PDA

View Full Version : Obama wants "smaller, leaner" government. Will Repubs insist on BIG Government?



Nicholas Scheuer
01-13-2012, 02:26 PM
Obama is asking for the same authority Reagan had to combine Agencies. Will Repubs like McConnell fight him on this?

Ian McColgin
01-13-2012, 02:28 PM
It's Obama socialism and must be resisted.

David W Pratt
01-13-2012, 02:31 PM
Hasnt the Federal payroll grown by about 140,000 since he took office?

Mrleft8
01-13-2012, 02:32 PM
Hasnt the Federal payroll grown by about 140,000 since he took office?

That's job creation. Are you against job creation?

RonW
01-13-2012, 02:38 PM
Hasnt the Federal payroll grown by about 140,000 since he took office?


That's job creation. Are you against job creation?

That is a tax increase, and that I am against.....more government = more taxes.....

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 02:42 PM
Smaller does not mean automatically more efficient. Larger does not mean its more efficient. I want more efficiency. Sometimes size doesn't matter that much. Pruning dead wood might not be a bad idea though.

RonW
01-13-2012, 02:50 PM
and ....
according to Office of Personnel Management data.
Executive-branch civilian employment,

Mumbo jumbo and confusion by deception of the facts....which is a larger government..

TomF
01-13-2012, 02:52 PM
Obama is asking for the same authority Reagan had to combine Agencies. Will Repubs like McConnell fight him on this?Most likely. And will then castigate him for not doing anything to eliminate duplication and red tape.

Of course, this is exactly why Obama's asked for such authority, which in legendary times was used for the same purpose by St. Ronald. Obama wins if the Reps actually approve it, and wins if they resist such a Holy initiative.

The last thing the Reps in Congress want, though, is for Obama to successfully introduce effective Government spending and bureaucratic restraint during Primary or election season.

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 02:56 PM
I have an issue with "effective" because gov is smaller. One would think that melding the departments *is more effective because it is smaller, but I do not necessarily agree with that

pefjr
01-13-2012, 03:02 PM
Where is the bill, request? All I see is a bunch of partisans bickering.

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 03:11 PM
Look if it takes 10 people to change a lightbulb: one sec. to send in the request to change it, one person to read the memo, one person to give the janitor the request, one janitor to get help to change the bulb,one person to get the new bulb, and three people to change it with two holding the ladder, and the 10th to turn the light back on is a wee tad ridiculous to me. If it can be done with smaller gov and less employees, fine.If it can't well.

Concordia 33
01-13-2012, 03:18 PM
Uhhhh......


Maybe you'll like this?


An ominous trend: number of Americans working for the government vs. those making things5 MARCH 2010

tags: employment (http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/tag/employment/)
by Fabius Maximus (http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/author/fabiusmaximus2000/)

Eric at the always-interesting Classical Values website (http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2010/03/taxing_our_way.html) revisited the FM website’s America passes a milestone! (http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/milestone/) (20 January 2010), marking when the number of government employees exceeded those in manufacturing and construction. Let’s update that, comparing workers in all good-producing industries to government employees. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics (ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.ceseeb1.txt):

Good-producing employment peaked in 2000 at 24.6 million.
Since then the number of goods-producing workers has dropped by 1/4, to 18.6 million.
In 2007 for the first time both groups were equal (22.2 million).
Since 2007 private sector employment has dropped by 7.0 million, over 1/2 of that from good-producing industries.
Since 2007 the number of government employees has risen by 2% (by 326 thousand).
The changes in employment during recession are typical. Good-producing industries — mining, logging, construction, and manufacturing — are cyclical. Government services are counter-cyclical, stable or increasing during recessions.
But the trend should send shivers up your spine. Recessions create opportunities for reform. Politics as usual stops. Voters pay attention to these things more than during booms. During the 1980-82 recession Fed Chairman Volker and President Reagan administered economic medicine that laid the foundation for the next quarter-century of economic growth. So far the Bush and Obama Administration have wasted this time. That’s bad news, since stimulus programs (monetary and fiscal) provide first aid only. They fix nothing. Treatment (http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/workers/#) requires bold move by our Federal and States executives and legislatures.

