The Budget

[Gaspar]

No.  I would be working hard to stop the wasteful spending of trillions in unjustified and unfunded wars.  That would never fly well with the Oklahoma mentality exemplified by your post.

I think you, I and Conan would all be striving to do that, the only difference would be that Conan and I would not be willing to turn a blind eye on all of the other waste.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I think you, I and Conan would all be striving to do that, the only difference would be that Conan and I would not be willing to turn a blind eye on all of the other waste.

Never said anything about turning a blind eye - that is The Script response - jump to the most extreme, illogical state of being that could possibly exist and present it as the proposed action.

So, what you seem to be saying is, that in your business, you would be putting equal attention to a million dollar hemorrhage versus a couple extra reams of printer paper every month?  Or would you put proportionate effort into the two problems - 99.999% of your time into the million dollar issue versus about 12.5 seconds into the paper waste?

[Conan71]

No.  I would be working hard to stop the wasteful spending of trillions in unjustified and unfunded wars.  That would never fly well with the Oklahoma mentality exemplified by your post.

I don't have a clue where you get the idea myself nor any other conservative is happy about the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan.  Nor how that is some "Oklahoma mentality".  I also don't understand your crazy obsession bringing this up when someone mentions cutting any and all waste from government.  

You are the one who seems to be reading from a script, like something right out of Daily Koz or HuffPo.

Here's $18 billion identified in a Coburn report.  Considering it was just announced the government will finally make a $35 billion payment to the debt principal, there's significance since that's just over 1/2 of what we are now applying to debt reduction.  We could be making a $53 billion payment instead.  I doubt you will take time to read much in it because it doesn't fit your RWRE/Murdochian mindset.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public//index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b7b23f66-2d60-4d5a-8bc5-8522c7e1a40e

[Gaspar]

Never said anything about turning a blind eye - that is The Script response - jump to the most extreme, illogical state of being that could possibly exist and present it as the proposed action.

So, what you seem to be saying is, that in your business, you would be putting equal attention to a million dollar hemorrhage versus a couple extra reams of printer paper every month?  Or would you put proportionate effort into the two problems - 99.999% of your time into the million dollar issue versus about 12.5 seconds into the paper waste?

Incorrect analogy.

The patient is bleeding to death (has been for some time), and no one wants to render aid, but everyone wants to argue about which wound is most important.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Incorrect analogy.

The patient is bleeding to death (has been for some time), and no one wants to render aid, but everyone wants to argue about which wound is most important.

Bleeding is $ trillions.  Essentially undetectable scratch - few hundred thousand.  When you stop the bleeding, the scratch is still irrelevant.

Here is a scaled reference for you to give some idea of the kind of relationship we are talking about.  For $ 2 trillion in unwarranted wars - versus $ 300,000 researching duck ducks;

That would be as if you had $ 50,000 in credit card debt.  And were worried about less than a penny - $0.0075 to be precise.  Are  you seriously trying to suggest that you would worry about that penny the same as you would the $50,000...??  Or even think about the 7.5 mills....before spending all your available 'concern time' on the $50,000....??

I submit you would not even think about the mills.  Nor would any rational person.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I don't have a clue where you get the idea myself nor any other conservative is happy about the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan.  Nor how that is some "Oklahoma mentality".  I also don't understand your crazy obsession bringing this up when someone mentions cutting any and all waste from government.  

Here's $18 billion identified in a Coburn report.  Considering it was just announced the government will finally make a $35 billion payment to the debt principal, there's significance since that's just over 1/2 of what we are now applying to debt reduction.  We could be making a $53 billion payment instead.  I doubt you will take time to read much in it because it doesn't fit your RWRE/Murdochian mindset.

http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public//index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b7b23f66-2d60-4d5a-8bc5-8522c7e1a40e

Don't know if you are happy about it or not - can only go by your previously expressed thoughts that you are not happy with it.  I'm all for cutting waste in government - that's been said a lot.  I am also grown up enough to understand reality - something tragically missing in this state and so many others who at the same time are wringing hands and bleating plaintively about "waste" - and yet, insisting on trying to continue the exact policies and personnel that put us in that hole to begin with.  The insanity is mind boggling.  It IS an Oklahoma mentality - but not limited to Oklahoma....there are plenty of other parts of the country that go the same way.

Putting an end to the atmosphere of imperialistic voyeurism we have indulged in for so long IS the biggest 'any and all waste'.  Even Coburn's examples are leading to the ratio of about 100 to 1.   $100 in huge waste - and death and wounding of tens of thousands of our kids....what is the 'dollar value' of that loss and waste?  Compared to $1 dollar of Coburn identified waste.

