Michele Bachmann exposes $105 billion in hidden Obamacare funding

**AetheLove** · 03-09-11, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Ill make you deal. They can keep the same size budget homeland security gets apply it to health care and scrap homeland security. Its a worthless entity to begin with.

Common ground. Who'da thought we'd find it in the Drama Forum? :)

Some quick Wikipediaing shows a few snags. First, the TSA is running about 8 billion a year. Let's engage ourselves even more deeply into this fantasy and say that we believe the Honourable Representative Bachmann - we need more than 8.

But you're willing to ditch the entire DHS? If that's the case, we're way more than covered. DHS is spending something on the order of 55 billion a year. With that sorta scratch, and your blessings, we've just put the Public Option back on the table.

Couple of problems. The DHS isn't only in charge of annoying citizens who travel. They have to annoy a lot of other folk too, including foreigners. Ditching DHS means we also lose (top of my head): Border patrol, Immigration, Customs, the Coast Guard, and FEMA.

I know a Border Patrol agent. He's a nice guy. Maybe we should keep a few of them around. Same thing with the customs guys - who is going to collect the money I owe when I bring alcohol and tobacco products back from Canada?

The Coast Guard provides a lot of great video footage to cable tv disaster shows. That's a public service I know we can all stand behind.

Anyway - yeah, the 8 billion from TSA, plus maybe another 10 we squeeze from the balance of DHS, and we're already fully-funding Bachmann's Nightmare (which, I think, is a great name for the bill to put all this into law) AND have a bonus 8 billion for...

... um ...

I dunno. Ongoing research into home aquariums and subsidized on-line fragging for disadvantaged children?

TPG could get funding for a pilot program.

Cheers,

AetheLove

**Red_Lizard2** · 03-09-11, 08:03 PM

Getting rid of the social security cap could help some, at the very least we would have a massive surplus for SS for years to come.

**deathgodusmc** · 03-09-11, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by AetheLove

Common ground. Who'da thought we'd find it in the Drama Forum?

Some quick Wikipediaing shows a few snags. First, the TSA is running about 8 billion a year. Let's engage ourselves even more deeply into this fantasy and say that we believe the Honourable Representative Bachmann - we need more than 8.

But you're willing to ditch the entire DHS? If that's the case, we're way more than covered. DHS is spending something on the order of 55 billion a year. With that sorta scratch, and your blessings, we've just put the Public Option back on the table.

Couple of problems. The DHS isn't only in charge of annoying citizens who travel. They have to annoy a lot of other folk too, including foreigners. Ditching DHS means we also lose (top of my head): Border patrol, Immigration, Customs, the Coast Guard, and FEMA.

I know a Border Patrol agent. He's a nice guy. Maybe we should keep a few of them around. Same thing with the customs guys - who is going to collect the money I owe when I bring alcohol and tobacco products back from Canada?

The Coast Guard provides a lot of great video footage to cable tv disaster shows. That's a public service I know we can all stand behind.

Anyway - yeah, the 8 billion from TSA, plus maybe another 10 we squeeze from the balance of DHS, and we're already fully-funding Bachmann's Nightmare (which, I think, is a great name for the bill to put all this into law) AND have a bonus 8 billion for...

... um ...

I dunno. Ongoing research into home aquariums and subsidized on-line fragging for disadvantaged children?

TPG could get funding for a pilot program.

Cheers,

AetheLove

Your putting to much faith into what they do. Remember we ran just fine prior to the the launch of Homeland security. You put things back the way they were and force those agencies like the fbi, cia, nsa, and so forth to actually work together instead of trying to one up each other. Which if you remember is why 9-11 happened in the first place. The intel was there just in different locations.

Maybe i'm missing something but if anyone can think of why we need a completely seperate agency to do a job that was being done prior to by all means speak up. As far as i can tell the whole division is just a huge waste of money.

**AetheLove** · 03-09-11, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Your putting to much faith into what they do. Remember we ran just fine prior to the the launch of Homeland security.

