NY pols assail proposed anti-terror cuts
What is Bush thinking?
BC-A Bush administration plan to slash anti-terror grant programs by more than half would threaten the safety of U.S. cities, several New York politicians charged Saturday.
more stories like thisU.S. Sen. Charles Schumer blasted the Bush administration’s plan to eliminate some port and rail security programs and cut Homeland Security grants for states and cities from $3.4 billion in the fiscal year 2007 to $1.4 billion in 2009.
“To say, no port security, no transit security, when we know that our ports and transit lines are targets for terrorists makes no sense if you want to protect America,” said Schumer, D-N.Y.
This may sound like a stupid question to some, but, who’s to say that these states and cities require the same 3.4 billion for 2009 that they received for 2007? Could it be that the additional $ is overkill and someone with a brain and a conscience decided that an inflated budget would be a disservice to the tax payers?
The fact that Shumer is pointing the finger doesn’t give the claim any sense of weight, either.
The only thing worse than a “grant” is a “Sherman”.
Do you think he even knows about this? Honestly…
Does Bush strike you as someone who would be aware of such details? He’s not really a hands-on guy.
I’m surprised that “Homeland security” isn’t handling this themselves. Of course most people would think border security and port security would be an “automatic”, especially when you consider the fact that the Federal Government has prevented the states from accomplishing this themselves.
Aubrey,
I’d chime in about this but you don’t think cops, firefighters, first responders, etc are part of the government.
Because, … if they are a part of the government, and the government is the problem, then you hate cops, firefighters, first responders… etc.
One of the possible reasons for internal conflict?
Conflicting internal values.
As you’ve pointed out.
One segment wants to spend money to protect us.
One segment wants to cut money to protect us.
Maybe Bush just wants to brag about budget cuts in the upcoming election cycle?
Later, he can add the money back in to an appropriations bill as part of the “War” on terror. [All appropriations are off the budget.]
Do you understand the debt gets bigger with every ‘tax cut?’
Do you want me to go over the numbers again on what a family of five need to pay annually under a flat tax system?
Maybe you’re willing just to take my word for it?
About $45,000 to $47,000 per year.
No matter want Reagan or Bush told the world, they spent money they didn’t have.
You’re one of those who gave them MY credit card.
Quit your pathetic whining.
MD
DAH!
md,
“you hate cops, firefighters, first responders… etc”
Are you serious?
“Do you understand the debt gets bigger with every ‘tax cut?’”
I would say that the debt gets bigger with every penyy spent OVER the budget!
Don’t peddle your b.s. One one hand you piss and moan about “the poor poor people, wah, wah, wah, we need to help them, wah, wah.” On the other hand you whine and cry about “the debt gets bigger with every ‘tax cut.’” PICK A SIDE!
Back on topic, 3.4 billion is quite a lot of money. 1.4 billion is quite a lot of money. To be honest with you, I don’t think I can comprehend the actual value of those numbers. It is possible that it costs 3.4 billion (”in grants for states and cities”) to secure the nation. It is also possible that it no longer or never cost that much money. I would expect you understand that waste is a speciality of gov’t agents and agencies. If some one can spend 3.4 billion in one year, then I’m sure that they can waste another billion or so.
And before you bring up the cost of the war, I’ve said from the day I stepped into Baghdad that there was excessive waste in every aspect of the operation.
penyy = penny
One = On
Aubrey,
“I would say that the debt gets bigger with every penny spent OVER the budget!”
Although I’m sure this means something, it means nothing to me. The debt would increase from interest. The debt increases from poor collection processes. The debt increases from poor money management. The debt increases from poor cash management. The debt increases when taxpayers refuse to pay their taxes and fight the IRS for years in court. The debt increases when revenues are soft or when parts of the economy contract more than budgetary expectations/projections. The debt increases when the President or the Congress spends money off the budget via appropriations. The budget increases when the Pentagon pays defense contractors for cost overruns on hard contracts. The debt increases for reasons unrelated to the Presidents Budget.
In kindness to you, the process of taxation and expenditure could be studied for years. And, still subject to disbute between two equally ‘learned’ people.
And, just when someone gets comfortable with the overall process, some idiot changes it.
