DHS Funding Fight

[Slateman]

Can we dump TSA too?

 

In all honesty, this burns the contractors more than the Feds. We know a deal will get reached, eventually, and the Feds will get their back pay. The contractors on the other hand, their companies don't have to pay them if they don't want to.

[Fred Jones]

Die DHS Die and take some other departments with you.

 

 

So, just cut the government in half?  Might as well cut Congress in half since they will have less decisions to make.  Should just stop giving money to any of our allies.  With all that cutting, probably should also reduce medicaid and medicare.  Let states pay for transportation, etc.  I could go on, but I need to understand your government reduction plan.

 

All that cost savings should give us all big tax cuts I assume.  All seems so easy and clean. 

 

Just on a side note, what departments are you considering cutting and/or reducing?

[Slateman]

So, just cut the government in half?  Might as well cut Congress in half since they will have less decisions to make.  Should just stop giving money to any of our allies.  With all that cutting, probably should also reduce medicaid and medicare.  Let states pay for transportation, etc.  I could go on, but I need to understand your government reduction plan.

 

All that cost savings should give us all big tax cuts I assume.  All seems so easy and clean. 

 

Just on a side note, what departments are you considering cutting and/or reducing?

Could we? I kid, I kid

 

But seriously, about cutting the government, would anything really be effected if the military were reduced by a third and spend 300 billion instead of 500+?

[Fred Jones]

Could we? I kid, I kid

 

But seriously, about cutting the government, would anything really be effected if the military were reduced by a third and spend 300 billion instead of 500+?

 

Unfortunately, it is not that simple.  Cutting the military means cutting the fight against ISIL.  My only comment to fighting all these foreign conflicts is "who the F is going to pay for it".  Not saying we should or should not, but we always just put it on the credit card and worry about it later.

 

No politician EVER wants to come out and say we have to fight these foreign conflicts for the safety and freedom for all Americans and I have to raise taxes to pay for it.

[Slateman]

Unfortunately, it is not that simple.  Cutting the military means cutting the fight against ISIL.  My only comment to fighting all these foreign conflicts is "who the F is going to pay for it".  Not saying we should or should not, but we always just put it on the credit card and worry about it later.

 

No politician EVER wants to come out and say we have to fight these foreign conflicts for the safety and freedom for all Americans and I have to raise taxes to pay for it.

What fight? We aren't doing squat and the current administration will do as little as possible (though that is a thread for another time).

 

And no, it really doesn't. It means not having as large a standing military as we do now. But a military at half size could easily match our current operational role in combatting ISIL. We no longer have the threat of the USSR. North Korea is laughable and largely SK's problem. China is massive and, frankly, we could double our military and still not be a match on the ground for China. More importantly, we own them, economically.

 

Frankly, we simply do not need a military this big. More than that, the rest of the Western world is reaping huge benefits because the US handles the majority of their defense needs. All those countries that spend more per capita, and have much better, education and health care, guess why? Because we've picked up the vast majority of the tab for their defense the last 40 years.

 

And this is the fundamental issue that no one wants to address. Before you can address our expensive healthcare system. Before we can talk about improving education and eliminating poverty. We have to stop dumping vast sums of money in to a defense system that is incapable of fighting today's wars and, frankly, no longer necessary.

[Fred Jones]

What fight? We aren't doing squat and the current administration will do as little as possible (though that is a thread for another time).

 

And this is the fundamental issue that no one wants to address. Before you can address our expensive healthcare system. Before we can talk about improving education and eliminating poverty. We have to stop dumping vast sums of money in to a defense system that is incapable of fighting today's wars and, frankly, no longer necessary.

 

First, we are spending a lot of money in the fight, just not in the open.  Been bombing them since the summer, boots on the ground training, etc.  But, that is another thread for another day.

 

I like your last paragraph, goes along with my comment above about paying for foreign intervention.  As much as I hammer Obama and as much as the GOP and Fox news hammers Obama, he at least has tried not to intervene relative to the previous President.  Yes, he continued what Bush did, etc. (not going to discuss that).  But, he is trying hard to get other nations to fight in the Middle East.  Trying not to get too involved in Ukraine (have to say Europe has become more involved the last six months as at first it was mostly the U.S.).

 

That said, I think you bring up a valid point.  Unfortunately, it is also a political problem as Congress does not want to close bases/shutdown contracts in their home areas.

[Slateman]

My issues with the lack of intervention have more to do with what i believe are Obama's underlying positions, not the methodology. I would have no problem with simply killing ISIL en masse. In fact, I'd have no problem if we came out and said sorry for the collateral, but we're going to do what must be done to ensure any kind of stability in the region.

 

But that could largely be done with a small number of ground troops and use of airpower.

 

The military has become a form of welfare.  People who probably couldn't have jobs anywhere else end up in the military. People who have skillsets only the military wants end up as contractors. Towns that would simply not exist end up being mildly prosperous because of nearby bases.

