|Our tax money being wasted AGAIN!!!||BikingViking|
Feb 13, 2002 8:01 AM
|If ever anyone thinks we need to let the federal government keep our money, below is a link showing another example of waste/fraud at the federal level. Until the government REALLY gets serious about cutting waste, we, as citizens should DEMAND our money back.
Vote out the crooks!
|Sounds good to me, by and large||cory|
Feb 13, 2002 8:27 AM
|I could quibble over some minor points, but the payouts listed in that story sound solid to me. Part of the EPA's job is to educate and inform, and there's proof right on this board that there's lots of work to be done in that area.|
Feb 13, 2002 8:49 AM
|I love the part about the Seattle Mariners, with their $80 million payroll. As if that matters. The stadium is going to generate an awful lot of trash and waste, regardless of how high the payroll is. It seems wise to work out a recycling plan for them.|
Feb 13, 2002 11:38 AM
|The people of Seattle need to worry about the trash generated by the Mariners. Why must the federal government get involved in such local issues? Using that logic, the federal governemnt should help EVERY city with professional sports teams. Just because a cause is worthy does not mean the Feds should help pay for it with money they took from us (citizens).
The Constitution does not state anywhere that the Feds mind the affairs of state/local governments. The Tenth Amendment is very clear on the roles of state and federal governments.
Feb 13, 2002 12:04 PM
|The federal government specifically established an agency (EPA) to do this kind of work. That's why they are involved. Local governments either didn't care or couldn't be trusted to police their own pollutants, so the feds have to step in.
And you still miss the point about the Mariners. It's not about The Mariners. Replace "The Mariners" with "The Sears Tower" and you still have one building producing a lot of trash. Where does that trash go? A landfill somewhere? A barge travelling up and down the east coast? And before it's trash, where does all the paper and such come from? Trees from national forests, maybe?
I don't think it is asking too much for the EPA to step in and say, let's figure out a better way to deal with this stuff rather than just burying it somewhere. How much trash from New York ends up in New Jersey? This is a national issue, therefore, the federal government is involved.
There is an awful lot of government waste, but this article picked the wrong examples.
Feb 13, 2002 12:19 PM
|that the draw of MLB and the medium of it being all american might be a good platform to show by example, that kids heros or supports of the all american pass time are doing the right thing by recycling?|
Feb 13, 2002 1:09 PM
|I agree that a local initiative is the way to get things done. Plus, it sets a good example for kids.|
|re: Our tax money being wasted AGAIN!!!||Me Dot Org|
Feb 13, 2002 9:04 AM
|Yes, some of the items are sad and laughable. "The Crooks", however, have been voted out numerous times.
Waste is a part of bureaurcracy, whether governmental or private sector. How many people have pens from the office at home?
Besides, some of the items could look silly on the surface, but might actually have some benefit:
$150,000 to research the "role of lighting in human performance and productivity."
This, for example, could actually be an important thing to study. If work areas are 'over lit', meaning more kilowatts are used than production extracted, reducing the lighting could mean a significant savings. Such a study could also help make guidelines for designing future office and manufacturing facilites. Yeah, the whole thing might be a crock, but it has the potential to save far more money than the study costs.
Feb 13, 2002 9:31 AM
|the money should be put into more weapons|
Feb 13, 2002 11:15 AM
|First and foremost, all of this money needs to go back to those who earned it. It galls me to think that there are a lot of politicians who think they know better what to do with OUR money.
There is plenty of waste, even in the DoD. I am pretty skeptical of this whole missile defense idea. If anybody is going to nuke us, they will not advertise where it came from by using a ballistic missile. We have to worry about the surreptitious entry and detonation of nukes.
|Geez......Waste and Fraud....||jrm|
Feb 13, 2002 12:13 PM
|So recycling, studys on recreational land use and there impacts, Employee productivity AND employing senior citizens is a Wasteful and Fraudulant use of Federal Funds.
"The" government will never, and can never live up to the standards of what people think they should be doing. And why is it that everyone feels compeled to bitch about what "It" does with "my" money. Ever think that maybe it might just provide a somewhat efficent, safe and pleasurable environment for people other than YOU and YOUR money.
|Geez......Waste and Fraud....||BikingViking|
Feb 13, 2002 12:59 PM
|This just boils down to a philosophical difference of opinion. I do not believe the Feds should be doing anything not specifically outlined in the Constitution. It is my belief that James Madison did not intend for the "general welfare" to be an open checkbook. The Feds did build our great Interstates, help with funding airports, port facilities etc. That is what I think "general welfare" was the intent for these activities
The problems I have with "studys on recreational land use and there impacts" is that this is something best handled at the local level. If the Fed taxes were lower, local govts' could raise taxes for their communities to fund these things.
"Employee productivity" is, in my opinion, a sham. I agree there needs to be safety guidelines in the workplace, but lighting?!?!?! Anyone can make a good case for any spending programs, whenther the Feds need to, is where I get annoyed.
My problem with this "employing senior citizens is a Wasteful and Fraudulant use of Federal Funds" is the apparent lack of competition for the jobs. If the Feds bestowed jobs to our "seasoned citizens" just becaue of their age, that is discriminatory and ANY discrimination is wrong. (I also oppose Affirmative Action...I'll save that for another thread! :o> )
Feb 13, 2002 2:53 PM
|Impact studies are usually done at the expense of, and in favor of a developer. With roughly 75% of local jurisdiction revenues not returning to that local juridcition, they cant afford or have the trained staff to compile a comprehensive $50 to $100 Environmental Impact Study focusing on golf coarses. Golf coarse have the potential to be very dangerous places. Chemicals and pesticides find there way into local water tables. It introduces evasive species of grass, plants into subsystems that indigous grasses, plants and such cant fight off. Constant watering can lend itself to vernal pools that harbor decieses(sp?). Not to mention that they along with large lot residential development are the least effective use of land.
People were skeptic of the Hawthorne experiments (worker,movement, moral and communication)conducted at Westinghouse in the 30's. These experiments, lead to the formation of managing methods (X and Y, organizational communication and behavior)that are still used to this day. There have been experiments done on how light affects our reactions, sleep, sight, perception why not how affects how we work. i for one dont like the lighting where i work and i know it can have adverse affects on me.
Personally i dont think its a lack of compettive jobs at the EPA. Seniors are a resource that this society perceives as (because of age being above 65) as unproductive and redundant resource that cant because of its age benefit progress. I have worked with and been consulted by SBA's small business seniors workshops when i formed my small businesss. My father who is 73 still sells on a part time basis because he likes people. Why do these people do this because they want to belong, socialize, be productive and active.