]

I have a friend that works for the Navy, I am sure you have heard stories like this but at the end of the year, they make sure to spend all the money they have budgeted because if they don't they have their budget cut.  So on like Dec 15 they spend 15 million dollars on new networking/computer equipment that they have no need for.  That stuff drives me mad.

 

My Army buddy worked a Telecom job over in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

 

He said it was common practice to destroy old equipment to prevent Al Qaeda from stealing it.  They received a bunch of brand new radios worth $50 million but weren't able to install them right away.  Another team sent in to destroy the OLD stuff didn't get the memo and blew up the NEW radios. 

 

I guess nobody really cared because their budget was intentionally padded for this type of incompetence. 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

As long as Congressmen and Senators live or die politically based upon what they bring to their home districts, don't look for anything to change.

[wopphil]

when we had the northridge earthquake in '94, senator robert byrd of west virginia attached a rider to the emergency relief bill asking for $10 million for a new transportation center in his home state. his rider was one of many that made their way on to a bill to help people who were devastated by a huge disaster. this is wrong, but i get that it's how the system has evolved ("hey i'll vote for your earthquake bill if you'll add my rider for $xxx for a new _________ in my state").

byrd was a crooked old man and i was so upset with what he did that i wrote him a strongly worded letter of protest. i never mailed it because he struck me as the kind of guy that would give the IRS a call and ask how my taxes looked for the last ten years.

Didn't Sean Hannity refer to him as "KKK Byrd?"

[Jay]

Critics accuse Gov. Jerry Brown of neglecting California's poor

 

http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-brown-poverty-20150113-story.html

 

The California Budget Project, a think tank that advocates for low-income families, issued a report Monday saying the governor's budget failed to "lay out a plan to tackle California's biggest challenges: high levels of unemployment and poverty, widening income inequality and a safety net severely weakened by years of funding cuts."

 

Brown's budget blueprint includes $17.7 billion from the general fund for healthcare for poor Californians and $1.7 billion in financial aid for university students. Home care for low-income elderly and disabled residents would get $3.4 billion, which includes $483 million to restore a recession-era cut in home care for the group.

 

But advocates say not enough money has been returned to government programs such as CalWORKs, California's main welfare program, which provides cash assistance to 1.3 million Californians, of whom 1 million are children.

 

The governor previously agreed to increase welfare grants to a maximum of $704, starting in April. That's equivalent to 2003 levels, but worth $200 less in today's dollars because of inflation.

 

"They're still a fraction of what they should be if we wanted to ensure that the poorest children in this state have a minimally decent standard of living," said Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Assn. of California.

 

-----

 

Libs

Edited January 14, 2015 by Jay

[wopphil]

Critics accuse Gov. Jerry Brown of neglecting California's poor

http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-brown-poverty-20150113-story.html

The California Budget Project, a think tank that advocates for low-income families, issued a report Monday saying the governor's budget failed to "lay out a plan to tackle California's biggest challenges: high levels of unemployment and poverty, widening income inequality and a safety net severely weakened by years of funding cuts."

Brown's budget blueprint includes $17.7 billion from the general fund for healthcare for poor Californians and $1.7 billion in financial aid for university students. Home care for low-income elderly and disabled residents would get $3.4 billion, which includes $483 million to restore a recession-era cut in home care for the group.

But advocates say not enough money has been returned to government programs such as CalWORKs, California's main welfare program, which provides cash assistance to 1.3 million Californians, of whom 1 million are children.

The governor previously agreed to increase welfare grants to a maximum of $704, starting in April. That's equivalent to 2003 levels, but worth $200 less in today's dollars because of inflation.

"They're still a fraction of what they should be if we wanted to ensure that the poorest children in this state have a minimally decent standard of living," said Frank Mecca, executive director of the County Welfare Directors Assn. of California.

-----

Libs

My brother in law has been on welfare for six years straight. He has no intention of quitting anytime soon, and his wife is just about to have their third kid. Between welfare, WIC, and subsidized preschool, he takes a couple grand a month from the system.

And since there is no limit on the length of time he can be on the programs, he isn't in a hurry to get a job anytime soon.

