Taxes: Our Government - How Much Longer Can It Last?

[bullet maker]

Well hold onto your shoe laces Brett, cause we are going to do civics class 3, and it will give you heart burn.

AIRCRAFT,GOVERNMENT The High Status Skies :gulp:

The United States Government owns and operates 1200 airplanes, with pilots, airfields, mechanics, and all that`s needed to keep them aloft. (this survey done in 1992), they may own more know, :?
   So? Every country needs an air force to protect itself, doesn`t it? Since when are military aircraft a novelty?
   But these are not military planes. These are civilian aircraft of 100 different varieties owned and operated by civilian government agencies like the Departments of Energy and Transportation. Their purpose? Mainly to fly their executives and employees around the country with out their having to suffer the inconvenience of mixing with the sweaty taxpaying public. :twisted:
   Piloted private planes have become an exalted status symbol among Washington bureaucrats. They`re also a great waste of money. Even usually understated government auditors are aghast: (Federal ownership of planes is inefficient and wasteful), says a General Accounting Office report.
    But typically, nothing has been done to halt this near secret boondoggle. Bureaucrats continue to slide Cessnas and Gulfstreams into their budgets by falsely claiming that the plane is needed for a technical MISSION.  :wink: Say the auditors: Some agencies classify certain aircraft as mission-related even though the aircraft are used primarily to provide transportation or to keep their pilots qualified.
   In reality, federal executives use the aircraft not only to fly themselves and employees on business, but to transport their parties to convention resorts and other destirable destination. :roll:
   checking on two Department of Transportation planes, the auditors found that their use for routine transportation was not justified: commercial travel would have been cheaper: flights were made with only a few passengers on board: and the planes were used to fly high ranking bureaucrts and Coast Guard officials---often with their spouses and guests---on trips in the U.S. and even overseas. :eek:
    Can this misuse of taxpayer money be halted? First, that requires that someone actually be in charge of the government, which as we shall see (CHIEF EXECUTIVE) is not the case. In Washington, everyone fends, and plots, for himself. For example, when the inspector General of the Department of Energy advised the Bonneville Power Authority that buying a new aircraft would violat government guidelines, the BPA wnet ahead and bought the plane anyway.
   How expensive is this craving for the bureaucrat`s ultimate status symbol?  :shock: very, The cost of the aircraft has been extimated at 2 billion  :shock: yes thats $2 billion dollars. The depreciation runs at least $200 million a year. The annual upkeep costs another $800 million. There`s also the added cost of civilian airports and military bases that accommodate the planes. And if that`s not enough, government agencies lease still another 5000 private planes each year at a cost of $100 million, :twisted:  :twisted:
   Because the planes are not standardized, each different model--from over 25 different manufacturers--requires its own specially trained pilot, mechanics, and individual spare parts, raising the cost even further.
   The tariff runs the taxpayer well over a billion dollars a year, a figure that will grow considerably as the old planes are replaced by new ones.
THE SOLUTION;
    Sell off most of the aircraft and put the proceeds into the Treasure. We`ll also save the billion dollars in annual upkeep.
    And as the late Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen of Illinois used to remind us: "A BILLION HERE AND A BILLION THERE, AND SOON YOU`RE TALKING ABOUT REAL MONEY'. :-D  :-D

With all that wasted money, they could build a decent railroad out of amtrak, make them use it along with us ordinary people and save on gas.
   
