100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Overgrowing government, another media myth? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
If in fact, the current administration doesn't believe we have too much government, why does the Obama administration propose merging several agencies together, effectively eliminating 1000 governmental positions in the process? http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-to-propose-combining-agencies-to-shrink-federal-government/2012/01/13/gIQAHsLqvP_story.html Wow, thats awesome! This from a democratic president, even! Its been a long time since obama did I heard of the president doing something i approved of. How is economy a "separate issue"? Where do you think the government gets the money it spends? Congress certainly isn't spending its own members' money! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No matter how you spin it, the government is ridiculously overblown. See http://usdebtclock.org/ In Q2 2009 alone, total debt outstanding in the United States — financial plus nonfinancial debt — amounted to 373.4% of GDP. That is not sustainable. Here's a good article by Thorston Polleit (Honorary Professor at the Frankfurt School of Finance & Management) from 2009, including plenty of graphs: http://mises.org/daily/3754 the issue of the ECONOMY is a seperate one and should stay the focus but too often the scapegoat syndrome merely seeks to divide and blame people or groups,,, so cuts to an ALREADY small government payroll are seen as a correction to the debt, when so many other things are contributing to it which would make more of a difference if addressed, How is economy a "separate issue"? Where do you think the government gets the money it spends? Congress certainly isn't spending its own members' money! economy is not 'how many' , economy is 'how much' as in, if I have a home with ten people and I budget my money right, Im still gonna be in better shape than someone with only two who blows through their income on unnecesseary things the issue of HOW money is spent is seperate from how many people are in the government,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What if a large mass of American people believed something that was a total distortion? Impossible, you say? Well, there’s this OMG-moment from the OMB–that’s the number-crunching department within the executive branch. Using OMB data, Washington Post’s reporter Ed O’Keefe recently dropped the following info-bomb in his Federal Eye column: Relative to the population of the country, the federal government employs fewer people than at any time since before 1962. That means the effective size of the government during Obama is lower than both Bushes, small-government hero Reagan, Ford and Nixon, who ran the biggest government than any president in more than half a century. In fact, even when not taking the massive population growth of the country into effect, Obama’s federal government employs fewer people (in absolute terms) than George Bush, Reagan–yes, that Reagan–Ford and Nixon. So here’s O’Keefe’s actual breakdown. (And read it and weep, Speaker Boehner.) ,,,see the chart at http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/116911-the-federal-government-is-smaller-now-than-in-past-49-years/ Using a post on a blog taken from a post on a blog is less than convincing.. Obviously not included by either blogger or you is the fact that the DOD is counted within the executive branch and considering the military was much larger during the cold war it would be rather obvious the numbers for full time employees would be higher.. Nice try though.. I didnt try anything, I gave a link to a post which CONTAINED The official Office of Budget Management numbers and Im sure they use the same standards throughout a chart,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What if a large mass of American people believed something that was a total distortion? Impossible, you say? Well, there’s this OMG-moment from the OMB–that’s the number-crunching department within the executive branch. Using OMB data, Washington Post’s reporter Ed O’Keefe recently dropped the following info-bomb in his Federal Eye column: Relative to the population of the country, the federal government employs fewer people than at any time since before 1962. That means the effective size of the government during Obama is lower than both Bushes, small-government hero Reagan, Ford and Nixon, who ran the biggest government than any president in more than half a century. In fact, even when not taking the massive population growth of the country into effect, Obama’s federal government employs fewer people (in absolute terms) than George Bush, Reagan–yes, that Reagan–Ford and Nixon. So here’s O’Keefe’s actual breakdown. (And read it and weep, Speaker Boehner.) ,,,see the chart at http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/116911-the-federal-government-is-smaller-now-than-in-past-49-years/ Using a post on a blog taken from a post on a blog is less than convincing.. Obviously not included by either blogger or you is the fact that the DOD is counted within the executive branch and considering the military was much larger during the cold war it would be rather obvious the numbers for full time employees would be higher.. Nice try though.. I didnt try anything, I gave a link to a post which CONTAINED The official Office of Budget Management numbers and Im sure they use the same standards throughout a chart,,,,, You know they are the official numbers? Neither blog posts a link to the OMB site showing they are the OFFICIAL numbers. If that chart originated from the OMB site then they could have linked directly to it. No link.. Zero creditability.. If you look at the fine print it says data taken from Washington Post.. We all have the right to post what we want.. Even if it is a biased liberal blog copying something from another biased liberal blog copying something from the liberal Washington Post.. Nuff Said.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What if a large mass of American people believed something that was a total distortion? Impossible, you say? Well, there’s this OMG-moment from the OMB–that’s the number-crunching department within the executive branch. Using OMB data, Washington Post’s reporter Ed O’Keefe recently dropped the following info-bomb in his Federal Eye column: Relative to the population of the country, the federal government employs fewer people than at any time since before 1962. That means the effective size of the government during Obama is lower than both Bushes, small-government hero Reagan, Ford and Nixon, who ran the biggest government than any president in more than half a century. In fact, even when not taking the massive population growth of the country into effect, Obama’s federal government employs fewer people (in absolute terms) than George Bush, Reagan–yes, that Reagan–Ford and Nixon. So here’s O’Keefe’s actual breakdown. (And read it and weep, Speaker Boehner.) ,,,see the chart at http://liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php?/topic/116911-the-federal-government-is-smaller-now-than-in-past-49-years/ Using a post on a blog taken from a post on a blog is less than convincing.. Obviously not included by either blogger or you is the fact that the DOD is counted within the executive branch and considering the military was much larger during the cold war it would be rather obvious the numbers for full time employees would be higher.. Nice try though.. I didnt try anything, I gave a link to a post which CONTAINED The official Office of Budget Management numbers and Im sure they use the same standards throughout a chart,,,,, You know they are the official numbers? Neither blog posts a link to the OMB site showing they are the OFFICIAL numbers. If that chart originated from the OMB site then they could have linked directly to it. No link.. Zero creditability.. If you look at the fine print it says data taken from Washington Post.. We all have the right to post what we want.. Even if it is a biased liberal blog copying something from another biased liberal blog copying something from the liberal Washington Post.. Nuff Said.. we do have the right to post, and review take note of references and review them because they are in one source, doesnt mean they originate there, especially if references are included,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still haven't from you that if the government isn't overgrown, then why is the Obama administration combining offices and agencies to cut 1000 jobs? Also, as you so pointed how does this help the economy displacing 1000 workers?
|
|
|
|
|
