Question for my Conservative friends.

[bobhawg]

The state in which I now live, Georgia and Arkansas my home state have a common
problem. Specifically, how to fund the repairs necessary on the states highway system.

It seems to me both states now basically conservative controlled at the state house level
recognize the need for more money to take care of highways. And in both states from what I read
the path they seem to be on is to raise the money by increasing "fees" And both general assemblies
seem to be saying that is not a tax increase.

My question is: how far can you promise smaller government and fund what the average citizen expects from
both the state and the Federal Government?

Frankly, I agree it is a real problem as our infrastructure is in bad shape country wide and
while making government smaller seems to be a good idea, how is it possible actually?
With our population getting older and roads so crowded I see no way to keep up the highways
without a lot more money spent.

I doubt if any conservative agrees with me, but I say, cut the defense budget, I see several ways to do so,
and increase the highway money.

It is easy to say we should cut the Federal budget, quite another thing to do so. Ronald Reagan
not once reduced the budget.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Ben Carson proposed that a good way to cut the deficit on the federal level would be to go to every head of every government agency and find 10% of their budget that is wasted and eliminate it. Now, when Obama was hit with the sequester, he took the path of cutting things that punished and hurt citizens in an effort to force the right to give in or at least look cold and heartless. Real public servant you guys have there.

You are a smart man, and you have to know that every government agency is fraught with waste, from useless programs, to meaningless positions, to ridiculous perks, to wasteful projects, to pet projects, to over reaching regulations, and on and on. Finding 10% worth of waste in a government agency would be as easy as finding a blade of grass on a golf course.

My wife worked for a state agency years ago and one year her department didn't spend all of it's budget. Her boss was called in by the director and pretty much told to find something to spend the excess on or else. How sad is that? No doubt it goes on everywhere.

That same agency now governs our private business and under Obama, has been awarding grants to businesses like mine. The first year it was offered, we took it(small compared to what was being doled out to bigger entities in our business) b/c we were buying a new piece of equipment and it served as a down payment. The next year, we got the application and decided to just toss it in the trash as we didn't really need to buy anything. Within a couple of weeks we got a call from the state wanting to know where our application was. When we told them we didn't need a grant, they got very hateful and insistent that we apply. Said they could lose part of their federal funding if folks didn't apply. We still didn't and they DID NOT like it.

So, the deal is simple, it is not a revenue problem, it is a waste problem. It is not about having money for needs, it is about taking the money we give the government and making them spend it carefully and wisely. Not going to be easy b/c those on the gravy train tend to come to believe it is owed to them and the left will always have their backs when they whine about it.

But it is our only chance. We cannot continue to borrow money and flail it around forever. And collecting more from taxpayers only increases the waste.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Duplicate post
This post was edited on 3/29 1:31 PM by rzrbk7777

 

[RazorbackDundee]

Originally posted by rzrbk7777:



My wife worked for a state agency years ago and one year her department didn't spend all of it's budget. Her boss was called in by the director and pretty much told to find something to spend the excess on or else. How sad is that? No doubt it goes on everywhere.

That is exactly how it works. If they don't spend it then their budget will be reduced the following year.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Originally posted by RazorbackDundee:

Originally posted by rzrbk7777:



My wife worked for a state agency years ago and one year her department didn't spend all of it's budget. Her boss was called in by the director and pretty much told to find something to spend the excess on or else. How sad is that? No doubt it goes on everywhere.

That is exactly how it works. If they don't spend it then their budget will be reduced the following year.

I understand the reason they do it, I just find it wasteful and a poor way to spend other people's money.

 

[bobhawg]

I surely agree that if the three of us on this post had the power, we could sit down and easily cut 10% out of the Federal Budget.

The true problem I think is that every one, every single one in Congress wants to get reelected. And the best way to do that is to spend money on projects that get votes. Simple actually.

Years ago my son worked for a chemical company that made a lot of pesticides etc. and he told me at the end of the Atlanta public school fiscal year a maintenance supervisor ordered several thousand cans of pesticide and when my son asked him what they did with that many, the reply was,, we have left over money and have to spend it.

But sadly for us all, it is not a party thing or and individual thing, but the way our political system has evolved.

I do think I have an answer, that is simply TERM LIMITS. One term in the Senate or two in the House and you go home and can never run again.

