OT...Keeping it simple
Hank
economy operates. But, I do know that if I have more money going out
than I have coming in, I am in debt. Since I was in debt at one point
in my life, I understand how hard it can be to get out of debt.
So, my question is..... How much money does the US take in (collect)
each year? And how much does it spend each year?
That's all us common folk want to know. Then if we are spending more
than we take in, cut HAVE to be made and income has to increase. So,
If the US is spending 10% more than it is taking in, 10% of everything
has to be cut. Also, 5% increase in income to pay to get us out of
debt. Then the 5% can be lowered or even done away with.
Personally, I just want it fixed.
Hank <~~~~ keeps it simple
bill horne
> Ok, I am a simple man and I admit I don't undersatnd entirely how the
> economy operates.
Neither does anyone else in here. And I submit that there's no one
person in the world who does.
Let's hope Winston is right:
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after
they've tried everything else."
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
nothermark
wrote:
from what I heard yesterday we are almost at the level of Ireland but
nobody will bail us out.
Technobarbarian
"Hank" <nineb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:948b332f-d4a3-47dd...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Ok, I am a simple man and I admit I don't undersatnd entirely how the
> economy operates. But, I do know that if I have more money going out
> than I have coming in, I am in debt. Since I was in debt at one point
> in my life, I understand how hard it can be to get out of debt.
>
> So, my question is..... How much money does the US take in (collect)
> each year? And how much does it spend each year?
TB
Technobarbarian
"Hank" <nineb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:948b332f-d4a3-47dd...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> Ok, I am a simple man and I admit I don't undersatnd entirely how the
> economy operates. But, I do know that if I have more money going out
> than I have coming in, I am in debt. Since I was in debt at one point
> in my life, I understand how hard it can be to get out of debt.
>
> So, my question is..... How much money does the US take in (collect)
> each year? And how much does it spend each year?
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/
TB
Lon VanOstran
I want the size of government cut until it complies with the
Constitution. That alone would balance the budget and pay off the
national debt in our lifetimes.
Mike
"Hank" <nineb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:948b332f-d4a3-47dd...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
> each year? And how much does it spend each year?
>
> Hank <~~~~ keeps it simple
We take in about $2 Tril and spend about $3.5 Tril. Got a few spare "tril"
laying around that you want to use to help your fellow citizens? Me neither.
Mike Hendrix at dot
Sometimes I agree with Lon and this is one of those times.
mike
--
Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/
Vince Wirth
Mike,
Don't agree too fast. I think that the government does comply with
the Constitution because the Supreme Court says so. That's been their
job for the last 200 or so years.
Also if we did away with Medicare, half of this newsgroup would not be
here to complain. In fact the newsgroup would not exist because ARPA
would not have existed to invent and implement it with
"unconstitutional government money". Shall I continue with more
examples?
Vince
Lone Haranguer
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 23:28:04 -0600, Mike Hendrix<mike (at) travellogs
> (dot) us> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 18:48:49 -0500, Lon VanOstran
>> <Lvano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I want the size of government cut until it complies with the
>>> Constitution. That alone would balance the budget and pay off the
>>> national debt in our lifetimes.
>
>>
>> Sometimes I agree with Lon and this is one of those times.
>>
>> mike
>
> Mike,
> Don't agree too fast. I think that the government does comply with
> the Constitution because the Supreme Court says so. That's been their
> job for the last 200 or so years.
>
approved putting ethnic Japanese in holding camps?
The USSC is made up of biased humans and as prone to error as anything else
involving humans.
> Also if we did away with Medicare, half of this newsgroup would not be
> here to complain.
How do you know? If Medicare had not existed, more people would have made
other provisions. My contract with our government said they would provide me
with health care for life. It's not my fault they reneged on that promise.
In fact the newsgroup would not exist because ARPA
> would not have existed to invent and implement it with
> "unconstitutional government money".
It was a by-product of defense spending, which is authorized in the Constitution.
