More Federal Waste

[cj's dad]

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Why are taxpayers (us) paying for this crap?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/hoyer-spent-17945-tax-dollars-2010-corne

[boxcar]

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Why are taxpayers (us) paying for this crap?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/hoyer-spent-17945-tax-dollars-2010-corne

Why? Because the it's not the spenders' money, so they don't give two flips. It's very easy to be generous ( or charitable) or to be big spenders with other people's money. Corruptness has its perks...for now.

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

Why? Because the it's not the spenders' money, so they don't give two flips. It's very easy to be generous ( or charitable) or to be big spenders with other people's money. Corruptness has its perks...for now.

Boxcar

"Why are taxpayers (us) paying for this crap"? Rhetorical question.

I am merely pointing out the arrogance of these a---oles.

[OntheRail]

Yep that's only spit in the bucket... to the hogwash that's been going on for way to long. The Azzhats on the Hill are spending junkies and program pimps. And way to many citizens and companies are entitlement whores.

What about

The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job.

And a couple more...

http://www.verumserum.com/?p=11141

[highnote]

Have you seen how much medicare fraud goes on? It's mind boggling. Criminal organizations even set up companies that send in invoices with codes for certain medical expenses. The computer of Medicare and medicade cut checks for them automatically.

There are so many claims made in one day that there is no way that each claim can be verified.

They only time someone is caught is if some investigative reporter starts looking at the records and stumbles upon something fishy.

The concept of medicare and medicaide was good. The execution has been terrible.

[Robert Goren]

What the fraud in defense spending? And the dept of home security has make sure every Congressional district gets a cut even if no Muslim has heard of the place.

[newtothegame]

What the fraud in defense spending? And the dept of home security has make sure every Congressional district gets a cut even if no Muslim has heard of the place.
What's really sad robert is we (in this case YOU ) use one fraud to justify another. This is the problem with us as a country. We have become so accustomed to it that we say "it's just small in relation to..."
I say it doesnt matter how small or how big, where it is, what department...IT'S ALL FRAUD and needs to be stopped!

[skate]

Have you seen how much medicare fraud goes on? It's mind boggling. Criminal organizations even set up companies that send in invoices with codes for certain medical expenses. The computer of Medicare and medicade cut checks for them automatically.

There are so many claims made in one day that there is no way that each claim can be verified.

They only time someone is caught is if some investigative reporter starts looking at the records and stumbles upon something fishy.

The concept of medicare and medicaide was good. The execution has been terrible.


good points babe.

Not too long ago(2years?) , Dem/Rep from congress tried to put into law a requirement saying that Doctors Must be open to the same scrupulous as other business when it comes to Medicare practice.

The "Bill" is still hanging, which shows just how serious these people in congress have become.

[mostpost]

What's really sad robert is we (in this case YOU ) use one fraud to justify another. This is the problem with us as a country. We have become so accustomed to it that we say "it's just small in relation to..."
I say it doesnt matter how small or how big, where it is, what department...IT'S ALL FRAUD and needs to be stopped!

What is even sadder is that you don't know what is fraud and what isn't. Fraud exists in Defense spending. What is happening here is not fraud. These expenses are all part of every congressperson's office budget. Every congressperson, by law, gets an allowance to run his office. This includes his Washington office and his offices in his home district.

House rules permit the use of federal funds to buy food and beverages for meetings which include persons not employed by the office. But, in the case of leadership offices all types of meetings are covered. So neither Hoyer nor Boehner were doing anything illegal or unethical.

None of this is any different from what is done everyday by commercial businesses. Do you think those businesses don't pass those costs on to the consumer?

[skate]

And the Toasted one continues to burn, you are really having your problems aren't you...think a little...please:kiss:

[mostpost]

And the Toasted one continues to burn, you are really having your problems aren't you...think a little...please:kiss:

If you disagree with what I write, how about saying what you disagree with and why. You might also try providing some evidence to back up your opinion. That's what I do. All you do is post nonsense and you post it using words that don't even exist.

[Tom]

House rules permit the use of federal funds to buy food and beverages for meetings which include persons not employed by the office. But, in the case of leadership offices all types of meetings are covered. So neither Hoyer nor Boehner were doing anything illegal or unethical.

But neither expenses were necessary and in the financial mud hole we are in, perhaps a little integrity - which neither man has ever demonstrated - would be in order.

how much health care could that money have purchased for the poor?

mosite, it just goes to show that the aholes have no perception of the mess they have created. And the original poster said it was waste,note fraud, but the fact never matter to you , do they?

[skate]

If you disagree with what I write, how about saying what you disagree with and why. You might also try providing some evidence to back up your opinion. That's what I do. All you do is post nonsense and you post it using words that don't even exist.

:lol: kiddin right:D wake up time... Toasted

[skate]

Moastly Toasted


and then some...yep


you say;
"House rules permit the use of federal funds to buy food and beverages for meetings which include persons not employed by the office. But, in the case of leadership offices all types of meetings are covered. So neither Hoyer nor Boehner were doing anything illegal or unethical.