I do think however, if we did cut the budget in one swoop, the result would be a huge surge in unemployment. So I would agree to a slope of definite downward trend over maybe 5-10 years and once the budget is balanced, keep it that way.

I do not expect to see it in my lifetime.

 

[rzrbk7777]

Couldn't agree more on term limits. When you have a legislative system that is so dysfunctional that its leaders, put in power by its own membership, are Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, McConnell, and Harry Reid, you need some serious turnover. While we are at it, we need to figure out some checks and balances to ensure that judges do not deviate from the Constitution if they want to keep their jobs. Our founders never meant for judges to legislate from the bench.

Our forefathers meant for congress to be made up of local citizens sent to represent their neighbors' interests every so often, and then go back home to their real lives. It was never meant to be a career of power wielding and favor swapping. Huge staffs, ridiculous lifetime perks, virtually unlimited expense accounts, and the biggie, the ability to throw around insane amounts of other people's money w/o ever having to be held accountable for it, and it has no chance of not being a mess.

On the 10% cuts, it will have to happen or we will cease to exist sooner or later. You cannot borrow and squander forever. Dragging out the process over 5-10 years does nothing but turn the budget cuts(waste removal, actually) into something for politicians to use as a grandstand the entire duration and likely to be reversed before it is ever fully implemented.

Do it like the railroads did it when they restructured their system and consolidated a lot of jobs. Offer generous retirement packages for those within a reasonable distance of retirement anyway. Offer cash buyouts based on years of service to anybody that will take it. Railroads cut a ton of payroll using those methods. For those who stay, there would be more expected due to fewer employees, and some of the holidays that nobody except government employees get off for, would have to cease. Then you close out some needless departments and transfer those who stay to departments that actually serve a purpose. And make future expansion very difficult to qualify for in the future. We would all be well served if expansion required legit need and wants were not allowed into the process.

A little early retirement here, cash up front there, threats of more work and fewer perks, and you can weed out 10% and make them feel like winners for leaving.

 

[bobhawg]

The sad thing to me is I do think most reasonable people see what we need but a lot of them cannot seem to vote out those life time politicians. And over the years, the career politicians have learned all the tricks to buy votes and I see no light at the end of the tunnel.

I have hoped for years that a third party type guy could come along and change things, but that is not happening. I was really enthused about Ross Perot until I thought he was a total disaster. And I do not see much hope in the Tea Party guys.

So I guess the die is cast and we will, or my grand kids will pay for it.

 

[LaHoggaNostra]

If our politicians could have a civil debate like this they could solve so much.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[PeteJC]

25% of federal highway funds are not spent on maintaining our highways. Take all the other programs that have expanded over the years to provide benefits that don't fit the original cause and you'll see where much of our problem is generated.

 

[rzrbk7777]

25% of federal highway funds are not spent on maintaining our highways. Take all the other programs that have expanded over the years to provide benefits that don't fit the original cause and you'll see where much of our problem is generated.

That is the problem. Cush government jobs with ridiculous perks, contracts used as paybacks in return for political support, and ever increasing budgets that must be spent w/o fail equal waste all over government programs of all kinds.

Finding 10% to cut would be easy and painless if done with common sense and integrity. That is the problem too. As Obama showed during the sequester, when libs have to cut something, they try to cut services that count in order to make it look like a cruel act instead of the right thing to do. Obama refused to cut waste and instead chose to squeeze needed services. Ought to be a law against that.

 

[Ole Hambone]

7777 is right. Obama didn't cut waste. He made the most visible and painful cuts he could find.

 

[bobhawg]

7777 is right. Obama didn't cut waste. He made the most visible and painful cuts he could find.

The trouble is that the guy in power would do that regardless of which party it is. I personally feel we may never solve the basic problems until we are dangerously bankrupt.

 

[Ole Hambone]

So, you don't dispute that Obama made the cuts in the most painful and obvious places?

What leads you to believe Republicans would do that?

You know... Democrats think we have a revenue problem. . We NEED to raise taxes.

Republicans think we have a spending problem...

 

[bobhawg]

So, you don't dispute that Obama made the cuts in the most painful and obvious places?

What leads you to believe Republicans would do that?

You know... Democrats think we have a revenue problem. . We NEED to raise taxes.

Republicans think we have a spending problem...

