Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Open Thread: What is on your mind

Now that we know none of the progressives/liberals/Democrats care that Rahm Emanuel called them "F*cking retards". Maybe that could be their new name knowing how they like to change their names so often. And if they don't like their new names, call them "F*cking retards". But since you know better then to use that kind of language lets keep it nice. And if I hear anyone use the word "negro" other then a white "F*cking retard" named Harry Reid I'll pull the post. For all of you that have no sense of humor I am joking. LOL
First, I’ve got a new video up called “What Does The Federal Budget Freeze Look Like?”

Here is the data summary of this video:
I got the budget numbers (budget, discretionary, mandatory) from the overview of the 2010 budget which includes projections for 2011. I did this because the 2011 budget is not available yet (although I understand that those projections are a bit low and the real budget will be bigger than the projection).
That gives us the following numbers:
  • 2011 Federal Budget – $3.7 trillion
  • Mandatory portion of federal budget – $2.322 trillion
  • Discretionary portion of federal budget – $1,380 trillion
I’ve seen it consistently reported that the freeze will affect $447 billion of the budget, although I imagine that number is subject to change. The amount saved from this freeze has been consistently reported as $15 billion in the first year and $250 billion over 10 years.
The stimulus funds as reported by recovery.gov at the time of this post are:

That leaves:
  • $195 billion in tax cuts that have not been applied
  • $202 billion in contracts, grants and loans that haven’t been spent
  • $121 billion in entitlements (what a creepy name) that haven’t been spent
If we left the tax cuts in place, but canceled the rest of the spending, we’d save $323 billion… which is a shade less than what I said in the video. Apparently, that is the result of some rounding errors in my spreadsheet, but the $4 billion comes out to about one and a half teaspoons, which isn’t enough to make a difference in the visualization.
As for the water part of it… If we assume that the budget is 192 ounces of water that we’ve split into 4 oz cups, then all the math in the video works out. I actually under-counted the unspent stimulus (it would be 17 ounces instead of 16). I measured my ice cube tray and found that each ice cube was 1.5 ounces and I used 1 and a half tablespoons of water to measure out the .75 ounces that would be equivalent to $15 billion.

<End of Boring Math Things>

OK… now to comment on what I think about the budget freeze to anyone who cares what I actually think.
First of all, I hate the “we’re saving $250 billion over 10 years” line. It is a piece of crass political rhetoric and I’m disappointed that the administration would use it. If they actually implement a three year freeze on the portion of the budget they’re talking about (which is a big if, but let’s assume the best), why measure the effects in the space of 10 years?
The answer is “To make the freeze look bigger”. They’re basically just basing the extended savings off of projected interest payments and “savings” due to the fact that the baseline on that portion of the budget hasn’t moved. It is setting a dangerous data precedent where politicians realize that all they have to do is calculate a projection out as far as they need in order to get the numbers they want. It would be like giving an employee a $5,000 bonus, but saying that you gave them a $8,000 bonus based on a 5% return of that investment over the course of 10 years.  They might as well say that they’re saving a trillion dollars over the next 25 years or a hundred trillion over the next 300 years. It is a data statement designed to trick people.
Second, I hate the “We’re saving all this money by not spending it” line because it is similarly political. If a future politician wants to play this stupid numbers game, all they have to do is “project” that they will spend like a crazy person next year and when the next year comes, they decided to spend like a half crazy person. Then they can claim that they have “saved” all this money because they “reduced” their projected spending.
As a slapdash example, a politician could project that they will increase spending by 5% next year and then decide at the last moment to increase it by 3%. They could then spin that decision to increase by a smaller amount as a decision to “cut” their spending (which wasn’t real spending, only projected spending) by 2%.
Last, my attempt to visualize the scale of the budget freeze does not mean I don’t support it. I really like to see cuts to the budget and I personally think this is not an insignificant one.I think it is worth our energy to do exactly what the Obama administration seems to be doing…freezing increases and looking around for crappy programs to cut.
Keep in mind the hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle. The Republicans are hypocrites for claiming that this is a totally inconsequential budget cut. In 2005, George W. Bush proposed a 1% cut (not a freeze, a cut) in discretionary spending that wasn’t Department of Defense or Homeland Security. Translated to today, Bush’s cuts would have “saved” $33 billion using the calculation metric for the current freeze; more than twice the amount that this freeze would save us. At the time, John McCain called it a “very austere budget” and Dick Cheney went out pushing their credentials as cost cutters. I find it strange that they were ecstatic about saving the equivalent of $33 billion but think that $15 billion is a drop in a bucket.
Of course the Democrats blasted Bush’s cuts as a gimmick too small to make a difference, but seem to have lost much of their skepticism over these new, smaller “cuts”.
Overall, it looks like both sides are more interested in political gain than in having a frank discussion about the numbers and what they mean. This should surprise no one, but I confess to finding myself somewhat dismayed that the Obama administration, for all their hype about being pro-science and pro-data, has no problem spinning the numbers in a way that decreases clear comprehension in order to increase message potency.