[...]

As far as i can tell the whole division is just a huge waste of money.

I don't know about faith. But Coast Guard, Border Patrol, Customs, FEMA, INS, etc all existed before the Department of Homeland Security. They all got shoved under the DHS umbrella (and budget) along with the creation of the TSA (and whatever else). I'm fine un-bundling them (though no one is calling me up for advice on it), but I'm thinking that some of the DHS's budget goes for things most of us want. The Coast Guard has been around for a long time. I think they do good work. It's not their fault their budget got moved under someone else's line-item in 2002.

Cheers,

AetheLove

**deathgodusmc** · 03-09-11, 11:21 PM

Come to think of it why do we need seperate agencies to do this shit anyway? Wouldn't it be more effective to have one? Put them in the same building working together under a different acronym and avoid all the bullshit red tape they put infront of each other.

**deathgodusmc** · 03-09-11, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I don't know about faith. But Coast Guard, Border Patrol, Customs, FEMA, INS, etc all existed before the Department of Homeland Security. They all got shoved under the DHS umbrella (and budget) along with the creation of the TSA (and whatever else). I'm fine un-bundling them (though no one is calling me up for advice on it), but I'm thinking that some of the DHS's budget goes for things most of us want. The Coast Guard has been around for a long time. I think they do good work. It's not their fault their budget got moved under someone else's line-item in 2002.

Cheers,

AetheLove

I agree and im saying dismantle everything. Just put it back the way it was and you will still save billions every year. I actually think a nationwide health care system is a good idea but this bs about where to get the money is ridiculous. What we need is an accountant to run for president. Let him go through where all this money goes and get rid of worthless items. I've said dozens of times there is money that can be saved from the dod budget without sacrficing anything as far as troops, equipment, and research. The old joke about the government spending 10 thousand on a hammer isn't really a joke its reality and anyone whos been in the nalcomis system can verify that.

To me it wouldn't be cutting the dod budget by letting them do their own tool shopping at sears and so forth. Let them do that for year and see how much money gets retained in the budget. Then reduce it to what is a proper amount. Yes i know it is cutting the budget in reality but you wont miss the extra funds if you dont need them to buy your tools and equipment.

**AetheLove** · 03-09-11, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Come to think of it why do we need seperate agencies to do this shit anyway? Wouldn't it be more effective to have one? Put them in the same building working together under a different acronym and avoid all the bullshit red tape they put infront of each other.

I can think of lots of reasons why this hasn't happened, and why it would be bad if it did.

If you want more than one, I can extend the list. But the first item on the list should be good enough.

Why not combine all those agencies?

1) Too much power in one place.

Are there administrative inefficiencies to keeping separate agencies? I'd guess so. Do communications sometimes get crossed, is there extra red tape, do petty squabbles impede work? Probably.

But putting all foreign and domestic, military and civilian, powers for intelligence, counter-intelligence, investigation, cyber-warfare, law enforcement, strategic planning and analysis, etc, etc, under one roof would be the death of this country.

It might not happen right away, but I don't think it would take very long.

Pleasant Dreams,

AetheLove

**deathgodusmc** · 03-10-11, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I can think of lots of reasons why this hasn't happened, and why it would be bad if it did.

If you want more than one, I can extend the list. But the first item on the list should be good enough.

Why not combine all those agencies?

1) Too much power in one place.

Are there administrative inefficiencies to keeping separate agencies? I'd guess so. Do communications sometimes get crossed, is there extra red tape, do petty squabbles impede work? Probably.

But putting all foreign and domestic, military and civilian, powers for intelligence, counter-intelligence, investigation, cyber-warfare, law enforcement, strategic planning and analysis, etc, etc, under one roof would be the death of this country.

It might not happen right away, but I don't think it would take very long.

Pleasant Dreams,

AetheLove

I didn't look at it like that but i do see your point. In all honesty though how would it be different then it is already?