A different perspective...
-
Good, interesting article. It underscores that the war on federal employees (of which there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit) doesn't really have an impact. I loved the phrase "the federal government is just a medical insurance company with an army".
Here's the chart in the article btw. Not sure how this would impact individuals, but it's a roadmap of sorts. What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt. Minimize impact but get on a trajectory for fiscal health.
-
The idea of getting the voting public informed on how their government really works is probably the most interesting part. Federal procurement processes, meant to be impartial, are anything but. Revenue sharing just means that, like it used to be in Ohio, localities are living off OPM. Your citizens want to be a municipality? Cough up locally. If you can't support it locally it needs to be folded in to a larger entity.
-
Good, interesting article. It underscores that the war on federal employees (of which there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit) doesn't really have an impact. I loved the phrase "the federal government is just a medical insurance company with an army".
Here's the chart in the article btw. Not sure how this would impact individuals, but it's a roadmap of sorts. What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt. Minimize impact but get on a trajectory for fiscal health.
@89th said in A different perspective...:
Good, interesting article. It underscores that the war on federal employees (of which there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit) doesn't really have an impact. I loved the phrase "the federal government is just a medical insurance company with an army".
Here's the chart in the article btw. Not sure how this would impact individuals, but it's a roadmap of sorts. What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt. Minimize impact but get on a trajectory for fiscal health.
A few comments. ...
- I think we can cut the Federal workforce by 10-15% and it wouldn't be noticeable. But that means we have to take a very hard look at responsibilities and overlap of services.
- Medicare Advantage needs reform. It's great for some people, but all the eye candy is simply marketing. They're really just HMOs, so educate the public into thinking of them as such. TINSTAAFL.
- The Social Security cap has to go.
More to come...
-
It’s pretty simple. The Federal budget needs to be set at a percentage of GDP. Any deficit spending requires equivalent cuts elsewhere OR congressional approval.
The Brad
-
Medicare physician reimbursement has not kept up with inflation in more than 20 years. What does line 2 propose to do?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Good, interesting article. It underscores that the war on federal employees (of which there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit) doesn't really have an impact. I loved the phrase "the federal government is just a medical insurance company with an army".
Here's the chart in the article btw. Not sure how this would impact individuals, but it's a roadmap of sorts. What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt. Minimize impact but get on a trajectory for fiscal health.
@89th said in A different perspective...:
there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit
That's Congressman Jack Shit to you!
-
Medicare physician reimbursement has not kept up with inflation in more than 20 years. What does line 2 propose to do?
-
It’s pretty simple. The Federal budget needs to be set at a percentage of GDP. Any deficit spending requires equivalent cuts elsewhere OR congressional approval.
@LuFins-Dad said in A different perspective...:
The Federal budget needs to be set at a percentage of GDP.
There goes Keynesian economics and the nearly century of stability and prosperity that come with it.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in A different perspective...:
The Federal budget needs to be set at a percentage of GDP.
There goes Keynesian economics and the nearly century of stability and prosperity that come with it.
@Axtremus said in A different perspective...:
@LuFins-Dad said in A different perspective...:
The Federal budget needs to be set at a percentage of GDP.
There goes Keynesian economics and the nearly century of stability and prosperity that come with it.
Forgot about the deficit?
-
Good, interesting article. It underscores that the war on federal employees (of which there are many doing great jobs, but also many doing jack shit) doesn't really have an impact. I loved the phrase "the federal government is just a medical insurance company with an army".
Here's the chart in the article btw. Not sure how this would impact individuals, but it's a roadmap of sorts. What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt. Minimize impact but get on a trajectory for fiscal health.
@89th said in A different perspective...:
What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt.
For me, the problem is that most most of the politicians do not want to take a long term viewpoint. They are too worried about the next election. So, while the above makes sense, hard to get them to do it.
-
@89th said in A different perspective...:
What they really need to do is pass a 20-year plan to reduce spending, deficit, and debt.
For me, the problem is that most most of the politicians do not want to take a long term viewpoint. They are too worried about the next election. So, while the above makes sense, hard to get them to do it.
@taiwan_girl Exactly, the blessing and curse of short terms. This is where I would hope Trump would step up and say "here is a 12 year plan to get our financials in order" (yes that takes it through two terms for Vance).