   People, its time we took back our government, if they don`t like it, let em quit, I`m sure there`s lots of hard working people that would love to have their jobs, and stay in the budget.


bullet maker  

[williamlayton]

HUMMMMMM! Well now, lets see what we have here.
I am assuming, from all post, that everyone who has posted is 1) self- employed. 2) Independent of anyone else. 3) Completely independent of needing anyone else.  4) Not desirous of needing anyone else. 5) Has the wherewithal to be independent of anyone else. 6) Has a plan for all to be as self-dependent and prosperous as he/she. 7) Has no desire for roads, bridges, national defense, government to regulate those who would take advantage of anyone who could not defend themselves, strive to preserve any symbol of order. Is in favor of every body for theirownselves. 9) Thinks there is some place in this world where they have their act together enough to offer all these things without any government.
Godd rantings folks, poor thought.
Blessings

[bullet maker]

HUMMMMMM! Well now, lets see what we have here.
I am assuming, from all post, that everyone who has posted is 1) self- employed. 2) Independent of anyone else. 3) Completely independent of needing anyone else.  4) Not desirous of needing anyone else. 5) Has the wherewithal to be independent of anyone else. 6) Has a plan for all to be as self-dependent and prosperous as he/she. 7) Has no desire for roads, bridges, national defense, government to regulate those who would take advantage of anyone who could not defend themselves, strive to preserve any symbol of order. Is in favor of every body for theirownselves. 9) Thinks there is some place in this world where they have their act together enough to offer all these things without any government.
Godd rantings folks, poor thought.
Blessings

Hi Williamlayton

  Not the thought at all. What is being said is that the above mentioned government help----needs to be more regulated by us---the taxpayers, and voters.   Read my above post , and I have shown what has happened to us, and the waste, that causes our taxes to be to high. Nobody said we don`t need the above mentioned services---just that it needs to be more watched, and approved by the voters.

bullet maker

[RIFLERANGER]

HUMMMMMM! Well now, lets see what we have here.
I am assuming, from all post, that everyone who has posted is 1) self- employed. 2) Independent of anyone else. 3) Completely independent of needing anyone else.  4) Not desirous of needing anyone else. 5) Has the wherewithal to be independent of anyone else. 6) Has a plan for all to be as self-dependent and prosperous as he/she. 7) Has no desire for roads, bridges, national defense, government to regulate those who would take advantage of anyone who could not defend themselves, strive to preserve any symbol of order. Is in favor of every body for theirownselves. 9) Thinks there is some place in this world where they have their act together enough to offer all these things without any government.
Godd rantings folks, poor thought.
Blessings

Bill, sorry, but you are WAY off the mark.
We know we need government, roads, defense, etc.
But as stated, we need efficiency and thrift when it comes to OUR tax dollars.  
It has become way too easy for those in power to abuse their office.  It is too easy to spend money that isn't theirs.  It is too easy to waste the money that is spent.
I am willing to bet my left AND right one that if people who really gave a crap ran the government, state, federal, and local, that we could probably reduce our tax liability to around 10 % of our incomes accross the board.
Welfare, medicare, and pork need to be adjusted and a whole slew of other changes need to be made clear across the board, but it can and should be done.
How healthy can our economy possibly be when all we seem to be doing is working to pay taxes so that others who supposedly represent us simply piss it away without so much as a thought of how they could spend it more efficiently.
I am still haunted by $900 hammers and $600 toilet seats.
Don't think for one second that someone who had no entitlement to our money lined their bank accounts with this egregious and sinful and unlawful action.
When we did have that brief period of surplus, we should have gotten refunds plain and simple.
I think what we are saying is that we are all pissed off about how things are being run and we are just trying to figure out the best possible way to fix these problems, and no, voting isn't the answer.
They ALL know how to tax and spend and our government has become no more than a money vacuum.

Ranger

[Mauser]

Mr Layton:

Respectfully, what you offer here is really a false choice.  You can't be serious that you think that if govt spent less and we were taxed less that we would cease to have functioning roads, bridges, etc?  Have you ever looked at what govt at all levels spends our money on these days?

Obviously no one is as autonomous as you would have us believe a person would have to be to want responsible govt spending (and regulations).  One doesn't have to live in a cave in Alaska to think maybe that its a little ridiculous that a typical middle-class person works until mid May to pay off the govt each year before they bring home the first dollar their family can keep.  I'm a middle class guy, and I'm sweating my kid's educations and my retirement while paying for those of other people and being told they are ENTITLED to it.  Maybe people could be a little more autonomous if the govt got off our backs somewhat.