14 comments:

  1. Go Virginia!

    http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/state_regional/state_regional_govtpolitics/article/senate_passes_bill_saying_virginians_dont_have_to_buy_health_insurance/321533/

    ReplyDelete
  2. Imagine if Rahmalangadingdong had called them "F**king Ni**ers." What would the reaction be?

    We don't call black people the N word anymore. Thankfully, that word has been banished from polite, civilized discourse. Time to do the same with the "R word."

    ReplyDelete
  3. No Way Jose&#39;02 February, 2010 21:19

    RICHMOND, Va. -- With five Democrats defecting, the Virginia Senate today passed a Republican measure that says Virginians don't have to buy health insurance.



    Voting 23-17, the Democratic-controlled Senate kicked to the House a bill by Sen. Frederick Quayle, R-Suffolk, that supporters say will send a message to Washington about its efforts to overhaul the health-care system.

    The Quayle bill was the first of three nearly identical proposals by Republicans. The others are carried by Sens. Stephen Martin of Chesterfield and Jill Vogel of Fauquier. They passed by the same margin as the Quayle bill.

    Quayle said the legislation is important, because it's a way of telling Congress that Virginians believe the federal goverrnment is overstepping its authority.

    If Washington can mandate health insurance, Quayle said, it could also require Americans to buy domestic automobiles as a way to help that ailing industry.

    "They could have just ordered us to go out and buy a car -- and just give us the cash to do it," said Quayle, rather than set up the so-called cash-for-clunkers program.

    Senate Majority Leader Richard Saslaw, D-Fairfax, said the Republican proposal is a "brochure bill," intended by the GOP as ammunition in the 2011 General Assembly elections.

    And Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Bath, the defeated Democratic candidate for governor in 2009, said the legislature has more important business than playing politics with health care through a debate on where federal power ends and state authority begins.

    Lawmakers, he said, should be more concerned about the aftershocks of the recession and closing the $4.2 billion hole in the Virginia budget.

    "And now we're arguing about theory," said Deeds.

    The five Democrats joining Republicans in this afternoon's vote were: Charles Colgan of Prince William, R. Edward Houck of Spotsylvania, John Miller of Newport News, Philip Puckett of Russell and Roscoe Reynolds of Henry.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No Way Jose&#39;02 February, 2010 21:24

    I think the liberals are trying to retire the "Retard" word. By killing them all before they breath air. They are killing the black babies in record numbers as well. They will have their master races one way or another. It's the progressive way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No way,
    Yes, we are killing black babies. Its a rite of passage, an initiation of sorts to get in our club. Kill more than one and get a T-shirt with our logo on it.

    Never met a more fucked up group of conspiracy nuts like you clowns. I'd ask if your on crack, but i know that conservatives like to be Hillbilly heroin like the head clown Rush fat-ass.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This may help you understand JoeC.
    Niece of Martin Luther King Jr:: "abortion has done what the Klan only dreamed of."
    One Quarter of Black Population Missing from Abortion Genocide Says Dr. Alveda King


    Dr. Alveda King, the niece of legendary human rights campaigner, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., told a meeting of Priests for Life, that the killing of a quarter of the black population of the US has not been from the lynch mobs of her childhood days, but from abortionists, “who plant their killing centres in minority neighbourhoods and prey upon women who think they have no hope."


    “The great irony,” she said, “is that abortion has done what the Klan only dreamed of.” King was speaking Sunday at the unveiling of memorials at the Birmingham, Alabama church served by her late father, the Rev. A. D. Williams King.

    ***

    Dr. King pointed out that the killing of the unborn in the US, which has taken the lives of well over 42 million American children, is overwhelmingly concentrated in the African-American community. “In the last forty-plus years,” Dr. King said, “15 million black people have been denied their most basic civil right, the right to life. Roughly one quarter of the black population is now missing.”

    The abortion movement’s history is inseparable from that of the eugenics movement that held the genocide of the “dysgenic races” races as a central goal and for which the poor were the “enemies of the people.” In the US, the abortion facilities and offices of Planned Parenthood are concentrated in poor areas where the black population is especially targeted.Margaret Sanger, the foundress of the organisation that eventually became Planned Parenthood, had as her goal the control and subjugation of the poor ethnic peoples including blacks.

    Dr. King said, “It's time that we remember the sacrifices of men like my father and my uncle who worked and died so that our children could live.”“It's time to stop killing the future and keep their dream alive.”

