Author Topic: So the budget came out today (Read 9949 times)

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **on:** February 15, 2011, 12:41:13 PM »

Never mind the fiscal year began almost 6 months ago. . .

It's $3.73 trillion. For people who can't count very high that's:
three thousand, seven hundred thirty billion dollars - $3,730 billion or
three million, seven hundred thirty thousand, million dollars - $3,730,000 million
- it also necessarily implies that spending considered material would start around $10 billion

According to Pravda, the new budget will cut $1.1 trillion from the deficit over the next 10 years. Pravda failed to mention that the budget was due prior to OCTOBER 1ST 2010.

No plans to deal with imploding SS or Medicaid, no comments on brand new entitlement Obamacare. Obama says republicans have to deal with that because it would be too unpopular for democrats to be serious and attempt to fix the entitlements they created (paraphrasing).

To summarize in one word how Obama is handling our nations financial woes: PUNT

steve dave · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2011, 07:00:49 PM »

Quote

Reaction to President’s funding request for NBAF
February 15th, 2011 in Local by Cathy Dawes 0
President Barack Obama is requesting $150 million dollars for the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility being built here in Manhattan near Kansas State. Assistant City Manager, Jason Hilgers says he is very pleased with the President’s request. Hilgers adds things are coming right along for the new facility.

Manhattan Mayor oscar Snead says the President’s support shows the importance of research, although Snead says NBAF construction will take several years.

U-S Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas takes just a bit of the credit, saying the Kansas Delegation, including former Senator now Governor Sam Brownback, and former Congressman/now Senator Jerry Moran, worked on this so long.

Meanwhile, Kansas State Vice President for Research Ron Trewyn reminds us that 2012 had been the plan all along. And Trewyn adds the 150 million still needs to be approved by Congress. He reminds us we still have to get some Fiscal year 2011 funds in to work on the central utility plant. But Trewyn describes the latest news from Washington as “excellent” and a show of commitment in these tough economic times.

Kansas State President Kirk Schulz says the President’s commitment from Washington shows how important research like this is.

If any of those back country tea party hicks you losers voted into office somehow get in the way of this budget I will destroy you.

felix rex · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2011, 07:56:07 PM »

New contract confirmed tonight!

jtksu · « **Reply #3 on:** February 15, 2011, 08:45:59 PM »

Ummm, isn't that budget for 2012?

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #4 on:** February 15, 2011, 09:27:12 PM »

Another $55 billion for DHS. Would like to see a breakdown on how much is going to control the American Sheeple and how much is going to actually catch and/or stop real bad guys (like the ones pouring over the Mexican border with the US).

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2011, 12:02:19 PM »

FYI, attempted closet liberal Steve Dave -

defense spending =/ discretionary budget

republican leaders brought that project to Kansas (i.e. Pat Roberts referenced in article)

liberals hate defense, obama currently trying to cut defense budget; neo-cons, not teabaggers in favor of endless defense spending

Based on your response I'd say your a neo-con. grats, SD

disclaimer: I don't think this is defense spending

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2011, 12:14:56 PM »

Quote from: jtksu on February 15, 2011, 08:45:59 PM

Ummm, isn't that budget for 2012?

No

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/02/houses_plan_to_slash_from_60_b.html

MSM has successfully covered this up or misreported it. 5+ months of fiscal year 2011 are over. This is an unprecedented dereliction of duties. If he were a CEO of a company, rather than the US, a shareholder could have him fired for breach of fiduciary duty in a derivative suit. It's rough ridin' pathetic

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2011, 12:38:37 PM »

Obama "hates" defense, yet his administration just spent more on the war/military/intelligence complex than any other administration in history and more than all of the other nations of the world combined.

The proposed DOD "budget cuts" don't amount to jack, and we are currently getting set up with a whole cadre of new "bogeymen" in the Middle East.

felix rex · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2011, 06:17:40 PM »

Obama (well, Gates/Mullen to be exact) just funded several important defense contracts that had been in serious limbo the past month and half.

06wildcat · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2011, 09:12:27 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 16, 2011, 12:38:37 PM

Obama "hates" defense, yet his administration just spent more on the war/military/intelligence complex than any other administration in history and more than all of the other nations of the world combined.

The proposed DOD "budget cuts" don't amount to jack, and we are currently getting set up with a whole cadre of new "bogeymen" in the Middle East.

Have you made the same complaint about every modern president?

Jeffy · « **Reply #10 on:** February 16, 2011, 09:34:51 PM »

Excited about this budget. Will be nice to see the debt gone by the end of the fiscal year!

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #11 on:** February 16, 2011, 10:11:07 PM »

Quote from: 06wildcat on February 16, 2011, 09:12:27 PM

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 16, 2011, 12:38:37 PM
Obama "hates" defense, yet his administration just spent more on the war/military/intelligence complex than any other administration in history and more than all of the other nations of the world combined.

The proposed DOD "budget cuts" don't amount to jack, and we are currently getting set up with a whole cadre of new "bogeymen" in the Middle East.

Have you made the same complaint about every modern president?

The man was a Nobel Peace Prize winner (OMG, what a load of crap that was), he had the Obamabots and the fake Anti-War movement believing that he was somehow different . . . and for previous presidents, they were not spending more on the military/war/intelligence complex than the rest of the world combined.

jtksu · « **Reply #12 on:** February 16, 2011, 11:43:07 PM »

Weird, Dax is disagreeing with someone. Dude gets his jollies that way. Bet his husband has to feign rape before Daxy can get it up.