[88Comrade2000]

Just on a side note, what departments are you considering cutting and/or reducing?

 

Education.  That is the domain of local and state entities and should remain that way.  I would reduce the defense department. It is not our job to defend Europe or Asia.  Let them defend themselves.  I would merge some of the others like Commerce, Labor.  Energy.

 

You can eliminate some departments, merge others and reduce the size of others.  The federal governemnt should only do, what can't be done on the local/state level.  IRS needs to be reduce.  Forgot who it was that proposed tax reform so it can be filed on a post card.

[Hersh]

My issues with the lack of intervention have more to do with what i believe are Obama's underlying positions, not the methodology. I would have no problem with simply killing ISIL en masse. In fact, I'd have no problem if we came out and said sorry for the collateral, but we're going to do what must be done to ensure any kind of stability in the region.

 

But that could largely be done with a small number of ground troops and use of airpower.

 

The military has become a form of welfare.  People who probably couldn't have jobs anywhere else end up in the military. People who have skillsets only the military wants end up as contractors. Towns that would simply not exist end up being mildly prosperous because of nearby bases.

 

Did you help the George W Bush administration plan for the Iraq war?

[Fergasun]

IRS needs to be reduce. Forgot who it was that proposed tax reform so it can be filed on a post card.

IRS got a big budget reduction due to the political group targetting scandal. A 3% reduction - what this means is less money collected, less audits, and more people. cheating on taxes.

Tax reform is an issue because it needa to be revenue neutral and any revenue raises in the rich offset by other reductions on the rich.

[Burgold]

Education.  That is the domain of local and state entities and should remain that way.  I would reduce the defense department. It is not our job to defend Europe or Asia.  Let them defend themselves.  I would merge some of the others like Commerce, Labor.  Energy.

 

You can eliminate some departments, merge others and reduce the size of others.  The federal governemnt should only do, what can't be done on the local/state level.  IRS needs to be reduce.  Forgot who it was that proposed tax reform so it can be filed on a post card.

These are nice ideas in abstract.  It doesn't really work in reality. Look at how many states are broke and so let/need the Federal government to do their lifting for them. Look how many states abandon their citizens in terms of education, health care, etc. It'd be a very different country and moreso for the Red States who complain the most, but also beg the most.

[Slateman]

Did you help the George W Bush administration plan for the Iraq war?

If only this war were that simple

[tshile]

it seems to me the GOP thinks everyone is stupid and they can just send bills to Obama and if he doesn't sign them go "See, we're running government, it's HIM that won't do anything"

 

don't get me wrong, it might work. it certainly works on some. i don't think it will work though. the real test will be 2016.

 

kind of sick of every year being about everything except for doing something that year. it's getting quite aggravating. at this point i can't really find anything impressive about either political party or their supporters. 

[zoony]

I hate the argument for local education

It's just dumb. Look at how kids in Mississippi are taught "facts" about the "war of northern aggression". Compare the education of Manhattan and little rock. Education with regional bias and blind spots dependent upon local economic factors. ****ing brilliant

We should demand federal control of our educational system. Right now it's slanted towards the wealthy like everything else in this country. Live in a rich county your kid will be smarter than the neighboring white trash county

Meanwhile, people are fine with this. Want more of it even.

[Forehead]

No kidding.  When those "top high school lists" or top high school counties lists come out, you can basically count on it almost entirely being clustered from Northern Virginia up through the Long Island area and on to Boston.  With a few random schools sprinkled in from California and Texas, usually magnet Sci/Tech schools.  You see almost nothing from the South or Midwest.

 

Getting back to my earlier gripe, may I just say how much fun it is as a Civilian Fed to be constantly used as a pawn while the two major parties duke it out.  Most of us are just trying to do a job, and many of them are actually pretty useful regardless of the general public being aware of them.

[skinfan2k]

 

 

Getting back to my earlier gripe, may I just say how much fun it is as a Civilian Fed to be constantly used as a pawn while the two major parties duke it out.  Most of us are just trying to do a job, and many of them are actually pretty useful regardless of the general public being aware of them.

did you hear what boehner said?  he basically said he did his job and won't worry if gems don't pass it 

[Slateman]

No kidding.  When those "top high school lists" or top high school counties lists come out, you can basically count on it almost entirely being clustered from Northern Virginia up through the Long Island area and on to Boston.  With a few random schools sprinkled in from California and Texas, usually magnet Sci/Tech schools.  You see almost nothing from the South or Midwest.

 

Getting back to my earlier gripe, may I just say how much fun it is as a Civilian Fed to be constantly used as a pawn while the two major parties duke it out.  Most of us are just trying to do a job, and many of them are actually pretty useful regardless of the general public being aware of them.

That's because, for whatever reason, school funding is tied to property taxes. Again, stop dumping hundreds of billions of dollars in to the military industrial complex, and start using that money to fix the education system.