Uncle Duke
01-13-2012, 03:46 PM
The fact is, Obama has grown the federal payroll by 140,000, so far, during his term.
Note that the figures on federal government employment, for which 2010 is the most recent available annual data, include the 600,000 temporary census employees.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 04:00 PM
Obama is asking for the same authority Reagan had to combine Agencies. Will Repubs like McConnell fight him on this?

Yes: they can't help themselves.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 04:00 PM
Hasnt the Federal payroll grown by about 140,000 since he took office?

NO! It has not.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 04:02 PM
Smaller does not mean automatically more efficient. Larger does not mean its more efficient. I want more efficiency. Sometimes size doesn't matter that much. Pruning dead wood might not be a bad idea though.

"Smaller" does mean it has not gotten "larger". Disgree with that>

John Smith
01-13-2012, 04:04 PM
I have an issue with "effective" because gov is smaller. One would think that melding the departments *is more effective because it is smaller, but I do not necessarily agree with that
Which party wants the govewrnmentn to meddle in our lives: like women and contraception? It's not the dems.

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 04:05 PM
Not yet..I thinking the IRS in 2014 when Obmacare is fully implimented as an example

BrianY
01-13-2012, 04:18 PM
Here's a quick way to get rid of a lot of excess government employees added during the Bush years: Eliminate the Dept of Homeland security and privitize the TSA. You wanna talk about the government jobs added under Obama but ignore those added under GWB...how convenient.

And I just love those that bray loudly about "incerasing efficiency" and "elilminating waste" but apprently don't have a clue where all of this waste and ineffciency is and how it can be cut out of the budget. From what I can see, when a politician talks about "waste" and "ineffciency", he actually means "goernt programs that I don't like". The same goes for 99% of the non-politicians out here among the general public.

Remeber, one guy's waste and inefficiency is another's essential job-producing program that should not be cut.

And don't bring up the old canard of $1000 toilet seats and wrenches, etc. Cut that stuff an you'll be cutting someone's job. More importantly to the Republicans, you'll be cutting some company's profits.

So come on all you arm chair quarterback, you Monday morning generals, how about talking about REAL cuts and efficiencies you'd make in the federal budget if you were the President. THAT would be interesting.

skuthorp
01-13-2012, 04:26 PM
The facts don't actually matter of course, preconceived prejudice, rusted on loyalties and wilful ignorance are more often why people vote the way they do.

ccmanuals
01-13-2012, 04:35 PM
and of course you have this knucklehead who can't remember who he wants to cut.

Updated 2:20 p.m. ET

BLUFFTON, S.C. -- Texas Gov. Rick Perry's enthusiasm for cutting the federal government expanded to include the Interior Department in a radio interview Friday, although he seemed to forget to include Education, a favorite for the chopping block, when asked which federal departments he would cut.
Perry was doing an interview with WTKS 1290 (http://www.newsradio1290wtks.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?podcast=billedwards), a talk-radio station in Savannah, Ga. When the host asked him which government departments he would cut, he said "Three right off the bat; you know, Commerce, Interior, and Energy are three that you think of."
Perry notoriously forgot one of the three departments during a Nov. 9 debate in Michigan (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57321982-503544/rick-perry-fails-to-remember-what-agency-hed-get-rid-of-in-gop-debate/), leading him to quip, "Oops." He later recalled that the three he'd like to cut are Education, Energy, and Commerce.

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 04:40 PM
Which party wants the govewrnmentn to meddle in our lives: like women and contraception? It's not the dems.Remember who signed NDAA or do you have a really short Memory? You probably think it was Bush. Mybe you will blame the REp. even though most if not all dems voted yes.Anyway, I'm sure that you will come up with some excuse as to why Obama signed it. On the contraceptives,it this or has been made the law of the land? I don't think so. NDAA has.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 05:08 PM
Not yet..I thinking the IRS in 2014 when Obmacare is fully implimented as an example

Based on what? rumors? unfounded emails?

Given that none of the predictions of this nature, so far, have come true, why do you continue to believe them?

John Smith
01-13-2012, 05:11 PM
Remember who signed NDAA or do you have a really short Memory? You probably think it was Bush. Mybe you will blame the REp. even though most if not all dems voted yes.Anyway, I'm sure that you will come up with some excuse as to why Obama signed it. On the contraceptives,it this or has been made the law of the land? I don't think so. NDAA has.