And the idea being expressed that somehow 100 times bigger - or 6 million times bigger - has the same weight of $18 or 300k...well, maybe in some alternate universe world.  But not the real world.  That means you would be just as happy with $ 1 revenue and it would have the same 'value' as $100 - should be pursued with the same effort.  Or $50,000 versus less than a penny!  Seriously?  No!

[Conan71]

Bleeding is $ trillions.  Essentially undetectable scratch - few hundred thousand.  When you stop the bleeding, the scratch is still irrelevant.

Here is a scaled reference for you to give some idea of the kind of relationship we are talking about.  For $ 2 trillion in unwarranted wars - versus $ 300,000 researching duck ducks;

That would be as if you had $ 50,000 in credit card debt.  And were worried about less than a penny - $0.0075 to be precise.  Are  you seriously trying to suggest that you would worry about that penny the same as you would the $50,000...??  Or even think about the 7.5 mills....before spending all your available 'concern time' on the $50,000....??

I submit you would not even think about the mills.  Nor would any rational person.

You miss an important mathematical point: The two trillion you keep bleating about is over almost 12 years now.  Throw in $200 billion in other waste every year between clown studies and being far too liberal on entitlement programs and it comes close to the waste on foreign wars. 

Heck, even if we stick with $18 billion a year identified by Coburn over 12 years, the same span of your two trillion, that's $216 billion.  Still want to say that's insignificant?  That's not Washington's money, that's your money, but continue to be glib about it if you like.

[Gaspar]

House passed the first budget bill of the year with almost unanimous support approving a $73.3 billion plan that increases funding for veterans programs. The vote was 421-4.

Looks like they will be on time again this year with the other bills.

Of course all of the bills are expected to die in the Senate again.

[JCnOwasso]

There are programs in the Government that have many questionable attributes.  Understanding the migration patterns of the European Swallow, as opposed to the African Swallow (Monty Python for the win) may not mean much to most ever person, but there is generally a reason behind it (though it may not be a good one). 

Here is how I look at it.  A certain portion of the Government will look at tax increases and say that it only provides X dollars which won't matter to our bottom line.  Another portion of the Government will look at these smaller programs and say that cutting it would only provide X dollars which won't matter to our bottom line.  Seperately they may be pennies, but together they are a start... all a part of that comprimise that should be happening in our Government, but is regularly dismissed because someone might lose their seat.

Now here are a couple numbers I am going to toss out
Program Cost- 66.7 Billion (F-22 Raptor)
Program Cost- 388 Billion (Joint Strike Fighter)
Cost for 2- 1.5 Billion (LCS)
14 Billion in development and 9 Billion per. (Ford Class Carrier)

These are all great programs that have cost the Government a significant amount of money.  The numbers have most likely inflated to double the initial forecasted costs.  We have designed aircraft to fly with the assistance of 30+ computers working in tandom but we have a vehicle that cannot withstand an impact of an explosion.  We have ships and aircraft that are invisible to radar, but the body armor utilized today hasn't changed in 3 -4 decades.  Misplaced priorities.  Our new enemies, for the most part, do not have radar or aircraft.  They do have mortars, RPG's and the ability to put together a bomb that is easily discharged with a cell phone.  The enemy goes for a body count, they are not trying to win... they are just doing their best to make sure we don't either.

[Gaspar]

There are programs in the Government that have many questionable attributes.  Understanding the migration patterns of the European Swallow, as opposed to the African Swallow (Monty Python for the win) may not mean much to most ever person, but there is generally a reason behind it (though it may not be a good one). 

Here is how I look at it.  A certain portion of the Government will look at tax increases and say that it only provides X dollars which won't matter to our bottom line.  Another portion of the Government will look at these smaller programs and say that cutting it would only provide X dollars which won't matter to our bottom line.  Seperately they may be pennies, but together they are a start... all a part of that comprimise that should be happening in our Government, but is regularly dismissed because someone might lose their seat.

Now here are a couple numbers I am going to toss out
Program Cost- 66.7 Billion (F-22 Raptor)
Program Cost- 388 Billion (Joint Strike Fighter)
Cost for 2- 1.5 Billion (LCS)
14 Billion in development and 9 Billion per. (Ford Class Carrier)

These are all great programs that have cost the Government a significant amount of money.  The numbers have most likely inflated to double the initial forecasted costs.  We have designed aircraft to fly with the assistance of 30+ computers working in tandom but we have a vehicle that cannot withstand an impact of an explosion.  We have ships and aircraft that are invisible to radar, but the body armor utilized today hasn't changed in 3 -4 decades.  Misplaced priorities.  Our new enemies, for the most part, do not have radar or aircraft.  They do have mortars, RPG's and the ability to put together a bomb that is easily discharged with a cell phone.  The enemy goes for a body count, they are not trying to win... they are just doing their best to make sure we don't either.

Very well said!