Jump to content
The main point with getting a college education is to get a good paying, full time job with good benefits. Right now there's not enough of those kinds of jobs to support the current college grads. There's a bottleneck already.
I must challenge fatherof5's quote, "Obama has shrunk the deficit faster than any president since WWII," since it's such a joke.
From the U.S. Treasury's website. For fatherof5, that's the U.S. Treasury.gov.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Date Dollar Amount
I'll do the math for you:
1/2009 when Obama took over the national debt was $10.6 trillion. By the end of the fiscal year 9/2009, Obama deficit $1.3 trillion.
Fiscal year 2010 Obama deficit $1.6 trillion.
Fiscal year 2011 Obama deficit $1.2 trillion.
Fiscal year 2012 Obama deficit $1.2 trillion.
Fiscal year 2013 Obama deficit just under $700 billion.
Fiscal year 2014 Obama deficit $1.1 trillion.
Deficit numbers reported by the media are regurgitated numbers from the CBO. The CBO excludes certain items called emergency funding as to intentionally make the deficit look smaller. However, the U.S. Treasury simply reports the total national debt. To find the true deficit you need to do a little math.
During the Obama administration, so far, Obama has borrowed $7 trillion. That's more than the first 42 presidents borrowed combined.
Yes, the accounting tricks may work for a few more years, but after that who knows? I'm glad I'm old. Once the young figure out what's been left them: huge debt and huge government obligations, no telling what they'll do?
I went back to the editorial, I wanted to make sure that the author really didn't give any credit to the taxpayers.
I found that to be true. However, I don't think it was an accident that he did say he appreciated "the vision and support of 21st century learning from the district’s administrative cabinet and School Board members."
Mr. Baker knows who butters his bread.
Unfortunately, the people paying for the upgrade is rapidly shrinking, which is my concern.
If government continues to grow, right now it's 40% of GDP and that's when the economy is growing, pretty soon government spending is going to be more than the private sector.
The government may want to consider that if pensions are going to be paid out for the next 30 years, government spending better slow down.
Furthermore, you only have to glance at the BLS data to know that young adult taxpayers are paying less and less because there are fewer and fewer good paying jobs. That means as everyday passes, the tax revenues will shrink, and they will fall off a cliff when the next recession hits.
School boards and city councils may be the most important thing to Mr. Baker now, but I'm betting that as time goes on he will learn that the taxpayers are much more of an issue.
Taxpayers are already being squeezed to death by government, there's not much more you can squeeze out of them as the bonds for schools and pools are getting harder and harder to pass even during so-called good economic times.
This editorial shows that government has no problem giving credit to school boards and city councils when they really should be giving credit to the ever shrinking pool of taxpayers.
That's how it works.
What I challenged in the editorial was the "good news" issue (this was brought up by fatherof5). Using Barracuda's example which was in the context of "happy" I would say the contractor was happy, and the person who paid the contractor was indifferent. Since the contractor made extra money off their bid, they are happy, since the person paying still had to pay $25 (as they should the bid was a contract), they are just indifferent, they may be happy if they are relieved that the job was done and done correctly. I also would say most likely, the contractor wouldn't tell anyone he made an extra 5.
Bottom line is the editorial wants to give extra credit for just doing the job correctly and on budget. For me that should be the standard. If money was saved and returned to taxpayers (if the contractor just kept the money that's fine, it was a contract) or if the job included some extra stuff free to taxpayers, or any other positive news, then yes that's something to be proud of and is newsworthy to the taxpayers.
Fatherof5 I believe he stated that he had no "sources" so he couldn't opine on the question does the government or private sector go over budget more often.
In my personal experiences I'm always hearing that some government job went over budget. But most private jobs I've done on either end, the job was done within budget at least as far as the transfer of money goes, the amout transferred was the agreed price (in WW 50 years ago all that was necessary was a handshake). Even when I mowed lawns, topped onions, or kept score at the Bowlaway, the transferred amount of money when the job was finished was the accepted bid amount. No over budget crap.
I believe the government consistently goes over budget because they are paying the extra money with someone else's money. I also believe when government just does their jobs they like extra credit.
And from the editorial I thought it was interesting that the person who payed for the work, made the wireless upgrade possible, the shrinking number of "net" taxpayers was not mentioned at all.
Fatherof5 why is it so difficult to understand that if someone puts a bid in to do a job for $100, did the job, got paid $100 that's not good news.
Yes, if someone puts a bid in to do a job for $100, did the job for $80, returned the extra $20, that's good news.
You must be someone who likes giving trophies to everyone, you hate competition (which is exactly what bidding on a job is), last place is the same as first place. How boring.
If someone gave someone a bid to mow their lawn for $25, did the job, and asked for $30, almost everyone would still only pay $25. Except the government. Most likely the government would pay the extra five dollars because the government is paying with other people's money.
At least you admit that it was the taxpayer's money that made the whole thing possible in the first place. That is what you meant when you said "spending our money?" But, of course the editorial doesn't give thanks to the taxpayers. Taxpayers are always taken for granted by the government.
Since I'm old I guess I can't enjoy the pool so I may as well vote no.
Okay, I stand corrected fatherof5.
Specifically, what did you mean when you said, "In private and public life, sometimes projects go over budget."
It seems fatherof5 suggests that the private sector goes over budget as much as the government does.
In my experiences with getting bids for jobs, the jobs have always been done within budget or I don't pay, it's called a contract.
Government is much more likely to accept excuses since the heads of governent don't pay the extra charges, it's the taxpayers.
It's amazing how different someone's opinion can be when they have to spend their own money or are spending someone else's money.
Again, congrats to the taxpayers for funding the upgrade, everyone else involved was paid to complete the job. Government is the same, a day's pay for a day's work.
Congrats to the shrinking number of taxpayers who payed for it.
The editorial stated it was done "within budget." It seems when the government is involved, doing something within budget is an impressive accomplishment, something to not take for granted, something to be proud of. I agree.
Outside, of the government, the standard procedure is to stay within your budget, no need to pat yourself on the back for staying within budget.
Beckybkennedy in the 1960s, there was a wading pool at Menlo Park, the Natatorium on Wilbur by Mill Creek, the Pioneer Park swimming pool, and the Memorial Pool. Those are all gone. Why?
Based on the small number of children who play outdoors in the Winter and Summer now, compared to the huge number of children who played outdoors in the 1960s, it seems children prefer to swim in cyber space rather than swim in an actually pool.
For the children who prefer to swim outdoors in the summer, what's wrong with letting their parents pay for it?
Or, in our new progressive America, it's the job of parents to provide the love and the government to provide everything else?
Last login: Sunday, July 12, 2015
2015 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Union-Bulletin, 112 S. First Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362/509-525-3300. All rights reserved.