 

[bobhawg]

Sorry, Ham, but i think the GOP only wants to cut the taxes on their folks. For instance here in Georgia the Republicans who now totally control Georgia politics want to eliminate income taxes totally and use a national sales tax for the revenue. I would venture it would require a 25% sales tax to cover the income now derived with income taxes. And remember the Reagan Administration who is the pride of the GOP since he did in fact cut taxes also doubled the national debt. Frankly, I see neither party truly concerned about the bulk of Americans, but in each instance, they are in business to protect their group. I personally think Harry Truman was the last American politician who thought he should represent all of us.

 

[Ole Hambone]

Reagan put us on the path for the longest bull market in US history. He set us up for the record Tax collections under Clinton.. There is PLENTY of pork to cut in the federal budget. Obama chose not to cut any pork. He chose to cut lean meat. Texas has no income tax and they have probably the strongest state economy in the country. They are certainly creating more jobs than anybody else.

 

[bobhawg]

Reagan put us on the path for the longest bull market in US history. He set us up for the record Tax collections under Clinton.. There is PLENTY of pork to cut in the federal budget. Obama chose not to cut any pork. He chose to cut lean meat. Texas has no income tax and they have probably the strongest state economy in the country. They are certainly creating more jobs than anybody else.

Texas and Florida and Tennessee among other have no state income tax. But they have income from other sources. Texas for instance has huge oil tax revenue since they own the oil rights for 7 leagues not three miles like other states because Texas came into the union by treaty not annexation. But that is beside the point, the Federal Government needs income taxes, but I agree the real shame is if they cut the fat, there could be both reduction in taxes and a balanced budget. And I still contend the only real possibility of fixing it is term limits. Nothing else is going to do it.

 

[Ole Hambone]

Texas and Florida and Tennessee among other have no state income tax. But they have income from other sources. Texas for instance has huge oil tax revenue since they own the oil rights for 7 leagues not three miles like other states because Texas came into the union by treaty not annexation. But that is beside the point, the Federal Government needs income taxes, but I agree the real shame is if they cut the fat, there could be both reduction in taxes and a balanced budget. And I still contend the only real possibility of fixing it is term limits. Nothing else is going to do it.

We had no federal income tax until 1914 or so... Our country survived just fine for the first 150 years or so.. Taxes are a brake on the economy... Taxes take money out of the economy... leaving citizens less money to spend.. This slows economic growth. Our government NEVER spends the tax money as efficiently as consumers would have. Let's face it... You spend your own money more wisely than you would spend someone else's money. Democrats have no will to cut spending. And if a Republican suggest cutting spending.. Democrats start talking about how Republicans hate everybody. We slowly moving more socialists every. Socialism has always lead to universal poverty.

 

[bobhawg]

We had no federal income tax until 1914 or so... Our country survived just fine for the first 150 years or so.. Taxes are a brake on the economy... Taxes take money out of the economy... leaving citizens less money to spend.. This slows economic growth. Our government NEVER spends the tax money as efficiently as consumers would have. Let's face it... You spend your own money more wisely than you would spend someone else's money. Democrats have no will to cut spending. And if a Republican suggest cutting spending.. Democrats start talking about how Republicans hate everybody. We slowly moving more socialists every. Socialism has always lead to universal poverty.

I submit that before 1914, the average American had little to nothing. And I confess that the average American today has no idea of what saving money means, rather we spend everything we make and in a lot of cases more than we make. Every report I have ever seen on average family savings show Americans at the bottom of the list and the Swiss at the top. I surely agree that the average conservative handles his own money much wiser than the average liberal. But our government is supposed to take care of all of us, not just the upper class Pure Socialism will surely not work, but the old fashioned Capitalism will not either, at least for the majority of us
So I think a mixture of common sense parts of both systems is required, we will never get Mr. Wells Utopia, but we surely need what we had in the 50's and 60's when America was by far the greatest nation on earth.

 

[Ole Hambone]

I submit that before 1914, the average American had little to nothing. And I confess that the average American today has no idea of what saving money means, rather we spend everything we make and in a lot of cases more than we make. Every report I have ever seen on average family savings show Americans at the bottom of the list and the Swiss at the top. I surely agree that the average conservative handles his own money much wiser than the average liberal. But our government is supposed to take care of all of us, not just the upper class Pure Socialism will surely not work, but the old fashioned Capitalism will not either, at least for the majority of us
So I think a mixture of common sense parts of both systems is required, we will never get Mr. Wells Utopia, but we surely need what we had in the 50's and 60's when America was by far the greatest nation on earth.