I love these arguments.  For example, I especially love the claims by those who support the tens of millions we spend on the Nat'l endowment for the Arts annually that without it there won't be any art.  There are literally thousands of examples like this just at the Federal level.

[williamlayton]

I was merely responding to the general thought I observed. I responded in the way I did because I saw precious little objective alternatives presented and only general rantings.
How much of the Government is taking up paychecks in the armed forces, the Law enforcement groups we require. This is a large and complex country we have and it cannot be operated by a few people behind a desk, some computers and cell phones. If one thinks about this, folks would really be up in arms if they could not do business with the government when needed.
Blessings

[bullet maker]

I was merely responding to the general thought I observed. I responded in the way I did because I saw precious little objective alternatives presented and only general rantings.
How much of the Government is taking up paychecks in the armed forces, the Law enforcement groups we require. This is a large and complex country we have and it cannot be operated by a few people behind a desk, some computers and cell phones. If one thinks about this, folks would really be up in arms if they could not do business with the government when needed.
Blessings[/quote

Hi Williamlayton
   Its not general rantings, I`m presenting you with the facts. read on.

CIVICS CLASS 4

     LIKE IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE? :?
Maybe Washington knows something that has passed most real-estate people by. While the commercial office building business is in the worst shape in thirty years, the federal government is constructing like mad, expanding its inventory of thousands of buildings. The real-estate section of the Sunday edition of the New York Times recently featured a story on the government building boom in Washington and even Philadelphia. Bureaucrats everywhere like to build, but it`s an obsession with the U.S. government.
    When a developer in the private sector decides to construct an office building, he has to worry about costs, overruns, overtime, depreciation, taxes, then finally the state of the economy and his ability to rent the building.  The GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, which handles our government buildings, has no such worries. They merely build, often with overruns, then automatically (RENT), the space to federal agencies, regardless of any market climate.
    The GSA, presently holds 15 million square feet of vacant space in thousands of federal buildings. Still, they`re on their usual construction spree. This is in addition to the $2 billion the government spent in 1992 to lease office space in private buildings all over the nation.`
   Under the budget heading (NEW CONSTRUCTION) :roll: are more than 50 entries that add up to $5 Billion. :eek:
   The projects include: a new $22 million lab for the U.S. Geological Survey: a $38 million FBI field office: a $50 million Department of Transportation headquarters: a $25 million U.S. Courthouse in Louisiana: a $182 million Federal Building in Boston: a $21 million dollar Courthouse in Prince Georges County in the Washington suburb: a $69 million Federal Building and Courthouse annex in Minneapolis: a $33 million Courthouse annex in Oregon: an $81 million Federal Building in West Virginia: a new Naval Command Center for a quarter Billion dollars in Virginia: and so on, and so on. :twisted:
    The GSA spent another billion that year for repairs and alterations, including $1.6 million for building no. 6 at the World Trade Center--a structure the government doesn`t even own. :shock:
    But the real surprises in this expensive package are the generous building gifts from Uncle Sam to scores of private institutions. They range from the Forestry Science Complex at Northern Arizona University ($4.5 million) to a computer center at Iowa State University ($2.2 million) to a Primate Research Institute in Alamogordo, New Mexico ($4 million), in addition to others for a total of almost $100 million.
    When queried about GSA support for these private buildings, a high-ranking official of the General Services Administration was nonplussed.
(I know absolutely nothing about them), he said embarrassed. (These appropriations were passed by Congress and all we do here is write the checks.)  BUT ON OUR BANK ACCOUNTS? :twisted:
    Is there a solution to the irresponsible building frenzy by the government? Yes.
   (1) Place a five-year freeze on all new construction.
   (2) Outlaw building grants to private organizations.
   (3) Follow the suggestion of a government auditor: Why not, he asked, "take the government employees out of the expensive leased space and move them into the dozens of military installations we`re closing down? We`ll save a fortune in rent." :idea2:
Now that`s an idea.

bullet maker

[RupertBear]

Here's another little known "government waste" of our tax dollars.