[Popeman38]

You know, I work under the DHS banner.  Not for HQ, but for one of the sub-agencies that was collected under the DHS banner when it was formed.  I can say this much, some of the cross-agency stuff I need to do/coordinate is easier now that the agencies are under one big banner, rather than each run separately.

 

On a personal note, those talking about dissolving it...so long as you're willing to let the sub-agencies continue to exist, I have no qualms because the folks at HQ annoy me sometimes.  If you want to get rid of everyone, to include ICE, CBP, CIS, etc...then **** you on principle because it's my livelihood.

 

And as someone pointed out, this will only hurt a small portion of people, myself included.  So many employees of these agencies are uniformed officers working at airports, at immigration centers, etc. and are all considered essential.

Everything that falls under DHS used to exist elsewhere in the federal govt. It is simply a new department and a ginormous waste of money. 

 

I stated I want to 86 DHS and move responsibility back to where it was. Pretty sure all sub-agencies would revert back to Treasury, Interioir, Defense...

[zoony]

That's because, for whatever reason, school funding is tied to property taxes. Again, stop dumping hundreds of billions of dollars in to the military industrial complex, and start using that money to fix the education system.

The most outspoken proponents of "local" education are the ones most affected

Guess what rural white GOP America. Your kids are at a severe disadvantage against kids from the rich liberal northeast because you want "local control"

Conservatives keeping it real. Real dumb.

[Popeman38]

Unfortunately, it is not that simple.  Cutting the military means cutting the fight against ISIL.  My only comment to fighting all these foreign conflicts is "who the F is going to pay for it".  Not saying we should or should not, but we always just put it on the credit card and worry about it later.

 

No politician EVER wants to come out and say we have to fight these foreign conflicts for the safety and freedom for all Americans and I have to raise taxes to pay for it.

Wrong. $63B in R&D spending in 2014. This R&D gets us the JSF, a plane that is coming in at $388B, double the projected cost. You could cut defense spending by ~35% with no functional or readiness impact. 

[TheGoodBits]

The most outspoken proponents of "local" education are the ones most affected

Guess what rural white GOP America. Your kids are at a severe disadvantage against kids from the rich liberal northeast because you want "local control"

Conservatives keeping it real. Real dumb.

Hey man, if your neighbors want to send their kids to a segregated one room school where they learn about Jesus riding on dinosaurs, more power to them. Just make sure there are private school options.

[Corcaigh]

Slashing some of the wasted weapons programs would be a great start. But that military industrial complex than Eisenhower warned us about won't let that happen. Congress is still buying more tanks than the army wants.

 

"In a statement, Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, said that Congress "recognizes the necessity of the Abrams tank to our national security and authorizes an additional $120 million for Abrams tank upgrades. This provision keeps the production lines open in Lima, Ohio, and ensures that our skilled, technical workers are protected."

 

Massive overlap across agencies is hugely wasteful too. And DHS is another layer on top.

 

And taking one example of  civilian agency ... anyone who visited the VA administration offices in DC in the last 20 years knew that the majority of employees didn't give a **** about serving their customers.

[Slateman]

Wrong. $63B in R&D spending in 2014. This R&D gets us the JSF, a plane that is coming in at $388B, double the projected cost. You could cut defense spending by ~35% with no functional or readiness impact. 

It also gets you a Navy rail gun, anti-ballistic missile technology, MRAPs, lighter body armor, better night vision, SOST, mk262, and drone technology.

 

Sorry, but R&D is maybe the most important thing you can do with military funds, as it gives America's troops a decided advantage in combat situations. Cutting R&D would have DRASTIC implications on the military's functional and readiness impact. 

[Popeman38]

It also gets you a Navy rail gun, anti-ballistic missile technology, MRAPs, lighter body armor, better night vision, SOST, mk262, and drone technology.

 

Sorry, but R&D is maybe the most important thing you can do with military funds, as it gives America's troops a decided advantage in combat situations. Cutting R&D would have DRASTIC implications on the military's functional and readiness impact. 

Which is why I didn't say cut all R&D. You can take a large cut of the R&D budget and still get useful items like you mention. We don't need the next generation fighter. We don't need to keep updating the Abrams. We don't need to keep replacing the service weapon. We sure as **** don't need to retool the uniform every decade. You know when you ramp up R&D for the next generation fighter? When there is an opposing air force that can think about challenging us in the air. Pretty sure as it stands we could take on the next 20 nations air forces combined and claim superiority. 

[Fergasun]

Wrong. $63B in R&D spending in 2014. This R&D gets us the JSF, a plane that is coming in at $388B, double the projected cost. You could cut defense spending by ~35% with no functional or readiness impact.

Sequestration says WRONG. There was a 7.8% cut in FY2013 and major impacts to readiness. Impacts that the DoD still talk about... but the impacts to operations and readiness were such that deals have been done to avoid it in 2014 and 2015.

Congresd won't let DoD do less.