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.
I cannot understand how the decision to reduce spending across the board in the sequester was made by an intelligent administration. Hagel has announced that the furlough's of government employees in the DOD will continue into next year and possible increase. Our military men and women who don't get paid much to start with are no longer receiving extra pay for being in a hot spot YET the IRS has lavish conferences and our Congressman spent thousands of dollars providing coffee and other food at their meetings, thanks to the taxpayer and the EPA was exempt from this sequester. It sure seems to me this administration needs to look in their own "houses" to reduce spending rather than cutting the pay of some of the lowest paid citizens who are defending us.
I cannot understand how the decision to reduce spending across the board in the sequester was made by an intelligent administration. Hagel has announced that the furlough's of government employees in the DOD will continue into next year and possible increase. Our military men and women who don't get paid much to start with are no longer receiving extra pay for being in a hot spot YET the IRS has lavish conferences and our Congressman spent thousands of dollars providing coffee and other food at their meetings, thanks to the taxpayer and the EPA was exempt from this sequester. It sure seems to me this administration needs to look in their own "houses" to reduce spending rather than cutting the pay of some of the lowest paid citizens who are defending us.
Those cuts weren't made by the Administration. They were agreed upon by the Administration and Congress, to be so devastating that all sides would come to a mutual agreement. Failing to do so, the cuts went into effect.
What is notable is that while you complain about Defense cuts, you don't mention a single word about domestic cuts, like to Medicare, aid for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP); the National Institutes of Health; The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Border security; Immigration enforcement; Airport security; Head Start; FEMA’s disaster relief; Public housing support; the FDA; NASA; Special education; The Energy Department’s program for securing nukes; The National Science Foundation; The FBI; The federal prison system; State Department; Global health programs; the Millenium Challenge Corp. sees a $46 million cut, and USAID a cut of about $291 million; The Nuclear Regulatory Commission; The SEC; The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; The Library of Congress and the Patent and Trademark.
Given that Congress has often added items to the Defense budget that the Pentagon said they don't need, I am not really worried that the nation is defenseless.
The Abrams tank provides one such example of where the Pentagon says it can save billions of dollars by freezing work on upgrading the Abrams tank from the M1A1 to the M1A2 version for the next three years. In spite of this, there are some in Congress who insist that this money be spent because the work is to be performed in their districts.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinback2011
Obama doesn't like defense spending.
Simple as that.
And any thinking person doesn't like excessive defense spending, which seems to elude many conservatives who will often try to spend on programs the Pentagon doesn't even want.
I cannot understand how the decision to reduce spending across the board in the sequester was made by an intelligent administration.
That wasn't the decision the administration made: The administration made the decision to work out a deal with Congress such that failing to pass a budget would have such terrible consequences that no one in their right mind would oppose coming to a compromise to avoid those consequences. The administration's mistake was assuming that Republicans in Congress are all "in their right mind", i.e., underestimating the extent to which Republicans in Congress could not care less about the nation and its people, and the extent to which Republicans in Congress will do whatever they feel like to foster egoistic avarice.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
That wasn't the decision the administration made: The administration made the decision to work out a deal with Congress such that failing to pass a budget would have such terrible consequences that no one in their right mind would oppose coming to a compromise to avoid those consequences. The administration's mistake was assuming that Republicans in Congress are all "in their right mind", i.e., underestimating the extent to which Republicans in Congress could not care less about the nation and its people, and the extent to which Republicans in Congress will do whatever they feel like to foster egoistic avarice.
Of course, notice how quickly Congress acted to smooth operations at Reagan National affected by the sequester when it found how its members travel would be affected.
Cingress men(and women) are the champions of "do as I say, not as I do" on both sides of the aisle.
Those cuts weren't made by the Administration. They were agreed upon by the Administration and Congress, to be so devastating that all sides would come to a mutual agreement. Failing to do so, the cuts went into effect.
What is notable is that while you complain about Defense cuts, you don't mention a single word about domestic cuts, like to Medicare, aid for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP); the National Institutes of Health; The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Border security; Immigration enforcement; Airport security; Head Start; FEMA’s disaster relief; Public housing support; the FDA; NASA; Special education; The Energy Department’s program for securing nukes; The National Science Foundation; The FBI; The federal prison system; State Department; Global health programs; the Millenium Challenge Corp. sees a $46 million cut, and USAID a cut of about $291 million; The Nuclear Regulatory Commission; The SEC; The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum; The Library of Congress and the Patent and Trademark.
Given that Congress has often added items to the Defense budget that the Pentagon said they don't need, I am not really worried that the nation is defenseless.
The Abrams tank provides one such example of where the Pentagon says it can save billions of dollars by freezing work on upgrading the Abrams tank from the M1A1 to the M1A2 version for the next three years. In spite of this, there are some in Congress who insist that this money be spent because the work is to be performed in their districts.
"Those cuts weren't made by the Administration."
PSST! There were NO cuts. Just a reduction in the expected increase.
The peak year for IRS boondoggle spending occurred during the Bush administration.
Such spending has been reduced by 87% since 2010.
According to Forbes, Obama is the smallest government spender since Eisenhower. Some may give credit for this to Congress. If so, spending during the Bush Admin also needs to be credited to Congress.
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.