Each dept is given a certain budget, and they HAVE to spend that entire budget or get less $$ the next year. So, when it comes time for the budget year to end, every "spare" $$ is spent (usually on unneeded items) just so that they can say they used their entire budget.

As an example, I worked in the contracting office of an Air Force base that was within one year of closing. My office has a $70,000 annual budget. When it came to Sept and closing of the fiscal year, all excess funds were given to the base commander to spend, as he saw fit. There were a lot of new chairs and desks, etc bought that in one year would be sold for $0.10 on the dollar as surplus.

Can you imagine every federal office doing the same? How many millions of $$ a year is wasted this way.

[BamBams]

That is absolutely correct Rupert!

And the game of "missions" is correct also.  When I worked as a Fed, I couldn't even count the number of plane trips we made under the guise of "Off Station Training" just so the pilot could check on some real estate of his, visit family, etc etc.  Of course, we'd always incorporate "some" mission activities to make it all legit.  By the way, I was not the person who made these decisions.

[williamlayton]

Well, there are some good obsevations here.
I would agree that there are good cases for inept management, and BTW, this budget spending is not limited to the government alone, big business does the same---must be some retired government managers running the show on this one.
It is those we elect that direct and departments are required to follow these directions.
Best we elect some qualified legislators--bet ya could if you wanted--it would take some work, but, bet ya could.
I would still like to see a count of all who would scream and rant but never vote. Might be as surprising as being dumbfounded in heaven as to who IS NOT there.
Blessings

[bullet maker]

Here's another little known "government waste" of our tax dollars.

Each dept is given a certain budget, and they HAVE to spend that entire budget or get less $$ the next year. So, when it comes time for the budget year to end, every "spare" $$ is spent (usually on unneeded items) just so that they can say they used their entire budget.

As an example, I worked in the contracting office of an Air Force base that was within one year of closing. My office has a $70,000 annual budget. When it came to Sept and closing of the fiscal year, all excess funds were given to the base commander to spend, as he saw fit. There were a lot of new chairs and desks, etc bought that in one year would be sold for $0.10 on the dollar as surplus.


Can you imagine every federal office doing the same? How many millions of $$ a year is wasted this way.

Exactly RupertBear    here`s a classic example and true story.

Civics class 5

We`ve got $49,000 left in our travel budget, a government bureaucrat confided in a travel agency. "Get us some meetings. We`ll figure out what they`re about later." :shock:
   This startling quote is taken from the careful research of Congressman Lamar Smith, Rupublican of Texas. Smith has been studying government travel expenses, something that is impossible to pin down in the cleverly obfuscated federal budget where there is no such category. (too easy to check up on.) The figure he has come up with is a startling $7 billion a year, about as much as we spend on Head Start, the Ntional Science Foundation, and School lunches combined. :shock: Remeber when they wanted to cut down on school lunch programs, for the needed :cry:
  The Congressional Budget Office adds that in 1991, federal travel cost rose 11.5% in just one year. As one travel supervisor told Smith: "There`s plenty of fluff in that budget." :x
   There is no greater perk for a bureaucrat than the exhilarating privildge (though he believes it is a "right") to get out of the office and travel to some distant point on the government`s tab---often to a convention meeting or seminar held in a resort area.  :evil:  In fact, during the last month of the fiscal year, as the opening quote indicates, a travel frenzy seizes the federal agencies, which must spend the money or return it to the Treasury.
   During that month, ther are rush bookings to such popular spots as Las Vegas and Palm Springs, Smith learned. "We found that supervisors assigned travel dollars to employees to spend before the end of the year," says the hard-nosed Texan. The fcts back him up. During the last month of the fiscal year, there was a 48% increase in government travel. He estimates tht the taxpayers will lose $1.6 billion just from this last-minute travel stampede.
    The whole question of civil servants traveling about the country so freely, and for free, is an issue Congress and the President must address. Judging from other excesses, a conservative guess would be that 50% of it is unnecessary and wasteful.

