RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier?

RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 2:22:50 PM)
quote: Foreign aid is one of the Lobbyists favorites. They make $Billions off of it. It's rampant with corruption, $45 B last year. And we can cut the State Dept by 50%. Anyone know what their budget is? And do away with "Education" and "Energy" Depts. Tens of thousands of paper pushers that don't do anything for The People. That's just a start. We could cut Defense by 20% and save more than all of the above. We could also eliminate the Department of Homeland Theater (the Department of Redundancy Department). We spend exponentially more than any other nation. As far as debt---reality needs to set in on both sides. Taxes will need to rise. Programs will need to be trimmed.

MrRodgers -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 4:37:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 raising taxes will not occur. it's too unpopular. 1) continue borrowing until people stop buying our crappy debt. 2) print money and wish they didn't stop releasing the M3 so you could get a good laugh as it rocketed off the charts. 3) ?????? 4) make the 1970's look like a time of unparalleled prosperity. What could you possibly mean by 'crappy debt ?' Most every single bank started in this country and every one that wishes to secure federal deposit insurance id 'capitalized' with T-bills. US T-bills represent the most secure govt. debt in the world. The 1970's comparatively speaking was a time of almost unparalleled prosperity, unless you compare it with the 1870's.

Thadius -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 5:21:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity What about foreign aid? Theres a good place to start. Theres got to be a lot of fat out there. Care to guess what percentage of the federal budget is foreign aid? Cutting it entirely would have effectively no effect on the deficit much less the debt. There is only one part of the discretionary budget large enough to have a significant impact on the deficit. It dwarfs the entire rest of the discretionary budget. Its budget is almost a full order of magnitude larger than the next most expensive department. For the truly clueless out there it is the Department of Defense budget and it is the only place enough savings can come out of to actually balance the budget and even that will require tax increases or restructuring a lot of contracts. Great place to start. However, even if you cut the entire 2010 DoD budget ($671.1 Billiion) to 0 it would only cover about 40% of the projected deficit ($1.7 Trillion) for this year alone. The biggest growth in the budget is paying on the interest and mandatory spending, both of which will be growing even more for the projected future, with no end in sight.

Musicmystery -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:16:52 PM)
And if we cut all foreign aid, all $25 billion of it in 2009, we'd have 1.4% of that deficit. Next. It's a favorite target, but not a serious proposal.

Thadius -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:38:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery And if we cut all foreign aid, all $25 billion of it in 2009, we'd have 1.4% of that deficit. Next. It's a favorite target, but not a serious proposal. Just for sport I would love to start with Congressional salaries, oh and the funds they get for their offices (including staffing). I know it wouldn't solve a damn thing when compared to the deficit but hell, at least we would know they were getting serious about cutting spending.

slvemike4u -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:40:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery And if we cut all foreign aid, all $25 billion of it in 2009, we'd have 1.4% of that deficit. Next. It's a favorite target, but not a serious proposal. Just for sport I would love to start with Congressional salaries, oh and the funds they get for their offices (including staffing). I know it wouldn't solve a damn thing when compared to the deficit but hell, at least we would know they were getting serious about cutting spending. Would that not make those Congressmen/woman and their staffs more likely to succumb to the oh so generous entreaties of your friendly neighborhood lobbiest?

Thadius -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:48:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery And if we cut all foreign aid, all $25 billion of it in 2009, we'd have 1.4% of that deficit. Next. It's a favorite target, but not a serious proposal. Just for sport I would love to start with Congressional salaries, oh and the funds they get for their offices (including staffing). I know it wouldn't solve a damn thing when compared to the deficit but hell, at least we would know they were getting serious about cutting spending. Would that not make those Congressmen/woman and their staffs more likely to succumb to the oh so generous entreaties of your friendly neighborhood lobbiest? More likely? Possibly. Most are on the take already, in one way or another. Which leads us to another area that needs fixing, and could help cutdown on all of those little earmarks... and thus save even more money.

slvemike4u -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:54:19 PM)
All I'm saying here is them having a actual living wage commesurate with the responsibility they are entrusted (and too often don't live up to) with ,is one of the few bulwarks against corruption. It would be nice if we could count on their honesty and integrity...but that would mean we would have to do a much better job of who the hell we elect ;-)

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:56:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u All I'm saying here is them having a actual living wage commesurate with the responsibility they are entrusted (and too often don't live up to) with ,is one of the few bulwarks against corruption. It would be nice if we could count on their honesty and integrity...but that would mean we would have to do a much better job of who the hell we elect ;-) Howsabout you make their salary equal to the average income in the area they represent? For Representatives, that would be their District, for Senators the state and for the President, the average income of the United States as a whole. That way the only way they could give themselves a raise is to increase the standard of living in the area they're responsible for.

