Political/Current Events Random, Pics, and Videos Thread - Page 32 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-14-2011, 06:11 PM   #621
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
None. He's already said that elimination of the cabinet departments will not involve cessation of those functions or layoffs of current employees. There will simply be no new funding allocated for those departments and the employee base will be reduced by attrition.


EDITED TO ADD:

And even if it did, what would it matter? Gradual change is kinder than immediate, but either way it only helps to shift those employees out of unproductive jobs into productive jobs.
If there is no funding, how can the department pay it's employees? Thats like somebody saying "I'm not going to kill you, I'm just going to push you off a 200ft cliff and what happens after that is not my doing".

Last edited by gearhead_318; 12-14-2011 at 06:25 PM.
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:15 PM   #622
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

You left out a word. I'm sure you can figure it out.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:25 PM   #623
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
None. He's already said that elimination of the cabinet departments will not involve cessation of those functions or layoffs of current employees. There will simply be no new funding allocated for those departments and the employee base will be reduced by attrition.
Help me understand this. Is that to say that, for example, the Department of Education would receive no new funding for 2014? If there is no funding, I am assuming they cannot pay the people that work for the Department of Education or conduct any operations.

I am not understanding the fundamental difference between starving it of an operating budget and just shuttering it completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
And even if it did, what would it matter? Gradual change is kinder than immediate, but either way it only helps to shift those employees out of unproductive jobs into productive jobs.
I wonder if Paul's budgets assume some theoretical model where people with 15-years of training doing something specialized automatically move to "productive jobs" (because that's all that exists in the private sector, of course) or if it reflects a more probable outcome in which the effects increase unemployment, increase unemployment insurance expenses, decrease tax revenue, decrease aggregate demand, etc.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:26 PM   #624
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 18
Default

Better?

The wording is not important, the point is.
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:35 PM   #625
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Current (as opposed to new) funding would continue (though reduced to 2006 levels). No mandatory layoffs. Some responsibilities shifted to state and local control. 10% reduction in federal work force accomplished through attrition as departments shrink over time.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:42 PM   #626
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 18
Default

That sounds like a lot of political BS to me. I thought he was supposed to be super honest and not say misleading things?

BTW Scrappy Jack, I you. It can a hard life in here trying to preach reason, rational thinking and occasional empathy, especially alone.
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:44 PM   #627
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhead_318 View Post
That sounds like a lot of political BS to me. I thought he was supposed to be super honest and not say misleading things?
You sound like a lot of political BS to ME.

Great discussion! Keep it up!
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:52 PM   #628
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

Regarding the question of the real feasibility of serious budget cuts when forced to work with Congress, etc. -- is this really an actual objection? It's counted as a strike against Ron Paul that others may not be willing to cut the budget as much as he'd like?

Of course it would be a battle for him to construct a budget that has some serious cuts that would get passed by Congress. That's how the system works. But at the very least, we'd have a chief executive who actually desires budget cuts, rather than just another liar who says he's cutting the budget by X amount, when what he really means is that he's cutting into projected future spending increases by X amount (but when we reach that point, we'll probably not cut the spending increase by X anyway).

One step at a time. Get a President who's serious about constructing a balanced budget, and then vote out the jackasses in Congress if they won't pass it.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:59 PM   #629
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,107
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

any country that's serious about their future reduces & limits gov't spending, and gets rid of pointless pencil pusher jobs that do nothing but slow the economy. This is something even Canada beats us at.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 07:42 PM   #630
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 639
Total Cats: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
One has to work with a bunch of other people to get anything done and has begun withdrawal of active combat troops if I understand correctly


Quote:
Originally Posted by jared8783 View Post
Could you elaborate on the efforts that President Obama has made for bringing the troops home that have been blocked?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
At what point did I say President Obama's efforts to bring home troops in Iraq have been blocked?
yes sir i did put words in yer mouth
guilty as charged

my point is that the president of the united states has full power to bring the troops home whenever he pleases

as a congress man ron paul does not

lemme rephrase my question.

were you trying to say that obama can't bring the troops home right now if he wants too?
and why did he break his campaign promise?
is it because he did not have the power?
jared8783 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 08:18 PM   #631
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Current (as opposed to new) funding would continue (though reduced to 2006 levels). No mandatory layoffs. Some responsibilities shifted to state and local control. 10% reduction in federal work force accomplished through attrition as departments shrink over time.
I must be misunderstanding something, then. I was thinking he wanted to immediately eliminate several departments, but it sounds like you are saying he wants to continue the departments - just with reduced funding now and in the future?

Assume it is calendar year 2014 and the Department of TSP Reports has a budget of $2 billion for fiscal year 2015. What happens in calendar year 2015 under your understanding of Paul's plan? After that?
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 10:26 PM   #632
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 803
Total Cats: 3
Default

Just so you know, I wrote to my congresswoman and one of the things she (or more likely her secretary) pointed me to was this:

If you would like to report welfare fraud and abuse in Florida, please e-mail the Florida Department of Children and Families at http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/admin/ig/fraud.shtml

So if you know some POS welfare abuser in FL, report them.
TrickerZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 10:07 AM   #633
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,275
Total Cats: 64
Default

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/redboo...rtsexample.htm
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 12:16 PM   #634
Boost Czar

Thread Starter
iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,107
Total Cats: 1,400
Default

Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 06:55 PM   #635
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,480
Total Cats: 373
Default

mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 07:01 PM   #636
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 28
Default

Uh, isn't that first?

And **** yes, GO PAUL
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 07:01 PM   #637
AFM Crusader
iTrader: (18)
 
olderguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Wayne, NJ
Posts: 4,275
Total Cats: 64
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Why didn't they move Paul to the left position? Isn't 23% more than 22%?


Edit: Beat me to it
olderguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 09:08 PM   #638
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Default

It really is pretty damn comical (assuming that is not shooped).
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2011, 10:54 PM   #639
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack View Post
It really is pretty damn comical (assuming that is not shooped).
I laugh whenever I learn that somebody watches Fox news too.

Also, I saw something where Fox "accidentally" put Obama's face in place of Paul's.
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2011, 11:22 AM   #640
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,284
Total Cats: 176
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhead_318 View Post
I laugh whenever I learn that somebody watches Fox news too.

Also, I saw something where Fox "accidentally" put Obama's face in place of Paul's.
Fox News is no better or worse than any other mainstream media outlet. If anything, you go in to it expecting bias. The news part seems pretty objective; it's the commentary that is obviously biased but that is true with all news outlets. If anything, the NY Times, NBC affiliates, et al are a little more subversive because they sometimes seem to blend their bias in to the regular news coverage.


The comical part was the continued Rodney Dangerfielding of Ron Paul.
Scrappy Jack is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Project Gemini - Turbo Civic on the Cheap Full_Tilt_Boogie Build Threads 52 08-28-2016 05:18 AM
OTS Bilstein to motorsports ASN conversion stoves Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 5 04-21-2016 04:00 PM
Going back to stock. Need some 1.6 parts. Trent WTB 2 10-01-2015 01:15 PM
Leaky Wilwoods mx592 Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain 1 10-01-2015 01:45 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 AM.