THE SOLUTION:
1----Make year-end travel over the usual allotment illegal.
 
2----Re-educate the agency chiefs on how not to travel at government expense.

3----Cut the travel budget from $7 billion to $4 Billion, and immediate savings of $3 billion. :wink:  Then look at the allotment again in a few years to see if it can be reduced further.

   The Washington Establishment has been up in the air long enough. It`s time to bring them rudely down to earth---but not into Palm Springs. :twisted:

[RIFLERANGER]

Agreed, but how !!!!!!

[BamBams]

That's just it.  There is no "how."  It ain't gonna happen.  Lot's of people "see" what the problems are - heck they are pretty obvious, but there is no stopping it short of a complete government collapse and rebuild which will only happen when the working class of American citizens are reduced to slaves once again.

[RIFLERANGER]

We ain't far from it.
Not far at all........

Ranger

[BamBams]

Sad isn't it?  The same government that was intended to empower the people, has instead, empowered itself beyond belief, and made the "people" much anemic.  We'll continue to feed the monster with each paycheck until it get's so fat that only thing left in America IS government, and the slaves that feed it.

[Brett]

What are going to do when everybody is on the government teat and there is no one left to feed the cow? :eek:

[RIFLERANGER]

As I have stated dozens of times, if not for the wife and four small children, I would have started the next revolution myself.
At this point, I am waiting for the revolution to start, at which point, I will jump in with both feet.
If, and this is a big if, EVERY gun owner joined in, I can't imagine the government not finally introspecting and either fixing itself IMMEDIATELY, or face a coup.  We can fix our problems without most of the politicians.
As powerful as our military is, there are how many MILLIONS of gun owners and how many hundreds of thousands of troops ?
If we took our government back the hard way, the troops, without financing, even if ALL of them were to obey the government and try to put us down, will not be able to function and they will be grossly outnumbered.  They couldn't win.
Assuming of course, that ALL gun owners would be brave enough to join the fight.
As far as I can see, this is the ONLY way to fix our problems.  Let there be no doubt that historically speaking, our government will fail all by itself if left to its own devices.
The more it gets, the more it wants, and it will only be ugly no matter which way it ends.
Ranger

[BamBams]

If there's going to be a revolution, I doubt that anyone here will see it happen in their lifetimes.  So far, the government has cracked down on all militia groups they have felt threatened by.  They cracked down on Wacko, and we all know what happened to those poor children there.  It's gotta be one of the saddest things to ever happen in this country.

Personally, I don't see a revolution happening.  There is no way to organize such a thing in a country with a government that is this pervasive and intrusive.

I just see it all falling apart eventually.  So many people are being put out of work, and soon, the government funds will diminish.

[RIFLERANGER]

Waco was not a threatening militia group.  They broke laws and disregarded orders afterwards.
Granted, what our government did to them and on Ruby Ridge was wrong, but they weren't nearly afraid of a takeover.
Nor were either of these groups a sufficient force.
I think 10 million gun owners might change the odds a bit.
Just my humble one.
You are right though, as good as our empire is, it will collapse just like all the rest before it.
What a shame.
Ranger

[Brett]

Be careful what you say, big brother is watching you.  :shock:  

[fe352v8]

This stuff sounds pretty left wing.  Is there such a thing as a left wing conservative?  Folks I am sef-employed, after some "aggressive" tax accounting Uncle Sugar takes about 42% (includes self employment tax) of the gross and the state gets another 4%.  I think of the Government is like an ex-wife, could not stand living with her, and now cannot afford living without her.

life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

[bullet maker]