I agree with a lot of what you said. The average American are terrible money manager. At the same time, I would submit that money does not buy happiness. Happiness is a product of loving and being loved by PEOPLE... family and friends. Material possessions to not provide happiness. Experiences make people happy. Getting together with another couple and playing cards on Saturday night makes me happy. We tend to judge success in material terms.

A lot of people place absolutely no value on having savings in the bank. Money in the bank means nothing to them. Most people do not want to accumulate wealth. they want to spend money like they are wealthy. They would rather appear wealthy than actually be wealthy. I see far too many people chasing the next possession.

On the other hand, I am not playing the "I've got it all.. big house, fancy cars, ... I've got more, BIGGER, and BETTER toys than you do!!" game. If I did, I'd still be working. People make choices. Some would rather go fishing than go to work. When I had rental property.. If I paid a craftsman on Friday... for the work he had done.. I swear... you could almost guarantee he wouldn't show up until Wed. or Thursday... until the money ran out. I'm telling you, some people are content to just get by in life. Their goal in life is to have a quart of beer on Saturday night.

When I drive through a poor neighborhood, and, I see them playing cards at a pick nick table under an oak tree, or standing around a burning barrel etc. Some of the best times of my life have been sitting around a campfire and shooting the bull.

There is opportunity all over the place in these United States. There are people that would rather hang out with their friends on the corner than go to HS... The bus goes by their house every morning and they don't get on it.

We have preached since the 60's, "stay in school, don't do drugs, don't get pregnant" and there are millions of people who aren't listening. Being cool with their drop out peers is more important than getting an education so they will qualify for a better job. We have a cultural problem with the poor... that don't value education and want to be like the drug dealer that rides around in a Mercedes...

Liberals call me crazy for even suggesting people "like to be poor"... What I'm saying is, they are not doing the things necessary to lift themselves out of poverty. They are making choices that keep them poor. Those things are not secrets that only the wealthy know. We've been preaching that message for 60 years. OK... off my soap box.

 

[bobhawg]

I agree with a lot of what you said. The average American are terrible money manager. At the same time, I would submit that money does not buy happiness. Happiness is a product of loving and being loved by PEOPLE... family and friends. Material possessions to not provide happiness. Experiences make people happy. Getting together with another couple and playing cards on Saturday night makes me happy. We tend to judge success in material terms.

A lot of people place absolutely no value on having savings in the bank. Money in the bank means nothing to them. Most people do not want to accumulate wealth. they want to spend money like they are wealthy. They would rather appear wealthy than actually be wealthy. I see far too many people chasing the next possession.

On the other hand, I am not playing the "I've got it all.. big house, fancy cars, ... I've got more, BIGGER, and BETTER toys than you do!!" game. If I did, I'd still be working. People make choices. Some would rather go fishing than go to work. When I had rental property.. If I paid a craftsman on Friday... for the work he had done.. I swear... you could almost guarantee he wouldn't show up until Wed. or Thursday... until the money ran out. I'm telling you, some people are content to just get by in life. Their goal in life is to have a quart of beer on Saturday night.

When I drive through a poor neighborhood, and, I see them playing cards at a pick nick table under an oak tree, or standing around a burning barrel etc. Some of the best times of my life have been sitting around a campfire and shooting the bull.

There is opportunity all over the place in these United States. There are people that would rather hang out with their friends on the corner than go to HS... The bus goes by their house every morning and they don't get on it.

We have preached since the 60's, "stay in school, don't do drugs, don't get pregnant" and there are millions of people who aren't listening. Being cool with their drop out peers is more important than getting an education so they will qualify for a better job. We have a cultural problem with the poor... that don't value education and want to be like the drug dealer that rides around in a Mercedes...

Liberals call me crazy for even suggesting people "like to be poor"... What I'm saying is, they are not doing the things necessary to lift themselves out of poverty. They are making choices that keep them poor. Those things are not secrets that only the wealthy know. We've been preaching that message for 60 years. OK... off my soap box.

 

[bobhawg]

I have no problem with any thing you said. I fear it is in fact, a cultural thing and that may be our undoing. I see little if any difference in the Roman Empire around 300 AD and us now. Historians can blame who they want as once a great nation falls, it is not that easy to explain why. But I do think cultural differences occurred in all of the fallen empires. I believe it is of no value for anyone to throw stones in a glass house, I think we should all be working to salvage our Empire before it collapses, but I fear that is not being done. Instead the opposite sides are lining up to fight each other and ignore the much larger greater problem and that is to save ourselves. Part of my problem is I think that I am soon to be 80 years old and I assume no older generation ever thought the new one was doing things right. I hope that is what is wrong with me. If I am right, America will never be the same as it was in my youth, mainly the greatest country in the history of the world.