What's your point. There were many "parts" of NDAA, and I agree with MOST of them. How many parts of that bill do you agree with? As to the contraceptives: do the states have the right to make them illegal? What's your opinion?

One state tried. Their effort failed at the ballot box. Had that effort succeeded, do you believe it would have violated the constitution?

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 05:18 PM
Based on what? rumors? unfounded emails?

Given that none of the predictions of this nature, so far, have come true, why do you continue to believe them?Its been reported that the IRS will have to hire more people to deal with the changes implemented
No exact numbers but look at at the required authority to run Obamacare. Do you actually think theey won't hire more IRS employees? Give me a break

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/obamacare-means-dramatic-expansion-of-irs-power/

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 05:21 PM
I responded to your question you posted above.

Which party wants the govewrnmentn to meddle in our lives: like women and contraception? It's not the dems.

If that isn' t meddling nothing is. And I'm not surprised that you agree with most of NDAA. Not surprised at all

Glen Longino
01-13-2012, 05:44 PM
Look if it takes 10 people to change a lightbulb: one sec. to send in the request to change it, one person to read the memo, one person to give the janitor the request, one janitor to get help to change the bulb,one person to get the new bulb, and three people to change it with two holding the ladder, and the 10th to turn the light back on is a wee tad ridiculous to me. If it can be done with smaller gov and less employees, fine.If it can't well.

Translation:
I'm confused and befuddled...how do lightbulbs get changed when they go dry...er, I mean wet....er, I mean dark?:D

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 05:46 PM
An example of inefficiency which I'm sure you are very used to and more than likely appreciate.:)

Glen Longino
01-13-2012, 06:03 PM
An example of inefficiency which I'm sure you are very used to and more than likely appreciate.:)

Your example of inefficiency was not based on reality.
It was merely a product of your own befuddled and negative thought process.
That's because you've adopted the herd mentality of the Regressive Right.
Your a sheep, Jamie, face it...you're a sheep in a herd of Regressive sheep.

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 06:12 PM
Really! You don't leave your porch much do you? If I'm a sheep I'm in company with you. You are a sheep or a gopher among libs.I just don't know whether to call you a rodent.At least, stop falling asleep in the direct TX sun.

wardd
01-13-2012, 06:19 PM
i've worked for the government and i have worked for large corporations and i didn't notice either as being more or less efficient than the other

when an organization gets big either private or public inefficiencies set in, it's just the way of things

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 06:22 PM
That's the excuse. Because it is being done by others it doesn't need to be rectified. You all use similar excuses for a lot. If everyone does such and such, it's okay.

Fine go ahead, jump off a cliff, but before you do, tells your friends that it is okay, everyone does it once.

wardd
01-13-2012, 06:27 PM
bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet .

fixed that for you

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 06:31 PM
Ihear a herd of shep. Not a ram among them it seems. Not surprised.Hey nice effort at tag teaming wardd and nice of you to allow glen to take a much need snooze on the porch. I'm sure he appreciated it..
Of course Wardd needs to tag team, as he really can't go one on one.Loses quite oftrn and he has at least figured that out.

wardd
01-13-2012, 06:32 PM
bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet bleet

fixed that one for you too

Glen Longino
01-13-2012, 06:36 PM
Ihear a herd of shep. Not a ram among them it seems. Not surprised.Hey nice effort at tag teaming wardd and nice of you to allow glen to take a much need snooze on the porch. I'm sure he appreciated it..
Of course Wardd needs to tag team, as he really can't go one on one.Loses quite oftrn and he has at least figured that out.

Hey, Jamie, I cut and split and stacked firewood all day for next winter.
What did you do today? Hmmmm?:D
Let me guess...you bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeted all day long!:D

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 06:38 PM
Hey wardd, did you wear your PFD when you went out to play with the ducks. I was worried in the four or five inches of water in the duck pond.I mean I was worried.Hey, time to call in Glen. I'll let him mutter to himself as I don't see any reason to hang around with the likes of you. Bye now. Oh here comes Glenny. bye.

wardd
01-13-2012, 06:39 PM
Hey wardd, did you wear your PFD when you went out to play with the ducks. I was worried in the four or five inches of water in the duck pond.I mean I was worried.Hey, time to call in Glen. I'll let him mutter to himself as I don't see any reason to hang around with the likes of you. Bye now.

got any ducks jamie?

