5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Investing in infrastructure and people produces a return.

 

No American business makes any profit without reliance on Federal and State Investment in infrastructure and people.

In an ideal world, perhaps. However, so much of the 'investment' is used to buy political power and repay favors that it is inherently inefficiently spent.  

 

A classis example is Amtrak. Biden has a nostalgia for trains so tens of billions of dollars are poured in. But... Americans don't ride trains (except in very specific areas). They can't be persuaded to either. American cities are not set up to be connected by them. Yet still they are funded.  The California High Speed Rail is a classic example.  Started in 2008, scheduled to be finished by 2020 at a cost of $33 billion.  Still not a passenger has ridden, cost is up to over $100 billion, no end in sight.  

 

Investments?  Come on, man.

28 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

In an ideal world, perhaps. However, so much of the 'investment' is used to buy political power and repay favors that it is inherently inefficiently spent.  

 

A classis example is Amtrak. Biden has a nostalgia for trains so tens of billions of dollars are poured in. But... Americans don't ride trains (except in very specific areas). They can't be persuaded to either. American cities are not set up to be connected by them. Yet still they are funded.  The California High Speed Rail is a classic example.  Started in 2008, scheduled to be finished by 2020 at a cost of $33 billion.  Still not a passenger has ridden, cost is up to over $100 billion, no end in sight.  

 

Investments?  Come on, man.

Try running a business without a road transport system, staff with no education, unreliable power supplies or snail place internet.

 

 

34 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Try running a business without a road transport system, staff with no education, unreliable power supplies or snail place internet.

 

 

States run the vast majority of the road system and also are in charge of education. Internet can be provided by private companies.

 

Any answer to the reality that government "investment" is all too often a waste?

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

States run the vast majority of the road system and also are in charge of education. Internet can be provided by private companies.

 

Any answer to the reality that government "investment" is all too often a waste?

I don’t agree it is all too often a waste.

 

Americans across the country are welcoming the ‘Build Back Better’ programs in their districts, especially those in rural and remote communities.

 

So much better than giving tax breaks to the already hyper wealthy.

 

 

12 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-irs-plans-crack-down-waiters-tips

 

Anyone who thinks the IRS are only after the ultra rich are sadly naive.

Anybody who thinks the IRS will go after people who don’t owe taxes doesn’t understand the idea of owing/not owing taxes.

 

 

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t agree it is all too often a waste.

 

Americans across the country are welcoming the ‘Build Back Better’ programs in their districts, especially those in rural and remote communities.

 

So much better than giving tax breaks to the already hyper wealthy.

 

 

Welcoming the government largesse is not the same as the money being put to good use. Every time the money goes through another set of hands, some of it sticks and less is available for actual projects.  The previously mentioned high speed rail in California has its hand out for more than $23 billion from the federal government. Money well spent? 

 

And there is more than one alternative than the old shibboleth "tax breaks for the wealthy".  How about everyone keep more of their money to spend as they please? 

15 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Yes it is. Because by a certain point, the effort is not worth the cost.  

 

Any idea why spending increased by 30% in just a few years, and why it is now necessary to keep at that level? The federal government collected around $5 billion in 2022- that would have more or less paid for spending if the level had stayed even close to pre pandemic levels. 

 

Even compared to last year, federal spending has increased by $226 BILLION this year. Why is that?

Let me guess:  You want spending cut but you won't identify where you would cut significant spending, enough to actually make a meaningful dent in the deficit.  Correct?

11 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

"Build Back Batter".... wow, haven't heard that phrase for a long time.   thanks for the nostalgia.  It also doesnt account for the huge bump in spending. As I recall it got trimmed down a lot before passing.

 

And it is NOT called "investment". It is called "spending".  "Investment" is when you put your money into something that will generate a return.  IE a bond or stock or something like that.  Government spending is generally inefficient and wasteful. See the great California high speed raid project for an example.

You think  spending to maintain bridges and highways and increase the power grid to handle increased loads is not investing?  Most people would disagree.

10 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

ESPECIALLY at the end of the fiscal year! I was the IT purchasing guy for a few years, and the unnecessary spending we did so our budget wouldn't get cut the following year was disgusting.

"Use it or lose it" spending at the end of a budget year has been part of all levels of government for as long as anyone can remember, and is common in every large organization including for-profit businesses.

 

It's idiotic but no one can seem to figure out how to get rid of it.

6 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

In an ideal world, perhaps. However, so much of the 'investment' is used to buy political power and repay favors that it is inherently inefficiently spent.  

