PDA

View Full Version : Economics Hope Boehner is right.


HonestChieffan
02-15-2011, 02:48 PM
Washington (CNN) – House Speaker John Boehner said Tuesday if some federal workers lose jobs because of Republican-proposed spending cuts, “so be it.” But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was quick to say “not so be it.”

“Over the last two years since President Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs and if some of those jobs are lost in this, so be it,” Boehner said during a news conference with reporters at the Republican National Committee. “We’re broke! It’s time for us to get serious about how we’re spending the nation’s money.”

Boehner, who was joined by other House Republican leaders, criticized the President’s budget proposal for not cutting enough and said Republicans would address entitlement reform when they release their budget blueprint this spring.

“Republicans will not punt,” said Boehner. “Everything’s on the table. We will put forward a budget that deals with the big challenges that face our country…I have no doubts that all of these issues [Social Security and Medicare] will be on the table.”

bobbymitch
02-15-2011, 03:18 PM
With over 2.7 million civilian employees, I am sure they could find some areas to "right-size."

FD
02-15-2011, 03:57 PM
Yes, because the number of government employees has "exploded" recently :rolleyes:

The chart below shows the share of the population working for the government, the blip last year was the census:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&chart_type=line&graph_id=&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&ts=8&preserve_ratio=true&fo=ve&id=CNP16OV_USGOVT&transformation=lin_lin&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=1982-01-01&coed=2011-01-01&line_color=%230000FF&link_values=&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&line_style=Solid&lw=1&vintage_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&revision_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&mma=0&nd=_&ost=&oet=&fml=b%2Fa&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin

HonestChieffan
02-15-2011, 04:00 PM
Yes, because the number of government employees has "exploded" recently :rolleyes:

The chart below shows the share of the population working for the government, the blip last year was the census:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&chart_type=line&graph_id=&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&ts=8&preserve_ratio=true&fo=ve&id=CNP16OV_USGOVT&transformation=lin_lin&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=1982-01-01&coed=2011-01-01&line_color=%230000FF&link_values=&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&line_style=Solid&lw=1&vintage_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&revision_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&mma=0&nd=_&ost=&oet=&fml=b%2Fa&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin


WTF? You think its a % game?

go bowe
02-15-2011, 04:03 PM
WTF? You think its a % game?well, it ain't texas holdem...

FD
02-15-2011, 04:04 PM
WTF? You think its a % game?

I thought the percentage was a more accurate picture considering population growth. But if you prefer, heres total number of government employees (again, the blip is the census):

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&chart_type=line&graph_id=&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&ts=8&preserve_ratio=true&fo=ve&id=CNP16OV_USGOVT&transformation=lin_lin&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=2000-01-01&coed=2011-01-01&line_color=%230000FF&link_values=&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&line_style=Solid&lw=1&vintage_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&revision_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&mma=0&nd=_&ost=&oet=&fml=b&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin

Taco John
02-15-2011, 04:20 PM
I thought the percentage was a more accurate picture considering population growth. But if you prefer, heres total number of government employees (again, the blip is the census):

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&chart_type=line&graph_id=&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&ts=8&preserve_ratio=true&fo=ve&id=CNP16OV_USGOVT&transformation=lin_lin&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=2000-01-01&coed=2011-01-01&line_color=%230000FF&link_values=&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&line_style=Solid&lw=1&vintage_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&revision_date=2011-02-15_2011-02-15&mma=0&nd=_&ost=&oet=&fml=b&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin

Wow!

Where is my weed whacker?

Slainte
02-15-2011, 04:25 PM
Who the fuck's Hope Boehner? Does she have any tits...?thank you once again for the thousandth time, father George...

orange
02-15-2011, 04:25 PM
Well, at least a little piece of Ohio is safe:

No, He Wouldn’t—Would He?
House Speaker’s State May Get $450 Million Extra

SOURCE: AP/Alex Brandon

Leaders of the new majority in the House of Representatives promised to cut spending and eliminate earmarks. But House budget legislation filed Friday night contains a provision that looks very much like an earmark that would benefit the hometown and congressional district of Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), above.

By Scott Lilly | February 13, 2011

There are two things the leaders of the new majority in the House of Representatives have made clear since they began to assume the reins of power three months ago. They would:

■Cut spending
■Eliminate earmarks

Those two frequently repeated objectives are being translated into legislation in a 359-page bill filed on the House floor Friday evening—legislation that will be considered by the full House later this week without the benefit of hearings or even committee deliberation. As promised, the bill contains a breathtaking list of program cuts and terminations.