None of this is any different from what is done everyday by commercial businesses. Do you think those businesses don't pass those costs on to the consumer?"


from the-skate;

gees ...i mean really ...i do not feel like givin you the satisfaction of an explanation....do you really NOT see the eff in Stupidity fo your Poor Post...STOP IT:bang:

there is NO comparison in regards to your "commercial/Government spending, none `, the business uses the Business Money while the Gov uses My Money, but i can see that will not sink into your short view.

I have to think you are flat out lying when you ask to to send proof...:lol: what a joke...go to any Fed site to find the Tax Receipts were Much Higher under Bush than under FishBellie, by almost $800 Billion. Have you ever heard that before Boing!

AND then come back and apologize, not to the-skate, but to someone that will listen to you....:bang: :kiss:

[skate]

and i apologize to cj's for myself coming to this here point...:)

[mostpost]

But neither expenses were necessary and in the financial mud hole we are in, perhaps a little integrity - which neither man has ever demonstrated - would be in order.

how much health care could that money have purchased for the poor?

mosite, it just goes to show that the aholes have no perception of the mess they have created. And the original poster said it was waste,note fraud, but the fact never matter to you , do they?
I was responding to Newtothegame who called it fraud. I don't think it is waste either, simply a part of doing business.
But you are right again. At an average rate of $18,000 per congressman and knowing there are 435 congressmen, if we can stop this terrible abuse, we can pay of our entire national debt in one million seven hundred and eighty seven thousand nine hundred and ninety four years. sooner if we include the senate. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[hcap]

And the Toasted one continues to burn, you are really having your problems aren't you...think a little...pleaseIf you disagree with what I write, how about saying what you disagree with and why. You might also try providing some evidence to back up your opinion. That's what I do. All you do is post nonsense and you post it using words that don't even exist.
From The Urban Dictionary:
Originated in the cult classic, Dumb & Dumber.(figures)

2.welp:

what really annoying people say instead of well. The same kind of people who use jah instead of yes. Annoying.

[mostpost]

Moastly Toasted


and then some...yep


you say;
"House rules permit the use of federal funds to buy food and beverages for meetings which include persons not employed by the office. But, in the case of leadership offices all types of meetings are covered. So neither Hoyer nor Boehner were doing anything illegal or unethical.

None of this is any different from what is done everyday by commercial businesses. Do you think those businesses don't pass those costs on to the consumer?"


from the-skate;

gees ...i mean really ...i do not feel like givin you the satisfaction of an explanation....do you really NOT see the eff in Stupidity fo your Poor Post...STOP IT:bang:

there is NO comparison in regards to your "commercial/Government spending, none `, the business uses the Business Money while the Gov uses My Money, but i can see that will not sink into your short view.

I got news for you pal. That Business Money is your money. Do you really believe that Kraft Foods doesn't include the cost of employee seminars in Las Vegas or sales meetings in Sun Valley when it is pricing its products. Of course you don't send a check directly to Kraft Foods and they don't take money out of your paycheck like the government does, but you pay for those meetings and that cappuchino and those hotel rooms just the same. In fact you probably pay more because government does not need to make a profit.


I have to think you are flat out lying when you ask to to send proof...:lol: what a joke...go to any Fed site to find the Tax Receipts were Much Higher under Bush than under FishBellie, by almost $800 Billion. Have you ever heard that before Boing!

AND then come back and apologize, not to the-skate, but to someone that will listen to you....:bang: :kiss:
What I love most about posting here is the lack of memory of the conservative posters. You keep posting how tax receipts were higher under Bush than under Clinton, and I keep explaining why that does not matter. So, here it is again because I love typing the same thing over and over to no avail.

Revenues always go up. They may not go up every year (Although there are very few years when they don't), but they will always go up over the course of a presidency-especially a two term presidency. They go up because the population increases, the economy grows. Bush cut taxes and revenue went up. Of course it went down for three consecutive years at the start of his term and also the last year. But, overall, it went up.

How does the increase in revenue match up with previous eight year periods?
We can start with 1969 to 1976 when revenues increased 92% over the previous eight years From 1977 to 1984 the increase was 128%. from 1985 to 1992 it was 78%. Bill Clinton increased revenues by 66% over the previous eight years. Finally we have George W. Bush. During his watch revenues increased by 38%-28 points lower than any period in our survey.

What we haven't determined is what those revenues would have done had tax rates remained the same. I say they would have been higher.

Surprise me with an intelligent response.

[mostpost]

From The Urban Dictionary:
Originated in the cult classic, Dumb & Dumber.(figures)

2.welp:

what really annoying people say instead of well. The same kind of people who use jah instead of yes. Annoying.
So, it's a real pretend word. Thanks for that update.

[cj's dad]

From our retired Govn't worker:

"What I love most about posting here"


I am amazed that you and a few others just don't get "it".

I did not say that it was fraud for the Reps to spend their allotted monies.
The point is that they have no business spending taxpayers $$$ on F----ng donuts and coffee. Both sides are guilty of being arrogant bastards.