 

A classis example is Amtrak. Biden has a nostalgia for trains so tens of billions of dollars are poured in. But... Americans don't ride trains (except in very specific areas). They can't be persuaded to either. American cities are not set up to be connected by them. Yet still they are funded.  The California High Speed Rail is a classic example.  Started in 2008, scheduled to be finished by 2020 at a cost of $33 billion.  Still not a passenger has ridden, cost is up to over $100 billion, no end in sight.  

 

Investments?  Come on, man.

 

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

States run the vast majority of the road system and also are in charge of education. Internet can be provided by private companies.

 

Any answer to the reality that government "investment" is all too often a waste?

The California High Speed Rail project is a state program.  Why are you using a state program to argue against federal spending in one post then suggesting state programs should not be part of the argument in another?

4 hours ago, heybruce said:

Let me guess:  You want spending cut but you won't identify where you would cut significant spending, enough to actually make a meaningful dent in the deficit.  Correct?

Here are a few ideas;

 

1. Generally, return spending to pre pandemic levels. No reason for the budget to be 30% bigger now.

2. Cut defense spending 10%

3. Cut all personnel in all departments 10%

4. Eliminate the Dept of Homeland Security and Dept of Education

5. Means testing for all federal entitlement programs.

 

Good start?

Repeal the debt ceiling! 

IMO, since it is raised every time, it serves no purpose other than a lot of drama and horse trading. by the opposition. 

39 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Repeal the debt ceiling! 

IMO, since it is raised every time, it serves no purpose other than a lot of drama and horse trading. by the opposition. 

Agreed, as long as it is accompanied by a balanced budget law. 

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

The California High Speed Rail project is a state program.  Why are you using a state program to argue against federal spending in one post then suggesting state programs should not be part of the argument in another?

https://hsr.ca.gov/2022/08/11/news-release-25-million-in-federal-funding-awarded-to-advance-high-speed-rail-in-california/

 

The train to nowhere.

15 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Agreed, as long as it is accompanied by a balanced budget law. 

what would they need to have any provisions on how to handle an increase in the debt, if they have a balanced budget amendment and don't increase the debt? What would all the people who work printing new money do?

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Here are a few ideas;

 

1. Generally, return spending to pre pandemic levels. No reason for the budget to be 30% bigger now.

2. Cut defense spending 10%

3. Cut all personnel in all departments 10%

4. Eliminate the Dept of Homeland Security and Dept of Education

5. Means testing for all federal entitlement programs.

 

Good start?

Interesting, I'll give you that.

 

Are you aware that the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for border security?  It appears you are advocating open borders.

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

https://hsr.ca.gov/2022/08/11/news-release-25-million-in-federal-funding-awarded-to-advance-high-speed-rail-in-california/

 

The train to nowhere.

Wow.  That equates to 0.025% of the estimated cost of the project.  https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/infrastructure/593755-price-rises-again-for-california-high-speed/

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

Repeal the debt ceiling! 

IMO, since it is raised every time, it serves no purpose other than a lot of drama and horse trading. by the opposition. 

Disagree. It serves to remind everyone how deep the doo is getting.

25 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Disagree. It serves to remind everyone how deep the doo is getting.

Nobody tried to do that when Trump cut taxes by 2.3 billion, mostly benefiting the rich. Or when they raised the debt ceiling 7 times during his tenure. Why was that?

 

That tax cut greatly contributed to the inflation problem and the run up in the stock market.

 

Trump’s 2017 tax cuts helped set stage for today’s inflation. Doubling down will make things worse.

The claim of irresponsible Republicans that they would do a better job than Democrats of containing inflation is just not believable.

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/10/28/23424916/inflation-donald-trump-joe-biden-republicans-tax-cuts-editorial

On 5/29/2023 at 11:03 AM, ozimoron said:

Removing 87,000 agents from the IRS to protect tax cheating by the rich is the most pernicious public policy initiative I've ever heard of. This money now has to be paid by the poor or the poor will go without. The narcissism gap is enormous.

Not 87,000 agents but 87,000 employees including programmers, janitors, etc.
Pretty blatant in the “desired” effect of reducing examinations of the biggest cheats for whom it is more cost effective to donate handsomely to the “anti-IRS” gang than to pay their actual tax burden.

58 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Disagree. It serves to remind everyone how deep the doo is getting.

It does that but IMO it does more harm than good, 

Putting aside the harm it does in international reputation, It straightens the  BRICS countries attempt to replace the dollar as the world's currency. It raised the 2 year Treasury bond yield by 8 base points and the 10 year by 4. Contributing to deficit spending. 

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

Interesting, I'll give you that.

 

Are you aware that the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for border security?  It appears you are advocating open borders.

I have no problem with Customs and Immigration returning to their previous departments.  The border can be guarded by the military as well- isnt that their job?  But the DHS gives me the creeps, and their current director is an incompetent. 