06wildcat · « **Reply #13 on:** February 17, 2011, 10:08:05 AM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 16, 2011, 10:11:07 PM

Quote from: 06wildcat on February 16, 2011, 09:12:27 PM
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 16, 2011, 12:38:37 PM
Obama "hates" defense, yet his administration just spent more on the war/military/intelligence complex than any other administration in history and more than all of the other nations of the world combined.

The proposed DOD "budget cuts" don't amount to jack, and we are currently getting set up with a whole cadre of new "bogeymen" in the Middle East.

Have you made the same complaint about every modern president?

The man was a Nobel Peace Prize winner (OMG, what a load of crap that was), he had the Obamabots and the fake Anti-War movement believing that he was somehow different . . . and for previous presidents, they were not spending more on the military/war/intelligence complex than the rest of the world combined.

Link?

Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2011, 10:12:13 AM »

I don't understand why the media lets obama get away with his contradictions. If they really think the war against terror is unjust or "fear mongering", why allow obama to get away with it? I thought the media was just liberal, it's looking more like it's just an arm of the democrat party, like the ACLU. They have no principles, they just want the dems to win and are willing to go bankrupt over it.

Really sad. The only reason the press was given first amendment rights was to provide an adequate check on the government. Just like the 3/5th compromise, this provision has become rather irrelevant.

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #15 on:** February 17, 2011, 11:13:06 AM »

Link to what '06??

felix rex · « **Reply #16 on:** February 17, 2011, 12:30:54 PM »

Dear Obama-

Thanks for the extra money again today.

Your friend,

felix

Panjandrum · « **Reply #17 on:** February 17, 2011, 11:45:17 PM »

I love when people get all riled up about discretionary spending items and someone breaks out a simple pie chart showing how small a part of our total expenditures it really is.

It was discussed earlier but unless folks are going to go to the table to talk about how we can slash defense, the whole conversation is nothing but a bunch of people arguing about the fuel efficiency for the type of tires on a car when the overall gas mileage is six miles a gallon.

And before everyone gets all up in arms about Social Security and Medicare, let's talk about something that we actually have the ability to cut. Old people vote, so it's going to take a titanic effort to ever fix that.

Jeffy · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2011, 10:03:34 AM »

Quote from: Panjandrum on February 17, 2011, 11:45:17 PM

And before everyone gets all up in arms about Social Security and Medicare, let's talk about something that we actually have the ability to cut. Old people vote, so it's going to take a titanic effort to ever fix that.

You are right, but until we are willing to discuss that, the whole discussion is generally one big

Kat Kid · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2011, 11:15:36 AM »

Well the fun part is we can now discuss cutting senior's entitlement programs, just not for anyone 55+. They get grandfathered in.

06wildcat · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2011, 06:23:03 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 17, 2011, 11:13:06 AM

Link to what '06??

If you read my previous post real close you might just be able to figure it out.

Panjandrum · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2011, 09:21:08 PM »

Quote from: Tortuga on February 18, 2011, 11:15:36 AM

Well the fun part is we can now discuss cutting senior's entitlement programs, just not for anyone 55+. They get grandfathered in.

Eh, it sucks, but they'll most likely die before we do, so it will all balance out.

In my opinion, if we want to get serious about the budget, we should do it in this order:

1) Defense
2) Discretionary
3) Social Security
4) Medicare

I put Medicare at four because Medicare is simply the end result of a massively screwed up system. There's so much that needs to be fixed there before we can even begin to address it.

If you get serious about cutting the defense budget and start tightening the belt on discretionary spending, while increasing the tax rate for the richest 2%, we'd start to dig out of the hole a lot more quickly. Then the next great battle would be figuring out how to make Social Security solvent in the long run. After that, we can address Medicare.

Dirty Sanchez · « **Reply #22 on:** February 19, 2011, 10:16:30 AM »

Quote from: Panjandrum on February 17, 2011, 11:45:17 PM

I love when people get all riled up about discretionary spending items and someone breaks out a simple pie chart showing how small a part of our total expenditures it really is.

It was discussed earlier but unless folks are going to go to the table to talk about how we can slash defense, the whole conversation is nothing but a bunch of people arguing about the fuel efficiency for the type of tires on a car when the overall gas mileage is six miles a gallon.

And before everyone gets all up in arms about Social Security and Medicare, let's talk about something that we actually have the ability to cut. Old people vote, so it's going to take a titanic effort to ever fix that.

That's why we need messiahcare. We can then decide anyone over 55 is no longer a productive citizen in relation to the cost of keeping them healthy. No one over 55 = 85-95% of medicare and ss can be safely axed.

sonofdaxjones · « **Reply #23 on:** February 20, 2011, 12:33:13 AM »

Quote from: 06wildcat on February 18, 2011, 06:23:03 PM

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 17, 2011, 11:13:06 AM
Link to what '06??

If you read my previous post real close you might just be able to figure it out.

Tell me, which previous "modern day" presidents started and expanded ongoing perpetual wars?? Bush, LBJ and now Obama. When you combine the defense budget, the war budget, DHS and Intelligence expansion . . . no one comes close to Obama in terms of spending.

06wildcat · « **Reply #24 on:** February 20, 2011, 03:21:51 PM »

Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 20, 2011, 12:33:13 AM

Quote from: 06wildcat on February 18, 2011, 06:23:03 PM
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on February 17, 2011, 11:13:06 AM
Link to what '06??

If you read my previous post real close you might just be able to figure it out.

Tell me, which previous "modern day" presidents started and expanded ongoing perpetual wars?? Bush, LBJ and now Obama. When you combine the defense budget, the war budget, DHS and Intelligence expansion . . . no one comes close to Obama in terms of spending.

I wasn't aware Obama started a war...going to need that link. You do realize we actually have fewer troops serving overseas right now than when Obama took office right?