Author Topic: Discussion: Bush's budget  (Read 1238 times)

Offline JB88

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10980
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2005, 07:19:38 AM »
all i am saying is that for 80 billion dollars i could resurrect elvis for a reshoot of blue hawaii.

:)
this thread is doomed.
www.augustbach.com  

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -Ulysses.

word.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2005, 07:22:24 AM »
Resurrect?

I was just talking to him the other day and he said he wouldn't come out of hiding and blow his cover for less than $90 B.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline JB88

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10980
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2005, 07:23:07 AM »
<----- writing my congressmen.
this thread is doomed.
www.augustbach.com  

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. -Ulysses.

word.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #33 on: February 08, 2005, 08:06:11 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by OneWordAnswer
Flipflop.
You can lower spending without gutting social programs and family farms. Want a one word answer? Greed.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline JBA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1797
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #34 on: February 08, 2005, 08:08:54 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by OneWordAnswer
Budgets



[so much for the BUUUSSHH hates the poor]

Thanks oneword.

Department of Education Budget at a Glance

Mon Feb 7, 4:00 PM ET   White House - AP
 
Agency: Department of Education (news - web sites)
   
Spending: $56 billion

Percentage change from 2005: -1 percent

Mandatory outlays: $7.4 billion

Total Spending: $63.4 billion


Highlights:


_ Would increase aid to poor districts by 4.7 percent , to $13.3 billion.


_ Would end 48 programs and reduce spending on 16 others to free $4.7 billion for other priorities. A third of the federal programs Bush promised to cut in his budget are in the Education Department. All federal spending on vocational education, $1.2 billion, would be eliminated and redirected toward other high school initiatives.


_ Would spend almost $18 billion on Pell Grants to help poor students attend college, an increase of 45 percent. That money would come mainly from deep cuts in subsidies to lenders.


_ Would spend $200 million to help high school students who read below grade level. That would be an eight-fold increase in the program's current budget.

_ Would create a $500 million fund to reward teachers whose students make great progress.


_ Would end $438 million in state grants for safe and drug-free schools. Related national programs would get more money, but overall funding for safe schools would drop $355 million.


The start of Bush's second-term school agenda has two big themes: expanding his No Child Left Behind law in high schools, and overhauling federal aid for college students.


But to pay for it, Bush is calling for major cuts, too, and Congress may balk. Overall education spending would drop slightly in 2006 after increasing yearly during his first term.


Bush is shifting focus from early grades to high schools, with more than $2 billion in help for struggling students, math and science partnerships and Advanced Placement tests. He would require state math and reading testing in grades nine to 11, an expansion of two years.


"We want to make sure that when children get into high school, they have an opportunity for rigorous academic courses," said Ray Simon, assistant education secretary.


At the same time, Bush would cut almost $2 billion in popular high school programs deemed "ineffective," including vocational education, Upward Bound, Talent Search and GEAR UP.



The ranking Democrat on the Senate education committee, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, called for Congress to reject the education budget. "The administration is going to find out that people believe we need to invest in our children," he said.
"They effect the march of freedom with their flash drives.....and I use mine for porn. Viva La Revolution!". .ZetaNine  03/06/08
"I'm just a victim of my own liberalhoodedness"  Midnight Target

Offline JBA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1797
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #35 on: February 08, 2005, 08:16:32 AM »
Budget Glance: Dept. of Veterans Affairs

Mon Feb 7, 6:23 PM ET   White House - AP
 
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs (news - web sites)
 

Spending: $33.4 billion

Percentage change from 2005: + 2.7 percent

Mandatory Outlays: $37.9 billion

Total Spending: $71.3 billion

Highlights:

_ Would raise medical care spending from $21.6 billion to $22.4 billion.


_ Would increase spending by $240 million on inpatient care for veterans with problems related to mental illness, including alcohol and drug use.


After four years of increases in the agency's budget, President Bush (news - web sites) wants veterans to start picking up more of the tab.


He asks veterans who have the highest incomes among those seeking VA health care and who do not have service-connected illnesses or injuries to pay a $250 annual fee. Bush also wants to increase prescription drug co-payments for such veterans from $7 to $15 for a 30-day drug supply. More than 2 million veterans could be affected.


The fees make up much of the increase in medical care spending.


Bush has made similar requests in previous budgets, only to be soundly rejected by members of Congress. But the environment is different this year with new House and Senate veterans affairs committee chairmen, at least one of whom has been supportive of Bush's efforts to focus resources on certain veterans.