 

[Ole Hambone]

I have no problem with any thing you said. I fear it is in fact, a cultural thing and that may be our undoing. I see little if any difference in the Roman Empire around 300 AD and us now. Historians can blame who they want as once a great nation falls, it is not that easy to explain why. But I do think cultural differences occurred in all of the fallen empires. I believe it is of no value for anyone to throw stones in a glass house, I think we should all be working to salvage our Empire before it collapses, but I fear that is not being done. Instead the opposite sides are lining up to fight each other and ignore the much larger greater problem and that is to save ourselves. Part of my problem is I think that I am soon to be 80 years old and I assume no older generation ever thought the new one was doing things right. I hope that is what is wrong with me. If I am right, America will never be the same as it was in my youth, mainly the greatest country in the history of the world.

I agree.. I am ashamed of the country my generation will be leaving our kids. Bob, it is the liberals that have pounded the message that if your not doing well... it is NOT your fault. you are a victim of circumstances beyond your control.

I think it was a huge mistake for us to go from a melting pot to the Salad Bowl... We are a lot better off when we think of ourselves as Americans and not hyphenated Americans where each minority is fighting for a bigger piece of the pie . They care less that about America as a whole.

I agree with you whole heartedly that we are tracking right along with the fall of the Roman Empire.

 

[bobhawg]

I agree.. I am ashamed of the country my generation will be leaving our kids. Bob, it is the liberals that have pounded the message that if your not doing well... it is NOT your fault. you are a victim of circumstances beyond your control.

I think it was a huge mistake for us to go from a melting pot to the Salad Bowl... We are a lot better off when we think of ourselves as Americans and not hyphenated Americans where each minority is fighting for a bigger piece of the pie . They care less that about America as a whole.

I agree with you whole heartedly that we are tracking right along with the fall of the Roman Empire.

I hope we are both just old cranks and are wrong.

 

[Ole Hambone]

I hope we are both just old cranks and are wrong.

Maybe we are... But, I really don't see my children living as well as we did.

 

[Ole Hambone]

I'd like to make one more point that occurred to me. Everything some disaster, like the Amtrak accident. What do Democrats say? "Republicans. BLOCKED the funding" How does that square with "Neither party want's to cut funding"?

 

[bobhawg]

I'd like to make one more point that occurred to me. Everything some disaster, like the Amtrak accident. What do Democrats say? "Republicans. BLOCKED the funding" How does that square with "Neither party want's to cut funding"?

I do not know about Amtrak in particular, but why should there be funding for railroads? The rails belong to a profit making company, not Amtrak. And in general I see neither party really trying to reduce fat from the budget, they just want the other party to do so. We are all to blame I think.

 

[rzrbk7777]

I do not know about Amtrak in particular, but why should there be funding for railroads? The rails belong to a profit making company, not Amtrak. And in general I see neither party really trying to reduce fat from the budget, they just want the other party to do so. We are all to blame I think.

The freight carriers are for profit companies. Amtrak is government funded b/c the railroads did away with the money losing, labor and liability intensive passenger business decades ago. The government has been shoving Amtrak onto freight lines ever since. I used to work for UP, trust me the railroads would love to see Amtrak disappear.

I respect you a lot Bob, but you are way off on the "nobody wants to reduce fat". You are confusing republicans with conservatives and politicians with regular people. Neither is true. Politicians aren't interested in spending our money wisely, regardless of party.

 

[bobhawg]

The freight carriers are for profit companies. Amtrak is government funded b/c the railroads did away with the money losing, labor and liability intensive passenger business decades ago. The government has been shoving Amtrak onto freight lines ever since. I used to work for UP, trust me the railroads would love to see Amtrak disappear.

I respect you a lot Bob, but you are way off on the "nobody wants to reduce fat". You are confusing republicans with conservatives and politicians with regular people. Neither is true. Politicians aren't interested in spending our money wisely, regardless of party.

I agree with your last paragraph, the trouble is, we have only politicians sitting in Congress. And regular people are the ones sending them back, year after year