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 07:08 PM
got any ducks jamie?Yup,in the freezer!

wardd
01-13-2012, 07:10 PM
Yup,in the freezer!

pervert

S.V. Airlie
01-13-2012, 07:21 PM
pervertI think dinner and you think perverted.I don't have that problem but you seem to have by your comment alone.*

wardd
01-13-2012, 07:43 PM
i was just out making my rounds and gave the ducks grapes

Blowtorch
01-13-2012, 07:43 PM
While thRepubs are playing Chutes and Ladders with Gay Witch Atheist Womynist Fallopian tube issues, Obama is playing 3-D Chess with the real world.

People Notice these things.

Blowtorch
01-13-2012, 07:44 PM
i was just out making my rounds and gave the ducks grapes
Hey mister you got any nails?

wardd
01-13-2012, 07:45 PM
Hey mister you got any nails?

nails?

Blowtorch
01-13-2012, 07:54 PM
Thats the way I heard the joke

genglandoh
01-13-2012, 08:17 PM
I hope he does reduce the size of Government.

But his track record is poor on saying one thing and then doing something else.

wardd
01-13-2012, 08:22 PM
i have news for you all, in the not too far distant future the government will have to supply a goodly portion of the jobs

genglandoh
01-13-2012, 08:31 PM
i have news for you all, in the not too far distant future the government will have to supply a goodly portion of the jobs

So you are saying the President is lying about reducing the size of Government?

wardd
01-13-2012, 08:34 PM
So you are saying the President is lying about reducing the size of Government?

he may not be lying and that may be his intentions but that is not the future i see like it or not

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:26 PM
Where is the bill, request? All I see is a bunch of partisans bickering.

This looks like a good place for this link: just the facts http://www.factcheck.org/2011/01/factchecking-the-gop-response/

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:27 PM
Not yet..I thinking the IRS in 2014 when Obmacare is fully implimented as an example
That's been debunked many times before.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:30 PM
Its been reported that the IRS will have to hire more people to deal with the changes implemented
No exact numbers but look at at the required authority to run Obamacare. Do you actually think theey won't hire more IRS employees? Give me a break

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/obamacare-means-dramatic-expansion-of-irs-power/


It's been falsely reported as such. Here's the scoop

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/irs-and-the-health-care-law-part-ii/

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:32 PM
Really! You don't leave your porch much do you? If I'm a sheep I'm in company with you. You are a sheep or a gopher among libs.I just don't know whether to call you a rodent.At least, stop falling asleep in the direct TX sun.


You're simply misinformed by whatever sources you use and the facts confuse you.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:33 PM
That's the excuse. Because it is being done by others it doesn't need to be rectified. You all use similar excuses for a lot. If everyone does such and such, it's okay.

Fine go ahead, jump off a cliff, but before you do, tells your friends that it is okay, everyone does it once.

Didn't you use that same logic when you referenced Kennedy's dad's money?

Glen Longino
01-13-2012, 11:36 PM
You're simply misinformed by whatever sources you use and the facts confuse you.

Yep, that's Jamie in a nutshell....or a sheep herd!:D

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:39 PM
I hope he does reduce the size of Government.

But his track record is poor on saying one thing and then doing something else.

Is it that poor compared to most presidents? If we look at what he's tried to do in accordance with what he said he would do, and what he said he would do he made no effort to do, I think he fares fairly well. You may not like some of what he's done, but he's mostly tried to keep his words. He said DADT would end on his watch; it did. He said he'd have all our troops out of Iraq, and he did. He said he'd increase efforts in Afghanisan, and he did. He promised healthcare reform, and he did. He made an effort to close Gitmo, but didn't get support from congress.

He has continued the Patriot Act, which I am annoyed with, but I'd like to see a list of promise he made that he made no effort to keep.

John Smith
01-13-2012, 11:41 PM
he may not be lying and that may be his intentions but that is not the future i see like it or not

I don't think you're looking in the right places. Also, anyone want to venture a guess as to how much the government grew or shrunk under Reagan or the Bushes?

L.W. Baxter
01-13-2012, 11:41 PM
Here's a quick way to get rid of a lot of excess government employees added during the Bush years: Eliminate the Dept of Homeland security and privitize the TSA...