Shall I continue with more
> examples?
Have at it. We could discuss "what ifs" all day.
LZ
>
> Vince
JerryD(upstateNY)
? <<<<<<<<<<<<<
Explain how Carter created the Dept. of Energy in the late 1970's to make us
more energy independent and 30+ years later we use more foreign oil than
ever and the DoE sucked up 26.4 Billion dollars last year..........for
NOTHING !!!
President Barack Obama unveiled on May 7 a $26.4 billion budget request for
DOE for fiscal year (FY) 2010
--
JerryD(upstateNY)
Bruce S
DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of our misery
immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this Department, it
performs no useful function, and shutting it down would save billions.
Hell, we could balance the budget just by closing down some of the biggest
government boondoggles, like this one.
--
Bruce S.
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first
things to be bought and sold are legislators." - P. J. O'Rourke
Lon VanOstran
> JerryD(upstateNY) wrote:
>> "Vince Wirth" wrote in message ........ Shall I continue with more
>> examples ?<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>> Explain how Carter created the Dept. of Energy in the late 1970's to
>> make us more energy independent and 30+ years later we use more
>> foreign oil than ever and the DoE sucked up 26.4 Billion dollars last
>> year..........for NOTHING !!!
>>
>> President Barack Obama unveiled on May 7 a $26.4 billion budget
>> request for DOE for fiscal year (FY) 2010
>
> DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of our misery
> immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this Department, it
> performs no useful function, and shutting it down would save billions.
> Hell, we could balance the budget just by closing down some of the biggest
> government boondoggles, like this one.
>
Shutting Congress down for a couple years wouldn't hurt any either. <g>
nothermark
For one thing it's let us use up foreign oil rather than ours.
OTOH without the government neither the Salt River Project nor the
Hoover Dam would have been built. The Southwest might be a lot
different.
Frank Howell
> JerryD(upstateNY) wrote:
>> "Vince Wirth" wrote in message ........ Shall I continue with more
>> examples ? <<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>> Explain how Carter created the Dept. of Energy in the late 1970's to
>> make us more energy independent and 30+ years later we use more
>> foreign oil than ever and the DoE sucked up 26.4 Billion dollars last
>> year..........for NOTHING !!!
>>
>> President Barack Obama unveiled on May 7 a $26.4 billion budget
>> request for DOE for fiscal year (FY) 2010
>
> DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of our
> misery immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this
> Department, it performs no useful function, and shutting it down
> would save billions. Hell, we could balance the budget just by
> closing down some of the biggest government boondoggles, like this
> one.
Beside now Constitutional basis there's no rational basis as you said for
these "dog and pony shows." Anyone know what useful function the Dept. of
Education serves? Does it fulfill the following at a 49 billion dollar price
tag?
The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student achievement
and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational
excellence and ensuring equal access.
--
Frank Howell
RMcBane
> JerryD(upstateNY) wrote:
>> "Vince Wirth" wrote in message ........ Shall I continue with more
>> examples ?<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>> Explain how Carter created the Dept. of Energy in the late 1970's to
>> make us more energy independent and 30+ years later we use more
>> foreign oil than ever and the DoE sucked up 26.4 Billion dollars last
>> year..........for NOTHING !!!
>>
>> President Barack Obama unveiled on May 7 a $26.4 billion budget
>> request for DOE for fiscal year (FY) 2010
>
> DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of our misery
> immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this Department, it
> performs no useful function, and shutting it down would save billions.
> Hell, we could balance the budget just by closing down some of the biggest
> government boondoggles, like this one.
Close to 40% of DoE's budget goes for National Security for things such
as designing, building and testing nuclear devices for DoD. If DoE were
shut down, we either lose nuclear capability or you have to move it to a
different agency, like DoD. For a breakdown of DoE budget see:
http://www.mbe.doe.gov/budget/11budget/Content/FY2011Highlights.pdf
--
Richard McBane
Bruce S
> Bruce S wrote:
>> DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of our
>> misery immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this
>> Department, it performs no useful function, and shutting it down
>> would save billions. Hell, we could balance the budget just by
>> closing down some of the biggest government boondoggles, like this
>> one.