Well guy`s here`s another one that you probably didn`t know.
It seems our  bigbrothers, passed a law about 2 years ago, that in essence say`s , you have to have worked 5 of the last 10 years to get social security. If you havent due to illness or whatever else that prevented you from working 5 of you last 10 years, you get nothing.
   You see my wife was diagnosed with COPD. It`s a breathing problem and she has to have an oxygen machine, and such. This was diagnosed about 3 years ago, and being good taxpaying Americans, we didn`t try to get her on SS, because she thought she would improve with a little time and rest. Now she worked for 33 years, but because she hasn`t worked the last 5 out of 10, ----she don`t get squat. :twisted: ---That`s OK, cause she will get part of my RailRoad retirement when I reach 62. But think of all of the American Taxpayers, that can`t work but have been working all their life paying into the system, and then when they reach their retirement age, find out they get nothing. :twisted:

   This is a true story, I`m not pulling anyone`s leg, it happened to us. And you-all should let your loved ones know about this fraud, or anyone that may be affected by this new law.


bullet maker

[Brett]

Yep, and the Dumbocraps are warning us not to trust our retirement funds in the Presidents 'market investment plan' because it is 'too risky, we might loose everything.'   Like it's not happening under the existing SS system.

[Num_1_Dad]

Our new bimbo Governer wants to raise cigarette taxes $2.00 a pack so she can fix the roads.  :?  Go figure, I thought that was what my vehicle & property taxes were for.

Our's did raise it to $2.25 per pack I believe. Michigan is now 2nd place for having the highest base tax on cigs., and it was done with a threat that if the cig. taxes did not go up, schools would lose money!!! How low is that!!!!

But the kicker is when I buy cigs, I also pay another 6% tax, which means I am paying a tax-on-a-tax!!! Cigs. cost around $4.50 plus tax per pack, which $2.25 is a tax. Almost the same with gas, as there is a Federal tax, then a State tax plus state sales tax for each gallon of gas.

[bgjohn]

We need to figure out how to tax illegal aliens and the United Nations.
JM :x

[Leverdude]

What we need is for a huge part of America to refuse to be abused by the government. I'm quite sure the policy makers for a long while have lost touch with what its like to be a mere working man in this country.

I do agree that any attempt to organize will be nipped in the bud rather quickly by the Gov't for self preservation.
They won't let it get past the local level as has been shown several times when local militias have been dragged thru the mud. I'm sure our gov't knows why militias are formed & see them as a threat.
The correct way they oughtta deal with it is to see why these people are unhappy with their government & take steps to give them the gov't they want, not brand them outlaw nutcases just because they are organizing in the way our constitution says they should.
Kinda stinks of tyranny dont it?

[RIFLERANGER]

Sure does.
That's why a massive mobilization would be necessary so there is no calling them nut cases.
That would bring sufficient attention and in turn, cause even more mobilization.
Gotta start somewhere.
Ranger

[Don Fischer]

Leverdude a huge part of america is not being abused by government. They are collecting on far to many social program's and the rest are employee's of government. If your boss gave you the deal they get, would you bite his hand? No!

I'm pretty sure that you guy's haven't even recognized the real enemy yet. It's you! The problem is that government see's what we let local and state government get away with and they go from there. Bring local and state government's into line and federal government will follow. You see we really are just a bunch of individuals, no organization. We are controlled at all level's by fear of loss.

Police, especially state police, are out of control. They are the goons of state government yet we keep patting them on the back. They do not enforce law's on one another unless someone does something they can't cover over. I was told by the state cop that run's the Madras, Ore post that reasonable cause is whatever they say it is!

How about fish & game? Most go out of their way to support them and in Oregon they're a big part of our problem's. How about OSHA, how could any organization be more detrimental than them. But we want a safe work place and we want goverment to provide it. How about the Dept of Education? What education? They give us lip service to save they're own job's. I could go on with this all day and I'm preaching to the choir, we're also complaining to the choir.