"Any (fee) increase is going to be shifting the cost on the back of veterans," said Dave Autry, Disabled American Veterans spokesman. "Vets are owed a debt and the government has said they are eligible for health care. The government needs to pay for it. It's a continuing cost of our national defense."


The spending plan eliminates funding for one year for state grants for extended care of veterans in state-sponsored nursing homes. About $104 million was provided for the program in 2005.
"They effect the march of freedom with their flash drives.....and I use mine for porn. Viva La Revolution!". .ZetaNine  03/06/08
"I'm just a victim of my own liberalhoodedness"  Midnight Target

Offline Krusher

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #36 on: February 08, 2005, 09:07:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Silat
Maybe I missed it but, didnt GB just give us a vague idea with no real plan?


The budget is vague?  It looks to be spelled out to me.

Offline TheDudeDVant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #37 on: February 08, 2005, 09:25:25 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Krusher
The budget is vague?  It looks to be spelled out to me.


Wrong vague idea.. 8)

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9805
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #38 on: February 08, 2005, 09:26:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by JBA
[so much for the BUUUSSHH hates the poor]


In case you missed these items in the original post from the AP wire:

...including trimming food stamp payments to the poor by $1.1 billion...

...the president proposed savings of $137 billion over 10 years in mandatory programs with much of that occurring in reductions in Medicaid, the big federal-state program that provides health care for the poor...

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #39 on: February 08, 2005, 09:29:07 AM »
oboe dude, its politics.  get a grip.  This is a proposed budget and yes, there are things being proposed I do not like.  Thats where I contact my representative and voice my opinions, if I so choose.

Jeepers :rofl
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline slimm50

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #40 on: February 08, 2005, 09:54:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by oboe
Here's what the President of the VFW had to say:
VFW Terms President's VA Budget Proposal Harmful to Veterans
VFW Appeals to Congress for Relief


"VFW Commander-in-Chief Edward S. Banas Sr., of Voluntown, Conn., said that with only a $500 million increase in medical funding, the administration's budget falls $2.6 billion short of what the Independent Budget recommends is needed to fully meet the demands for quality veterans' health care. 'This funding package is a disgrace and a sham,' Banas said."

How do you classify spending on veteran's health benefits, Martlet?   Wasteful program, welfare or government sinkhole?


So, VFW get half a billion increase. Couple that with a dramatic increase in death benefits to soldiers' survivors. Sounds like this admin is trying to do the right thing by the military, and using their heads about it instead of indiscriminately throwing money at a problem, as the Dems are wont to do.

Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #41 on: February 08, 2005, 10:21:05 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by oboe
Well, it's 500 million, not 500 billion.   But I know what you meant.   I take it you are a veteran, and disagree with the President of the VFW on the sufficiency of the funding.   Its good that you are satisfied with your benefits.   What about your fellow servicemen, who according to VFW Pres. Banas are "...waiting by the thousands for six months or more for basic health care appointments with VA"?    Are you satisfied with their benefits?    To me its seems a helluva way to treat people who spilled their blood and broke their bodies in the service of this nation.

Here's a link to the story: http://www.vfw.org/index.cfm?fa=news.newsDtl&did=1576

And whether we ever see eye to eye on this or not, Martlet, let me thank you for your service.  


Bush wants veteran's without service related medical conditions to accept more responsibility.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  The people that spilled their blood and broke their bodies would be unaffected.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #42 on: February 08, 2005, 10:42:04 AM »
The President proposes, the Congress disposes.

This budget, like every budet from every President is merely the place that Congress starts. From here on, the President is pretty much on the sidelines and not as Coach but as Cheerleader.

This budget and the final budget will bear little resemblance to each other.

You heard it here first.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9805
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #43 on: February 08, 2005, 11:11:01 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Yeager
oboe dude, its politics.  get a grip.  This is a proposed budget and yes, there are things being proposed I do not like.  Thats where I contact my representative and voice my opinions, if I so choose.

Jeepers :rofl


Agreed.   I'm better now.    Especially after Martlet clarified that veterans with service-related medical conditions would be unaffected by the cost increases for medical care.   You shoulda seen the post I deleted!:rolleyes:

I am sure I could find things in there I think are OK and things I don't.    I'm not opposed to all the cuts, but what rubs me the wrong way is cuts in programs to the needy coupled with continued tax breaks for the wealthiest.    It just doesn't seem very Christian to me.


Offline Martlet

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4390
Discussion: Bush's budget
« Reply #44 on: February 08, 2005, 11:18:40 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by oboe
.    It just doesn't seem very Christian to me.



Politics isn't allowed to be Christian anymore, remember?