Example, annual budgets used to have ten year projections. Now, since Bush and his brand of GOP conservatives, the budget has a five year projection. Usually. So the Prez says this will happen over the next five years if my budget is put into place. Then, someone else crunches the same numbers and says, over the next ten years if that budget is put into place. With the caveat, all other things being equal.
So, take some thought for the meanings of budget, debt, deficit, appropriations and a few other terms seldom used in public debate.
“The Budget” does not mean what most of us would think it means.
[The Executive summary for one year ran to over 200 pages. Almost 300 if I remember. The budget was a senior year project item in my college days. The professor wasn't impressed with some obscure comment I made about the numbers. So he said, "Didn't you read the budget?" Being who I am, I said, "Hail no I didn't read it. The D@MN executive summary was 284 pages. You know I couldn't keep all that straight in my head!" So, he laughed. Thought about it. And, said. "OK" He was a Reagan era scholar. Meaning, his political focus as a post grad was on the Reagan years. If that means anything to you.]
Prior to 1972, I think that was the year, the budget did not include revenue or expenses for the trust funds.
The allegations are that the military industrial complex became the largest item in the ‘budget.’ Therefore, ‘we’ had to relabel various programs as social programs and include those in the budgeting process.
If the trust funds [I think the correct wording is "If the Trusts funds] are taken back off the budget, defense becomes half of the ‘budget.’
To make it simple, the ‘budget’ tell us very little about taxation and expenditure.
MD
I’ll have to get back to you after I do a few things.
MD
Aubrey,
“Don’t peddle your b.s. One one hand you piss and moan about “the poor poor people, wah, wah, wah, we need to help them, wah, wah.” On the other hand you whine and cry about “the debt gets bigger with every ‘tax cut.’” PICK A SIDE!”
Nicely done on the spin. Well done.
But, what makes one mutually exclude the other?
Can you feel empathy? A very personal question that you don’t have to answer. So take it as a general question.
What’s the difference between sympathy and empathy?
MD
“you hate cops, firefighters, first responders… etc”
Are you serious?
Yeah, I’m serious. Maybe you don’t remember that exchange. It’s one of my standards whenever the I hear, “The government is the problem.”
“Back on topic, 3.4 billion is quite a lot of money. 1.4 billion is quite a lot of money. To be honest with you, I don’t think I can comprehend the actual value of those numbers.”
Now …. that is why I like ya. Worth your weight in gold.
I’ve been in a vault with $10 million in cash. Ditto. I had no comprehension of a ‘value.’ It could have been 10 million sheets of toilet paper. NEW toilet paper, thank you very much.
I can carry $100,000. I can spend a hundred K. It has a value. Not much. But, it does have value that I can comprehend.
I’ve worked within a departmental budget of $2.7 million. Long before the PC was invented. When data was entered with punch cards. When a single computer had an air conditioned room and an “operator.” An eight state trucking operation with 16 locations and over a thousand pieces of equipment. Every dang tire had a serial number. We burned the serial numbers into each new tire along with our logo. We kept a hand written book on tire installs.
And, I never ever saw an invoice for a new tire. Never, never, ever.
I purchased every nut and bolt. Every spark plug and battery. Every fuse. I did an inventory every four weeks. Some items weekly. Fuel and gasoline daily.
I purchased every permit and license plate. Every part, pencil, and piece of paper.
But, never a tire.
Management didn’t trust me to know the value of a tire to a trucking company.
VALUE
The issue is value. Not money.
Well done. Very well done.
Mad Dog
MD,
(I’ll put your initials back in caps.) Being the economy savvy guy that you are, I’m willing to bet that you know the term “shock therapy.” Milton Friedman, Jefferey Sachs (look at me, tossing out names! ha, ha!) and their policy to turn around the economies of our neighbors to the south and Russia and Poland and some of the Asian Tigers. I’m no economist, but, the (at the time) modern day authority on market economics (Friedman) says that, when applying shock therapy, the gov’t can’t spend one penny more than is generated through taxes or any other means. So, my way of thinking is that the ‘budget’ can’t be larger than the incoming tax revenue. End of story. Until…the spending grows larger than the ‘budget.’ Now we have a defict. At the end of the year we have a debt. Next year we spend less, generate the same income in taxes, and pay the debt off again.