So my question is, why don't the libs put caps on this stuff? Don't they understand they are holding my brother in law and his family down, rather than propping them up?

Edited January 15, 2015 by wopphil

[mtangelsfan]

I agree that unlimited, unrestricted welfare doesn't work, but your brother in law has nobody to blame but himself.  Nothing is holding him down but him.

[Tank]

wait a sec, i thought bill clinton put a limit on how long people could stay on welfare (i want to say somewhere around 18 months, though that may be wrong). when did this change? and why wouldn't congress put some kind of incentive to get off of welfare?

[Jason]

 

I have worked for state agencies in which this is the case. One agency in Oklahoma sent us on a spending spree at the end of the year because if we had anything left in the budget it would be returned to the general fund and our budget would be reduced by a corresponding amount for the next fiscal year. Agencies are punished for economizing, so therefore they don't. It seems to me that the better thing to do would be to let the money carry over and let the agency spend it on a more pressing need or an unforeseen emergency the following year. I have participated in many budgeting conferences and I now compose a biennial budget myself. I have never known an agency head to deliberately pad a budget, and I never have done it myself. If we don't need something, I don't put it in my budget request just to see if we can get the money.

 Hell, even my cellphone has rollover minutes.

[arch stanton]

So my question is, why don't the libs put caps on this stuff? Don't they understand they are holding my brother in law and his family down, rather than propping them up?

My guess is because if people like your brother-in-law start looking for jobs with a living wage and benefits then the libs and all other politicians will have to ask their pimps in the corporate world to provide those and they much prefer that those be handled by the government.

[Blarg]

My brother in law has been on welfare for six years straight. He has no intention of quitting anytime soon, and his wife is just about to have their third kid. Between welfare, WIC, and subsidized preschool, he takes a couple grand a month from the system.

And since there is no limit on the length of time he can be on the programs, he isn't in a hurry to get a job anytime soon.

So my question is, why don't the libs put caps on this stuff? Don't they understand they are holding my brother in law and his family down, rather than propping them up?

I had the same problem with my two brothers in law. After my in laws passed away we have had zero contact with either of them or their families. This wasn't even my decision, my wife refuses to have anything to with them, her sleeve was torn once her parents died.

[Jay]

So my question is, why don't the libs put caps on this stuff? Don't they understand they are holding my brother in law and his family down, rather than propping them up?

 

I'm guessing your brother-in-law votes Dem across the board... that is if he gets off of his ass long enough to vote.

[wopphil]

I'm guessing your brother-in-law votes Dem across the board... that is if he gets off of his ass long enough to vote.

Wouldn't you? Which party generally proposes extending and increasing benefits? Which party "feels his pain" and knows that it isn't his fault he is in this situation - it is all those mean corporate interests.

[wopphil]

Oh I should add, he has a smart phone, cable t.v., and two large dogs that require a lot of food (which I don't think is covered by WIC just yet; although maybe it is, since the dogs are pitbulls). He has also taken his kids to more amusement parks the last few years than I have my kids.

I am not trying to pick on the guy. Just pointing out that as long as he gets a check every month for doing nothing, he will have no incentive to work. I am pretty confident if his welfare was taken away, he and or his wife would get jobs.

[Adam]

Your brother in law sounds like a huge POS Phil.

[wopphil]

Your brother in law sounds like a huge POS Phil.

In his defense, he has severe learning disabilities. But he doesn't make things any easier on himself by making very poor decisions. And his wife has normal mental capabilities and could absolutely work...she is just lazy as sin.

[Adam]

In his defense, he has severe learning disabilities. But he doesn't make things any easier on himself by making very poor decisions. And his wife has normal mental capabilities and could absolutely work...she is just lazy as sin.

 

 

Where is your wife on the subject?  I've got a brother in law, who is working FT now, but has been unemployed for most of the past 7 years. I was very clear with her that I'll give him food, but no money and no roof if it ever comes to it. 

[Tank]

Oh I should add, he has a smart phone, cable t.v., and two large dogs that require a lot of food (which I don't think is covered by WIC just yet; although maybe it is, since the dogs are pitbulls). 

 

standing ovation, phil.