Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

[CRedskinsRule]

NC_Skins I agree on the Homeland Security funding. While there may be some slight gain in the consolidation, the bureaucracy created is just ridiculous.

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

NC_Skins I agree on the Homeland Security funding. While there may be some slight gain in the consolidation, the bureaucracy created is just ridiculous.

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

One thing I don't gat is that the National Flood Insurance Program now falls under Home Land Security.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by firstdown

One thing I don't gat is that the National Flood Insurance Program now falls under Home Land Security.

If our guns get wet we won't be able to shoot anyone. Duh!

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

If you end the Blue Angels, fly overs, you have to end this as well. A terrorist can do the exact same damage at any college, NBA, NHL game my friend. Our tax payer money doesn't need to be spent on the NFL, the NFL needs to spend that money. If you are in favor of spending the money for this, then by default, you have to agree to spend it at EVERY single event that has a large assembly. (concerts, NBA games, college games, NHL)

It's a HUGE waste of spending.

[Alvin Walton]

Tons of money to be had for Blue Angel fuel right here.

Foreign Assistance Fast Facts

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Tons of money to be had for Blue Angel fuel right here.

Foreign Assistance Fast Facts

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

Thats because I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

At this point when we give foreign aid we are giving away money we have to borrow or easier said we don't have. Its time we stop this crap. I don't have a problem providing man power to places like Haiti for a period of time but it stops there.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

At this point when we give foreign aid we are giving away money we have to borrow or easier said we don't have. Its time we stop this crap. I don't have a problem providing man power to places like Haiti for a period of time but it stops there.

And I can agree with this in principle, just like I agree in principle to the NFL paying for the SB security, and the suspension of BA/TB air shows. But, as That Guy pointed out by asking about the F-22, the list of Foreign aid/SB sec/BA-TB shows are piddling around the edges. You can cut all foreign aid 100% (reduce it to 0) and we would still be spending at a deficit. Defense (serious programs) and Welfare both need to be re-vamped and brought in line with what our intake affords, and if we need to increase our intake from the top 1%, then they need to put it in.

Question (i don't know the answer) has anyone ever thought of allowing tax dollars to be earmarked? ie you can designate %'s for major categories, defense, welfare, maybe 3 or 4 others top level line items? I imagine it would be book keeping hell but it would be interesting to see where people want their money to go, and then have a percentage off the top that is designated for SS, and Debt repayment. Even if we can't do it on the real taxes, it would be an interesting study if conducted properly. (I am pretty sure there is an internet equivalent, but I would want a solid firm conducting it if I were to trust the results)

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

And I can agree with this in principle, just like I agree in principle to the NFL paying for the SB security, and the suspension of BA/TB air shows. But, as That Guy pointed out by asking about the F-22, the list of Foreign aid/SB sec/BA-TB shows are piddling around the edges. You can cut all foreign aid 100% (reduce it to 0) and we would still be spending at a deficit. Defense (serious programs) and Welfare both need to be re-vamped and brought in line with what our intake affords, and if we need to increase our intake from the top 1%, then they need to put it in.

Question (i don't know the answer) has anyone ever thought of allowing tax dollars to be earmarked? ie you can designate %'s for major categories, defense, welfare, maybe 3 or 4 others top level line items? I imagine it would be book keeping hell but it would be interesting to see where people want their money to go, and then have a percentage off the top that is designated for SS, and Debt repayment. Even if we can't do it on the real taxes, it would be an interesting study if conducted properly. (I am pretty sure there is an internet equivalent, but I would want a solid firm conducting it if I were to trust the results)

I have always thought if person does not think we pay enough in taxes then they can just write a check and send it to the federal goverment. Just add an addtional line to tax returns to write in what you feel you should pay in addition to what you paid over the year. Also why would anyone put more money into SS because there is no guarantee anyone will ever see a penny of the money you contribute.