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

I have no problem with Customs and Immigration returning to their previous departments.  The border can be guarded by the military as well- isnt that their job?  But the DHS gives me the creeps, and their current director is an incompetent. 

Actually the mission of the US Department of Defense is "to provide the military forces needed to deter war and ensure our nation's security."  https://www.defense.gov/About/  People seeking jobs or asylum are not regarded as a security threat.

 

If you want to return border control to Customs and Immigration you will need to greatly increase their budgets and positions; in other words move the people doing that job from Homeland Security to the new positions.  I don't see any budget savings there.

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Actually the mission of the US Department of Defense is "to provide the military forces needed to deter war and ensure our nation's security."  https://www.defense.gov/About/  People seeking jobs or asylum are not regarded as a security threat.

 

If you want to return border control to Customs and Immigration you will need to greatly increase their budgets and positions; in other words move the people doing that job from Homeland Security to the new positions.  I don't see any budget savings there.

Blocking illegal entry into the country seems to me to be the most critical way to ensure the security of the nation.  People seeking jobs or asylum can do so at consular posts abroad.

 

The problem with DHS is that it is just another layer of bureaucracy.  Its budget has doubled (in real dollars) since its inception just 20 years ago.  It controls the TSA, another waste of money and great violator of freedoms.- perhaps my biggest beef with the DHS of all. The dept is infamous for its disregard for basic personal liberties.

 

In general, these kind of umbrella organizations that try to do too many jobs manage only to do ALL of them poorly. 

9 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Blocking illegal entry into the country seems to me to be the most critical way to ensure the security of the nation.  People seeking jobs or asylum can do so at consular posts abroad.

 

The problem with DHS is that it is just another layer of bureaucracy.  Its budget has doubled (in real dollars) since its inception just 20 years ago.  It controls the TSA, another waste of money and great violator of freedoms.- perhaps my biggest beef with the DHS of all. The dept is infamous for its disregard for basic personal liberties.

 

In general, these kind of umbrella organizations that try to do too many jobs manage only to do ALL of them poorly. 

While you are no doubt aware of the fact that the overwhelming majority of undocumented residents in the US arrived legally and mainly by air, what do you propose should be the solution? Other than the most basic solution which is to prosecute employers but that's heresy in the Republican playbook.

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

Wow.  That equates to 0.025% of the estimated cost of the project.  https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/infrastructure/593755-price-rises-again-for-california-high-speed/

The money was wasted, the rail will never operate, in my book wasting 25 mil is fraud waste and abuse.

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Blocking illegal entry into the country seems to me to be the most critical way to ensure the security of the nation.  People seeking jobs or asylum can do so at consular posts abroad.

 

The problem with DHS is that it is just another layer of bureaucracy.  Its budget has doubled (in real dollars) since its inception just 20 years ago.  It controls the TSA, another waste of money and great violator of freedoms.- perhaps my biggest beef with the DHS of all. The dept is infamous for its disregard for basic personal liberties.

 

In general, these kind of umbrella organizations that try to do too many jobs manage only to do ALL of them poorly. 

Yes. 9/11 prompted the introduction of the DHS, which seems no longer to serve its intended purpose, is expensive, inefficient and poorly managed. 

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

It does that but IMO it does more harm than good, 

Putting aside the harm it does in international reputation, It straightens the  BRICS countries attempt to replace the dollar as the world's currency. It raised the 2 year Treasury bond yield by 8 base points and the 10 year by 4. Contributing to deficit spending. 

So if the debt was a secret all would be good. I see.

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

So if the debt was a secret all would be good. I see.

First of all , I am all for having a debt ceiling, but if it going to be raised every budget, what is the sense of having a debt ceiling? Other than for the opposition, being democrat or republican to hold the country hostage for political gain? Having said that, how having or not having a debt ceiling  makes the debt secret? 

The national debt is very well publicized  , Simply google "National debt clock" 

https://www.usdebtclock.org/  it displays in detail all aspects of the national debt and service costs.  

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Blocking illegal entry into the country seems to me to be the most critical way to ensure the security of the nation.  People seeking jobs or asylum can do so at consular posts abroad.

 

The problem with DHS is that it is just another layer of bureaucracy.  Its budget has doubled (in real dollars) since its inception just 20 years ago.  It controls the TSA, another waste of money and great violator of freedoms.- perhaps my biggest beef with the DHS of all. The dept is infamous for its disregard for basic personal liberties.

 

In general, these kind of umbrella organizations that try to do too many jobs manage only to do ALL of them poorly. 

"In general, these kind of umbrella organizations that try to do too many jobs manage only to do ALL of them poorly. "

 

I agree.  So why do you want to expand the already broad and complicated job of the military to include stopping people who want to pick crops or escape gangs or despots?