sunset from behind the wire

sunset from behind the wire

Friday, March 23, 2018

Federal Pork




A billion here - a billion there, who's counting?

News reports a threatened veto by President Trump - but I doubt he'll do it. 

20 comments:

  1. And every bit of it taken from us. Taken either by taxation, or inflation. It is just infuriating, as people struggle to pay their bills, buy food, get some health insurance, and the
    government just pisses away their hard earned money.
    Every one of those handouts has some damned advocacy group behind it, who is getting most of the cash, and using some of it to pay off the same bastards who handed it to them from the treasury.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A percentage of the money shoveled out domestically is returned in the form of taxes (military spending, etc) the rest is redistributed. The foreign aid is money down a rat hole. Having said that my basic nature feels that we could have done it for a lot less if only THEY HAD LISTENED TO ME...crickets. Nobody does.

      Delete
  2. A billion here - a billion there, who's counting?

    Sen. Dirksen is smiling on you....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. President Trump did not campaign as a fiscal conservative. He never claimed to be anything but a populist and he is true to what he's said. I don't know whether or not he will shrink the size of government. Maybe incrementally?

      Delete
  3. This spending only goes to those that administer it and seldom (say never) gets to those it supposes to help. It needs to be severely reined in or stopped all together.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The gut buster is not the $1.3 trillion spending bill, which carries us through to October. It's discretionary spending and that's a small fraction of non-discretionary spending: Entitlements and the interest on the national debt. Stopping spending in a meaningful way would include a curtailment of Medicare and Social Security payments. I doubt that is what you are advocating here. We all have our own share of pork in the pot.

      When I write this, I am not advocating a curtailment of entitlements. I'm only pointing out that THEY completely eclipse discretionary spending in terms of cost.

      In terms pf my personal self-interest, though I paid into Social Security, current law holds that I will NEVER be able to get a pay-back because I have a government pension. It's therefore one of those things where even though I have been screwed, commenting in detail over something to which I am not entitled is not appropriate. I'd be arguing other people's money. I'm a few years short of being able to file for Medicare and I have no idea whether or not it will be in place then. Since I have other options in that case as well, I'll leave that debate to those who are entitled to Medicare.

      Delete
    2. There are also farm subsidies. Why should the rest of the nation pay farmers not to grow something on their land? Why should the nation subsidize farms? Sugar tariffs protect that particular American commodity from being wiped out by far less expensive imports from Brazil and Mexico. Again, we all have our own pork in the pot.

      Delete
    3. Well I can comment on something to which I have paid into. It is bs that social security is an labelled an entitlement. Both my late husband & I paid into social security since we were kids. When he died, I was told I could collect the larger of the two, but not both.

      Delete
    4. The truth is that it's just another tax and we've all been ripped off by USGOV. But the money was taken from us by force and is kept from us. I tend to just kiss it off, because there's nothing that I can do about it. But it's still 2/3 of the federal budget.

      Delete
  4. Every bill should be a stand alone (one issue) and not cluttered up with every little porky pig project some weasel wants to bring back to his constituents.

    Thankfully this crap sandwich is only for 6 months.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. And trotting out the 2200 page spending bill three days before a vote is unconscionable. President Trump said that he won't let that happen again. We'll see. That sort of chicanery has become common practice. If WE THE PEOPLE had the opportunity to read and understand these spending bills before a vote, there would be a lot more push back on legislators -- and they don't what the heat. As is, they can lift their hands to the heavens and tell us "not my fault" -- right.

      Delete
  5. Who will receive the $218 million in Europe??? That sounds really stupid. The European countries vaste billions together via the European Union.

    Here is just one example from The Telegraph https://goo.gl/4aqPQN

    "Fraud allegations and waste as EU hands out money faster than states can spend it

    EU auditors yet again refuse to give accounts a clean bill of health, as inspectors say states cannot "absorb" the money they are given."

    Why should the US taxpayer sponsor a system like this?

    If anyone use Google and search words like EU and waste you will find numerous example that will take away any motivation to throw taxpayers money into this deep black hole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John, that's a very good question. And why should we offer scholarships to kids from Egypt? None of that makes sense, which is why it was completed 3 days before a vote. It's a scam and the President said that in the Oval Office today - but he signed the spending bill. Yes, I'm an American but I'm clearly not defending our moronic appropriations process.

      Delete
    2. I suggest the vaste of money is glued to the politician that came up with the ideas so no one ever forget. Other sound people should also follow up where the money actually go and inform the citizens. When politicians becomes to willing to give away taxpayers money they should be replaced with new ones.

      Delete
    3. Their cheeks need to be branded with a dollar sign so that everyone who sees them will know what they did.

      Delete
  6. Time for a Line item veto... sigh!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would benefit any president in office. The Supreme Court has ruled that practice unconstitutional in the past. It will be interesting to see how they can craft something that addresses the SCOTUS concern.

      Delete

It's virtual - it's a mirage - it's life