Brian Y for President!

genglandoh
01-14-2012, 11:34 AM
Is it that poor compared to most presidents? If we look at what he's tried to do in accordance with what he said he would do, and what he said he would do he made no effort to do, I think he fares fairly well. You may not like some of what he's done, but he's mostly tried to keep his words. He said DADT would end on his watch; it did. He said he'd have all our troops out of Iraq, and he did. He said he'd increase efforts in Afghanisan, and he did. He promised healthcare reform, and he did. He made an effort to close Gitmo, but didn't get support from congress.

He has continued the Patriot Act, which I am annoyed with, but I'd like to see a list of promise he made that he made no effort to keep.

I do hope Obama reduces the size of Government.
But his track record is poor, he will say one thing and then doing something else.

This is just a short list of Obama saying one thing but the reality was something different
1. He said the stimulus bill was full of shovel ready jobs.
2. He said the stimulus would keep the unemployment rate below 8%
3. He said the bills will be posted on the internet for 5 days before he signs it.
4. He said he would revive pay as you go.
5. He said we need to live within our means.

My guess is his goal is to merge the Government agencies in one bigger agency with more employees and a larger budget.
Not what most people think as reducing the size of Government.

wardd
01-14-2012, 11:42 AM
I don't think you're looking in the right places. Also, anyone want to venture a guess as to how much the government grew or shrunk under Reagan or the Bushes?

i'm looking at the advances in technology and the numbers of people it replaces

there will be no jobs available for the numbers of people needing one, there will be no need for their labor

Orange
01-14-2012, 11:46 AM
As I've read, the move by Obama is about politics more than anything else.

http://news.investors.com/Article/597855/201201131851/businesses-need-relief-from-obama-policies-not-government-reorg.htm

sample:



Obama's sudden realization that the federal government is a bloated mess is welcome. There's no shortage of targets at which to aim. But his proposal should be seen for what it is: a crass political move designed to inoculate himself against charges that he's anti-business.After all, if these reforms are so important to companies, why did Obama wait three years to propose them, or wait a full year after promising such changes in his last State of the Union address, knowing Congress would never get it done in an election year?It's just as well, since once you scratch the surface, you realize Obama's reorg would almost certainly do more harm than good. Of particular concern is his plan to mash the lean and effective U.S. Trade Representative office together with the bloated and aimless Commerce Department.In a joint memo Friday, Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Ways and Means chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., warned that making the USTR "just another corner of a new bureaucratic behemoth would hurt American exports and hinder American job creation." And former USTR head Susan Schwab told the Washington Post that "I don't think it makes sense to put USTR in Commerce because you'd have to reinvent USTR."

S.V. Airlie
01-14-2012, 11:59 AM
It's been falsely reported as such. Here's the scoop

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/02/irs-and-the-health-care-law-part-ii/Have you read your own bloody link LOL. I read it. To me it doesn't matter why the IRS is getting more recruits. They are stlll requesting more. Look at the link you posted and count the bodies.

S.V. Airlie
01-14-2012, 12:04 PM
Yep, that's Jamie in a nutshell....or a sheep herd!:DAlthough I'm not one, I'm glad you can recognize your own kind. Must be because of all the bleating going on.

ccmanuals
01-14-2012, 12:13 PM
By Steven Sloan
(Updates with Boustany quote starting in eighth paragraph.)
Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- An increasing workload for the U.S. Internal Revenue Service combined with reduced funding for the agency pose the “most serious problem” facing taxpayers, according to the national taxpayer advocate.
In her annual report to Congress today, advocate Nina Olson told lawmakers that cutting the IRS’s budget while making frequent changes to the U.S. tax code poses difficulties for the agency in enforcing tax laws and collecting revenue. Lawmakers agreed last month to cut the agency’s budget by 2.5 percent for fiscal 2012.
“The overriding challenge facing the IRS is that its workload has grown significantly in recent years while its funding is being cut,” Olson said in a press release. “This is causing the IRS to resort to shortcuts that undermine fundamental taxpayer rights and harm taxpayers and at the same time reduces the IRS’s ability to deliver on its core mission of raising revenue.”
The IRS’s budget struggles reflect differences between the Obama administration and congressional Republicans. Obama has pressed for an increase in the agency’s budget so it can help implement the 2010 health-care law. Most Republicans are opposed to that law and many support lower corporate and individual tax rates.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-12/taxpayer-advocate-calls-irs-budget-cut-most-serious-issue.html