A million here and a million there and we're starting to talk about real money.

[Actor]

This is only the tip of the iceberg. Why are taxpayers (us) paying for this crap?
Have you checked the prices of eateries in downtown D.C. lately? :lol:

Seriously, it comes down to the way the government runs itself. I worked for the government for over 20 years. It's a "spend it or lose it" culture.

Let's say you are the head of a government agency and your budget for 2011 is $10,000,000. If you spend only $9,000,000 then next year your budget will automatically be cut to $9,000,000 - the theory being that you have demonstrated that you only need $9,000,000 to run your agency. If you want next years budget to be $10,000,000 then you have to spend all of the $10,000,000 you got this year.

I have sat in on meetings where we were told "Sep 30 (end of the fiscal year) is less than a month away and we still have to spend another $100,000 if we don't want to lose it." So we'd spend a lot of time trying to figure out what we could buy. If we made the goal we'd have a party to celebrate "obligating all our funding."

The bottom line: managers are rewarded for spending and penalized for saving. I suspect this is the way it is with those who run congressional offices. If you are budgeted $17,000 for coffee and donuts this year, but only spend $15,000 then next year you will only get $15,000.

I have not worked for the government for 15 years so maybe this has changed, but I doubt it.

[ceejay]

Seriously, it comes down to the way the government runs itself. I worked for the government for over 20 years. It's a "spend it or lose it" culture.




The bottom line: managers are rewarded for spending and penalized for saving.
Clearly, that is what needs to change.…

[Actor]

Clearly, that is what needs to change.…
Don't hold your breath.

[skate]

What I love most about posting here is the lack of memory of the conservative posters. You keep posting how tax receipts were higher under Bush than under Clinton, and I keep explaining why that does not matter. So, here it is again because I love typing the same thing over and over to no avail.

Revenues always go up. They may not go up every year (Although there are very few years when they don't), but they will always go up over the course of a presidency-especially a two term presidency. They go up because the population increases, the economy grows. Bush cut taxes and revenue went up. Of course it went down for three consecutive years at the start of his term and also the last year. But, overall, it went up.

How does the increase in revenue match up with previous eight year periods?
We can start with 1969 to 1976 when revenues increased 92% over the previous eight years From 1977 to 1984 the increase was 128%. from 1985 to 1992 it was 78%. Bill Clinton increased revenues by 66% over the previous eight years. Finally we have George W. Bush. During his watch revenues increased by 38%-28 points lower than any period in our survey.

What we haven't determined is what those revenues would have done had tax rates remained the same. I say they would have been higher.

Surprise me with an intelligent response.



No way will you be able to see this, but it took 15% of our tax receipts to pay off the interest on our debt, during the FishBellieBill yrs.


During the Bush yrs., it took 10% of our tax receipts to pay off the debt.

;)

[hcap]

I can sort of understand your nick names for big shots. Uncle George (strange thing to publicly acknowledge) and certainly your fascination with BigDick(s) (nothing wrong with that :cool: )

But where the hell did you get "FishBellieBill"
Welp?

[mostpost]

I can sort of understand your nick names for big shots. Uncle George (strange thing to publicly acknowledge) and certainly your fascination with BigDick(s) (nothing wrong with that :cool: )

But where the hell did you get "FishBellieBill"
Welp?
Urban dictionary:
fishbelly
A bad name for a white/caucasion person

Kind of an odd nickname considering Bill Clinton was a favorite of blacks.
But then we are dealing with Skate here. And his 81 IQ.

[skate]

I can sort of understand your nick names for big shots. Uncle George (strange thing to publicly acknowledge) and certainly your fascination with BigDick(s) (nothing wrong with that :cool: )

But where the hell did you get "FishBellieBill"
Welp?



:lol: gees...i've been using that for soooo loooong, but with my memorable abilityies let me say....

I caught the FishBellieBill jogging one day and he was as white as a Fish Bellie, i cant' forget that picture:D

[hcap]

:lol: gees...i've been using that for soooo loooong, but with my memorable abilityies let me say....

I caught the FishBellieBill jogging one day and he was as white as a Fish Bellie, i cant' forget that picture:D
You can't expect occasional visitors and observers to the land of Skatedonia to understand the strange customs and quaint sayings of the locals. No matter how long you and imaginary friends have used it.

But the question I musk ask now that you sort of cleared up that confusion, is how long has unca george been telling you bedtime stories.

[cj's dad]

Urban dictionary:
fishbelly
A bad name for a white/caucasion person

Kind of an odd nickname considering Bill Clinton was a favorite of blacks.
But then we are dealing with Skate here. And his 81 IQ.

PA- I thought name calling was supposed to stop.

[mostpost]

PA- I thought name calling was supposed to stop.
There's no name calling. Check Skate's own post #105 in the "Little bounce in the Market for theBO" thread.

[cj's dad]

Insults aka name calling aka insults

[PaceAdvantage]

PA- I thought name calling was supposed to stop.It was.