>
> Beside now Constitutional basis there's no rational basis as you said
> for these "dog and pony shows." Anyone know what useful function the
> Dept. of Education serves? Does it fulfill the following at a 49
> billion dollar price tag?
>
> The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student
> achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering
> educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
Since the creation of the Dept of Ed, we have moved DOWN to 24th in the
world in educational quality. If that is "promot[ing] student achievement"
then they are doing a great job. They should be defunded immediately.
Bruce S
Testing devices for the DOD should be a DOD function - there is no need for
the DOE.
Frank Howell
> Frank Howell wrote:
>> Bruce S wrote:
>>> DOE is just one of the federal agencies that should be put out of
>>> our misery immediately. There is no Constitutional basis for this
>>> Department, it performs no useful function, and shutting it down
>>> would save billions. Hell, we could balance the budget just by
>>> closing down some of the biggest government boondoggles, like this
>>> one.
>>
>> Beside now Constitutional basis there's no rational basis as you said
>> for these "dog and pony shows." Anyone know what useful function the
>> Dept. of Education serves? Does it fulfill the following at a 49
>> billion dollar price tag?
>>
>> The mission of the Department of Education is to promote student
>> achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering
>> educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
>
> Since the creation of the Dept of Ed, we have moved DOWN to 24th in
> the world in educational quality. If that is "promot[ing] student
> achievement" then they are doing a great job. They should be
> defunded immediately.
Yeah, but you know what "they" will say. More money is needed, that's why
the failure!
--
Frank Howell
bob
Lvano...@gmail.com says...
That's one thing I like about Texas' Legislature; per the Texas
Constitution it only meets in odd-numbered years and only for part of
the year. (Sorry I've forgotten the number of days the session runs.)
Bob
Califbill
news:37slf61v0f03vrctc...@4ax.com...
Hoover dam was built because the Federal Government had contracts to buy the
water and power for enough to pay for the building of the dam. they were
just a big banker for Hoover Dam.
Lone Haranguer
the power of eminent domain to grab land for projects.
http://nashville.about.com/od/governmentpolitics/a/tntvaemindomain.htm
LZ
nothermark
The only issue I was illustrating was that the government was involved
in facilitating it. As I understand Bruce his thought that there is
no acceptable way they should have been involved.
I picked Hoover because among other things LV would probably still be
a desert crossroads. OTOH it is what I would favor as it required and
services multiple states. Contrast this with something like the Mt
Morris dam on the Genessee River in NY. It is certainly needed but
should have been a state project and should be run by the state not
the federal folks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letchworth_State_Park#Mt._Morris_Dam
Ron
"Califbill" <bmc...@nospamix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:572dneMrf4WrYZ_Q...@earthlink.com...
> "nothermark" wrote in message
> news:37slf61v0f03vrctc...@4ax.com...
>
> On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 14:31:18 -0500, "JerryD\(upstateNY\)"
> <jer...@somewhere.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>"Vince Wirth" wrote in message ........ Shall I continue with more
>>examples
>>? <<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>>Explain how Carter created the Dept. of Energy in the late 1970's to make
>>us
>>more energy independent and 30+ years later we use more foreign oil than
>>ever and the DoE sucked up 26.4 Billion dollars last year..........for
>>NOTHING !!!
>>
>>President Barack Obama unveiled on May 7 a $26.4 billion budget request
>>for
>>DOE for fiscal year (FY) 2010
>
> For one thing it's let us use up foreign oil rather than ours.
And how much are you willing to pay US oil royalty owners and producers to
shut down wells or to not drill new ones?