The bill would shred, among other things, the social safety net in hard-pressed localities across America with reductions in nutrition programs for infants and pregnant mothers. And it would cut federal support to keep destitute families from having their heat and electricity cut off during one of the coldest winters in recent memory. Preliminary analysis also indicates that Head Start programs may be forced to shut down a month early in many communities across the country. Finally, the bill would deliver a particularly hard blow to struggling local governments, canceling out billions of dollars in assistance to law enforcement, sewer construction, support of local schools, and so forth.

But buried deeply in these 359 pages of ugly surprises is a provision that would mean one community in America would do a lot better than all of the others. The legislation added an estimated $450 million for a particular bit of defense spending that the Department of Defense did not ask for and does not want.

The item is a down payment that would obligate the federal government to future payments that could well be three or four times the increased spending added to this particular piece of legislation, with a big portion of the funds flowing to two cities in Ohio—Cincinnati, where Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) grew up, and Dayton, the largest city in his congressional district.

The money will go to pay the costs to General Electric Co.’s General Electric Aviation unit and the British-owned Rolls Royce Group for their development of an engine for the new Joint Strike Fighter aircraft—money that looks, feels, and smells very much like an earmark.

Should the Department of Defense end up paying the two companies to develop the engine it is hoped that they will then buy significant numbers of them for the aircraft. The problem that the Pentagon has with this plan for using tax dollars is that they already have an engine for the plane—an engine that was decided on when the contract for production of the plane was agreed to 10 years ago.

But that does not deter union leaders, company executives, and local government officials in Dayton and Cincinnati from arguing their case. At a rally held at one of GE’s Ohio facilities last October, the company announced the addition of 500 new jobs at the Cincinnati and Dayton plants and emphasized the importance of congressional action to override Pentagon objections to the program. A story from the October 22 edition of the Dayton Business Journal entitled “GE’s fighter engine ‘a huge issue’ for Tri-State economy” reported:

The Pentagon insists GE’s second engine isn’t needed, that it has no use for it, and that further development is a waste of money. But the engine’s supporters in Congress—and Evendale, where GE employs more than 7,000—beg to differ...“It’s a huge issue. There’s a lot at risk here,” said Gary Jordan, president of United Aerospace Workers Local 647.

The increased funding added to the new House budget bill was done in a manner even more “stealthy” than the plane that the would-be engine hopes to power. It is believed to be mixed in with much larger spending totals in one or more of the bill’s military research and development accounts.

Appropriations Defense Subcommittee Chairman Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-FL) conceded to Reuters on Friday that "the bill that we're going to deal with next week has the money in it," referring to the GE-Rolls Royce engine.

The local political sensitivity on this issue is so strong that it was repeatedly rumored that assurances on the second engine were being offered by competing candidates during the contest in the House last December to determine the new chairman of the full appropriations committee. Whether or not Rep. Boehner can leverage the White House into signing legislation that contains a major spending increase that neither President Barack Obama nor the Pentagon favors, the mere existence of the spending program in the House bill would seem to significantly tarnish the commitment of Rep. Boehner and his colleagues in the House to spending cuts and the end to earmarking.

Scott Lilly is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/02/boehner_earmark.html

http://static.rateyourmusic.com/album_images/f1db0f7d2e39c6dc3e2d0adf8397e9d7/2304671.jpg

bobbymitch
02-15-2011, 04:31 PM
If one counts the total number of civilian employees employed by the federal, state, and local governments it works out 1 out 13 of the total US population. At least back in 2007.

WV
02-15-2011, 05:59 PM
Boy I hope so too, because this is where the most money is wasted damnit....Statements like these are merely for shock value because of how Federal Employees are villianized and made into talking points.

The funniest part is even this wonderful pay freeze that's been implemented is merely a drop in the bucket. Again Federal employees are easy marks.

Oh and here's the part that was left out......
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi seized on Boehner's comments in a speech on the floor, saying Republicans' proposed cuts would leave many in the cold.

"Democrats do not subscribe to Speaker Boehner's verdict that if jobs are lost in this continuing resolution, so be it," Pelosi said. "Maybe so be it for him. But not so be it for the people who are losing their jobs."

Asked at a news conference about Boehner's comments about federal workers, New Jersey Democrat Rob Andrews pounced.

"What I'd wonder – so what if it's air traffic controllers that make the skies safe? So what if it's FBI personnel working in labs that do DNA testing of suspects? So what if it's border security officers keeping people from getting into the country illegally? So what if it's USDA meat inspectors that make sure our food supply is safe? So what if it's people who test the cleanliness of our drinking water or test for radioactivity in our land?"



I personally think they should start in the House and Congress....no bigger example of Government waste than the majority of these clowns.