Musicmystery -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 7:59:55 PM)
You could pay them nothing and nothing would change---that power and influence pays well on the outside. Or we could be a true socialist country and not allow those outside factors to pay more.

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:17:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You could pay them nothing and nothing would change---that power and influence pays well on the outside. Or we could be a true socialist country and not allow those outside factors to pay more. No "system" is going to prevent corruption or sweetheart deals in return for favors. It doesn't matter whether you're democratic, socialist, authoritarian or theocratic. I'm sure that the Pharaohs had issues with corruption in their courts - and they were god-kings. If you have good people running the show, they can make any system work. If bad people are in charge, they can turn the best system in the world into a nightmare. Actually ... I think Bismarck said that once. Hang on. "With bad laws and good civil servants it's still possible to govern. But with bad civil servants even the best laws can't help." - Otto von Bismarck The big trick is figuring out how to ensure your leaders are good.

Thadius -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:20:32 PM)
Give me 6 months of absolute power and I guarantee no corruption (at least not of myself). I can't guarantee I will not provide myself with another 6 year term, but that is a different matter.[8D]

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:21:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Thadius Give me 6 months of absolute power and I guarantee no corruption (at least not of myself). I can't guarantee I will not provide myself with another 6 year term, but that is a different matter.[8D] The defense rests. [;)]

Musicmystery -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:26:43 PM)
W. Edwards Deming disagrees---85% of problems are in the system. "The Appreciation of a system involves understanding how interactions (i.e., feedback) between the elements of a system can result in internal restrictions that force the system to behave as a single organism that automatically seeks a steady state. It is this steady state that determines the output of the system rather than the individual elements. Thus it is the structure of the organization rather than the employees, alone, which holds the key to improving the quality of output. "The Knowledge of variation involves understanding that everything measured consists of both 'normal' variation due to the flexibility of the system and of "special causes" that create defects. Quality involves recognizing the difference to eliminate "special causes" while controlling normal variation. Deming taught that making changes in response to 'normal' variation would only make the system perform worse." Worked for Japan...

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:50:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery W. Edwards Deming disagrees---85% of problems are in the system. Deming was speaking of the advantages of system design and quality control in manufacturing. As far as I'm aware, he never commented (at least publically) on politics or government design. quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Worked for Japan... You're saying that Deming's manufacturing methods were used to restructure the Japanese governemnt and insured less corruption? Do you have some evidence of this? Or are you kidding? I don't think you can put forward that the Japanese government is somehow "less corrupt" than most others. The current party in power, the Democratic Party (DPJ), is being rocked by scandals and they were put in power because of the blatant corruption of the Liberal Democratic Party(LDP). When you add in the economic problems Japan has been having for the last twenty years - the "lost decade" of the 1990s and their current economic woes, I'd hardly hold up Japan as a model of effective and problem-free governance. Which is not to say that they're any worse than most of the Western governments. We're all headed down the same path. Some are just running and others idly walking down it.

Musicmystery -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 8:54:00 PM)
I'm kidding. But I am sticking to the point that most problems are systemic. Individual decisions that make good sense are often poor decisions at the systemic level. The quality of the people is not the issue. That's the problem with the continual labeling of all people in the system as incompetent or corrupt. It's not likely.

InvisibleBlack -> RE: Ben Bernanke, a Tea Partier? (4/8/2010 9:12:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I'm kidding. Phew. I was worried there for a sec. [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery But I am sticking to the point that most problems are systemic. Individual decisions that make good sense are often poor decisions at the systemic level. The quality of the people is not the issue. I agree with you that often the decision that seems best from an individual point of view isn't the best choice for what will work for everyone in the system. This is the "big picture" problem. I'd suggest that most people don't really think long term and system-wide when making political (or any other kind of) choices. Finding someone who the ability to take in the overall effect of a decision, not just now but for many years down the road, is difficult at best. However, finding effective leadership is different than keeping out corruption. A corrupt person can make a very effective leader. A completely honorable person can be a disaster as a leader. I wasn't talking about finding brilliant leadership, I was talking about avoiding corruption. My point is that I don't thin you can design a system of government that cannot be corrupted. Part of the problem being that the corrupt both don't obey the laws and then find ways to hide, shield or obscure their activities. That's the problem with the continual labeling of all people in the system as incompetent or corrupt. It's not likely.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875