Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Giving away land? No, the only reason they are considering it is the raise millions of dollars for themselves. Do you know how expensive it is to run a facility like that? There are tons of underutilized acres of land that GSA wants to leverage for operational money. Right now, it's just wasted potential revenue.
Giving away land? No, the only reason they are considering it is the raise millions of dollars for themselves. Do you know how expensive it is to run a facility like that? There are tons of underutilized acres of land that GSA wants to leverage for operational money. Right now, it's just wasted potential revenue.
Federal funding doesn't work that way. All receipts revert to Treasury.
Federal funding doesn't work that way. All receipts revert to Treasury.
Which then supports the revenue stream coming from the nations taxpayers. Why do you think GSA is selling buildings they don't need across the nation? Revenue. Save the taxpayers money. What do you think the FBI swap is about. That money will build the FBI a new HQs.
Which then supports the revenue stream coming from the nations taxpayers. Why do you think GSA is selling buildings they don't need across the nation? Revenue. Save the taxpayers money. What do you think the FBI swap is about. That money will build the FBI a new HQs.
Again, you don't understand how federal fiance works. It's like you sending in an extra $100 on your income tax. It affects nothing.
The FBI wants a new HQ and it's cheaper in the suburbs. What the government gets for the property is irrelevant.
Again, you don't understand how federal fiance works. It's like you sending in an extra $100 on your income tax. It affects nothing.
The FBI wants a new HQ and it's cheaper in the suburbs. What the government gets for the property is irrelevant.
How would sending in $100 extra bucks affect nothing? It would be a $100 dollars that the government wouldn't otherwise have and would offset a $100 from somewhere in the budget. Yes $100 is insignificant when you consider the entire federal budget, but it has real effect.
If you increase this to the value of leasing or selling valuable real estate, it becomes much more significant. The offset would potentially pay for the new building. This is simple accounting. I'm not sure why it's difficult to understand.
How would sending in $100 extra bucks affect nothing? It would be a $100 dollars that the government wouldn't otherwise have and would offset a $100 from somewhere in the budget. Yes $100 is insignificant when you consider the entire federal budget, but it has real effect.
If you increase this to the value of leasing or selling valuable real estate, it becomes much more significant. The offset would potentially pay for the new building. This is simple accounting. I'm not sure why it's difficult to understand.
These are business concepts. Without experience in business, it's hard for a novice to understand. I don't expect many people to understand unless they work with business deals and have experience. Hopefully, these discussions can inform people about these principals.
These are business concepts. Without experience in business, it's hard for a novice to understand. I don't expect many people to understand unless they work with business deals and have experience. Hopefully, these discussions can inform people about these principals.
I have a masters degree in the subject from one of the country's leading business schools plus 40 years experience working as a consultant with boards of directors and top management. Do you really want to compare experience?
How would sending in $100 extra bucks affect nothing? It would be a $100 dollars that the government wouldn't otherwise have and would offset a $100 from somewhere in the budget. Yes $100 is insignificant when you consider the entire federal budget, but it has real effect.
If you increase this to the value of leasing or selling valuable real estate, it becomes much more significant. The offset would potentially pay for the new building. This is simple accounting. I'm not sure why it's difficult to understand.
Do you have any basis for this assertion or should we just take your word for it because you claim to have some degrees and experience?
How does extra money in the treasury have no impact? There is usually a shortfall between what the government allocates to spend and what it takes in. This shortfall is made up for by selling bonds (t-bills). If there is 100 dollars that wasn't there before, there will be 100 dollars less in bonds to sell. If we are talking about the sale of a large valuable piece of real estate, there will be a lot less bonds to sell and less debt to service.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