Ron
nothermark
I'd drill anywhere we could find oil. That said it is one thing that
has been accomplished.
bill horne
Well, which is it? "use up foreign oil rather than ours" or "drill
anywhere we could find oil"? Trying to follow you is like trying to
push a marble up the wall on the point of a needle.
Lone Haranguer
LZ
K Miller
news:4d03d51e$0$1186$c3e8da3$f07d...@news.astraweb.com
> nothermark wrote:
>>>
>>
>> I'd drill anywhere we could find oil. That said it is one thing that
>> has been accomplished.
>
> Well, which is it? "use up foreign oil rather than ours" or "drill
> anywhere we could find oil"? Trying to follow you is like trying to
> push a marble up the wall on the point of a needle.
SuperGlue - available at better WalMarts everywhere...
--
"You cannot transmute some incoherent mixture of words into sense merely by
introducing the three-letter word 'God' to be its grammatical subject." -
Anthony Flew
bill horne
> "bill horne"<red...@rye.net> wrote in message
> news:4d03d51e$0$1186$c3e8da3$f07d...@news.astraweb.com
>> nothermark wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd drill anywhere we could find oil. That said it is one thing that
>>> has been accomplished.
>>
>> Well, which is it? "use up foreign oil rather than ours" or "drill
>> anywhere we could find oil"? Trying to follow you is like trying to
>> push a marble up the wall on the point of a needle.
>
> SuperGlue - available at better WalMarts everywhere...
Do I apply it to his brain or mine?
K Miller
Both Then following should be easy.
--
"Heresy makes for progress". - Hypatia Bonner
bill horne
> "bill horne"<red...@rye.net> wrote in message
> news:4d03de64$0$12860$c3e8da3$4e33...@news.astraweb.com
>> K Miller wrote:
>>> "bill horne"<red...@rye.net> wrote in message
>>> news:4d03d51e$0$1186$c3e8da3$f07d...@news.astraweb.com
>>>> nothermark wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd drill anywhere we could find oil. That said it is one thing
>>>>> that has been accomplished.
>>>>
>>>> Well, which is it? "use up foreign oil rather than ours" or "drill
>>>> anywhere we could find oil"? Trying to follow you is like trying to
>>>> push a marble up the wall on the point of a needle.
>>>
>>> SuperGlue - available at better WalMarts everywhere...
>>
>> Do I apply it to his brain or mine?
>
> Both Then following should be easy.
>
crap. I'm already entropying too fast.
nothermark
wrote:
My personal opinion is that I'd drill more now.
The reason is bcause I think we will eventually get so desperate that
we will drill at some time. I don't think we had the technology 50
years ago and I don't think we will have the time to be as safe as we
can be now in 50 years. This is the time to get at the sensitive
areas.
As a separate topic.
one of the things the DoE has managed to do is not drill a lot of
places where we know oil exists but we do not drill for political
reasons. One result of this is that the oil is still there to drill.
We can argue whether that was good planning or pure stupidity
pandering to political issues over practical reality all day. It
really does not matter from my perspective. A result is that the oil
can now be drilled by us and for us.
I don't see a conflict of opinion. If you do please point it out.
bill horne
So "use up foreign oil rather than ours" was not your opinion? Whose
was it?
nothermark
wrote:
It was not an opinion, it is an observation shared by many people. A
question many of us have about the drilling bans is whether smart
folks are saving our oil or whether stupid folks are screwing things
up. Either way we are sucking up other peoples oil while leaving ours
in the ground.
Many of us also think that at some time the oil will get so valuable
that we will eventually drill. The question is whether it will be a
panic "damn the torpedo's" approach or the slow and careful job we
could do now.
The thing that will save us, or at least postpone things many more
years, will be if the DoE suceeds in finding an alternative to
internal combustion engines using petroleum fuel. I'm not holding my
breath on that one as most of the plans I have heard of still use
petroleum as the feedstock to make hydrogen or electricity.