Nowhere do I see the need to increase the taxes to reduce the deficits or the debt. By raising taxes to bring the numbers back to the black, you do not require any fiscal responsibility or hint at any accountability to the check writers.
If, however, the pres. vetoed every bill that crossed his desk that was outside a balanced budget’s allowances…problem solved. I know this is over-simplistic; but, why can’t it be?
Aubrey,
Sorry to not stay up with this thread.
My real level of economic ’stuff’ is very, very low. At least in the formal way. And, you as well as others should be very careful about assuming I understand all that I know.
DOR talks about ’stuff’ that is really pretty basic for a real economist and I have to research it, scratch my head, and then ask him WTF are you trying to tell me.
Friedman … oh I hate that guy.
Try to imagine economics as being something like this blog.
We have the Mad Dog School of Economic theory, the John Konop School, the DOR School, and even a Aubrey School.
Now to give my definition of ‘School.’
Mad Dog isn’t teaching school. It’s just that his point of view is distinct and so different from bb, Aubrey, DOR, that we can label HIM and others like him.
Now, you may already know how there are ’schools of thought’ and subcategories within fields like economics. Just like in medicine.
Pediatrics versus geriatics.
BUT, sometimes similar thinkers do have very similar educational backgrounds or … teach and hold academic posts at the same physical school.
I think Friedman is associated with the Chicago School of economic theory. I might be wrong.
But, I reject all the Chicago conclusions, as I know them.
However, some world organizations and many economists follow the Chicago school.
Austerity programs, I’m more comfortable with that term than shock therapy, is followed by several NGO’s (non governmental organizations).
I’m thinking of the World Bank, if it’s still called that.
A country wants to borrow money but can’t pay the going rates and terms. Or isn’t credit worthy. Yet, the country is important enough and the people important enough for a guided loan program with the ‘lender of last resort.’
World Bank will usually only loan money IF certain terms are met. Usually a huge cut in government spending.
That would be military spending, employees, etc. The perks of office. Palaces.
Some of that makes really good sense.
However, just from the common sense point of view, no economics, how does creating a surge in unemployment help?
Imagine Bush giving up Air Force One. No Marine Band. Closing all the national parks and monuments. All public museums like the Smithsonian (which I’m sure isn’t spelled like that). Tourist attractions like the Space Centers in AL, TX, and FL. No interstate rest stops. No routine Coast Guard patrols, only rescues. No parades or school kids doing tours of the firehouse, police station, or water treatment plant. No retirement plans or benefits for any public employee at any level. Termination of Secret Service protection for past presidents and families. The First Family would not get security either.
I don’t remember how the ’social programs’ are handled. I don’t recall.
I just know that every government flourish is cut completely out.
Now, when I studied this in college, about 3 years ago, this austerity program was being judged a failure.
IF you would like, I could spend some time doing some hard research to back that up. The research would take some time. 40 hours or more.
But, to the best of my knowledge, the western imposed austerity programs of US supported NGO’s all failed.
All of that to say Friedman had his 15 minutes of fame.
MD
Aubrey,
Back to your ideas of budgets.
As to how the budget is imagined to work, I’d say your right on.
Reality just seems to always shatter theory.
Let me throw out some stuff.
There was this movie about dinosaurs. Jeff Goldblum was the rock star mathematician who said, “Life finds a way.”
Chaos Theory I think was his characters ’school of thinking.’
The budget has to be finite in scope. Made up over a period almost covering three years. It is an attempt to enforce order on chaos.
That chaos is OUTSIDE the government more than it is inside the government.
For giggles, google zero budgeting or maybe it’s zero sum budgeting.
It’s midnite. I had something to drink. I’m tired. I’m going to bed.
MD
It was Chicago.
I don’t know much about the World Bank other than it was a creation of Breton Woods. GATT and the IMF were too.
Aubrey,
Right.
My comments are based on criticism of the Bretton Woods system.
There are also pro arguments.
I’m not an expert on those. Just had to deal with the system for a semester in college.
I do have a contact with a former World Bank employee from Bangladesh named Kibria.
MD
united states medical insurance statistics…
omicron wisher mutandis shapelessness sordidness …
cgm check cashing…
uninterruptedly where Billie …