    ReplyDelete
  7. That was a post from Murray In the Middle blog. A light is being shinned on the progressive agenda with Planed Parenthood and their founding genocidal progressive founders intentions are. And the sick thing is Joe you think it's just a joke. As you can see JoeC your liberal/progressives are as dirty as they come when it comes to racism,sexism and religious bigotry.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Truth About Margaret Sanger
    "I accepted an invitation to talk to the women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan...

    I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses...

    I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak...

    In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose.

    A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered." (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366) The founder of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics. Now do you understand about your hero's on the left? I know you say you don't like abortions but you think it fine and dandy to get one. Go to www.maafa21.com and get your copy of MAAFA21.
    Yes...Abortion A Key to A Racist Agenda? The 2 hour film : Maafa21Black Genocide in 21st Century America,is the most stunning and "offensive" look behind the racist and eugenic mentality of abortion and Planned Parenthood. Maafa21 will show you things that will leave you gasping and horrified. Original quotes and video of the founders of Planned Parenthood and their links to Hitler and the Nazis as well as their memberships in the American Eugenics Society. Get a copy of Maafa21 - see what all the talk is about here http://www.maafa21.com If you let this happen then you are no different then the KKK or Nazi's for that matter. That is like standing on the sidelines watching a bunch of men rape a women and doing nothing but cheering on the men for their freedom to have sex when they want to. She is "just" a women. Just like they are not crying babies yet because they haven't taken their first breath. If you let this happen you are a genocidal baby killer. Go ahead and cheer on the women for having the right to destroy a life. As long as you don't do the killing it never hits your conscience. That is BS and you know it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Chris, As if your side honestly cared. just because someone chooses to have an abortion, doesn't tie me to their choice.


    to be blunt, less abortions means more of Reagan's favorite type of mother, The "welfare mommas."

    You want to lessen abortions which is a good thing, but yourside also wants to lessen entitlement programs which most of the babies that are aborted would be on if allowed to live.

    That means 15 million more african american babies, most living in marginal conditions, with food insecurity. How do you suppose to handle that? How do you reconcile the extra 40 plus million people into getting jobs, healthcare etc?

    The rights healthcare proposal covers around 3 million people and yet you wish we had another 40 plus million in america. How many people without food then? Living below poverty? without healthcare?

    And while personally i oppose abortion, how do you reconcile all the other realities? I don't see it.

    So whats the grand plan? Stop abortions today and then what? Please inform me, Chris.

    ReplyDelete
  10. JoeC Your a FUNNY Guy, Not RIGHT but Funny!

    Entitlement Programs and Welfare are VOTER Incentives to LIBERALS! How in the Heck DID you Miss that ONE! Reagan and Welfare,Thats Like Saying BJ Clinton was CELIBATE! Your a Funny Funny LIB!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jeez Joey ... I'm not trying to start yet another argument with you. But did you read what you wrote? Seriously ... abortion as a means to control the black population because you are worried about the strain on the economy? As if every black baby, or the majority of black babies, that are born will not contribute meaningfully to society, they will be stuck in a Hypocrat welfare state!?! That's, truly, horrifying that you think like that.

    I think like this: More people means more people that can be entrepreneurs and create wealth and opportunity for more people. You think more people will just be a burden on society. Classic lieberal mentality.

    Well Joey, why don't we just sterilize the black people living in slums now, would that work for you? I mean, they just keep reproducing, and that's more and more of a strain on society, while they aren't contributing a damn thing.

    I am shocked and disgusted, frankly, by your thought processes.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm as progressive as just about anybody I know. But on this one topic I find I really have a split with my party. I just cannot approve of abortion. I think it is wrong, and terrible. You folks have the "Reagan Republicans" well I guess I'm a "Stupak" Democrat.

    ReplyDelete
  13. John, save your fake outrage for someone who cares.

    Its a simple thought that the majority of abortions within any community are not coming from the middle and upper class of that community, therefore a majority of the possible babies would be effected by poverty and all its ills.

    And i am not suggesting that abortion is a means of population control, Chris and the author he quoted are. Surely you can see that. I am merely following in their vein and asking what would Chris do to solve the problems that his beliefs would create. Perhaps you didn't read the previous post by Chris or the discussion Dr. Kings niece also Dr. King presented. Perhaps i should've been more concise in my post that i was following up on their views.

    Again save you fake outrage for someone else.

    The reality is that if you belief that abortion has been a de-facto population control then you should be able to acknowledge that the fact that the majority of abortions are by people whow face pretty serious economuic conditions. How do you handle that?

    If current statistics are correct and 57 percent of all abortions happen to those that are economically challenged thats anothe 27.5 million people of the estimated 48 million abortions that would be poor.

    ReplyDelete
  14. and don't add in that 88 percent of all abortions are by unwed mothers, whether divorced, unmarried, widowed etc.

    That would be 42 million single parent families.

    I realize that it sounds cold and perhaps it is, but there are things that have to be explored beyond the surface.

    I didn't even get into the infant mortality rate in America and issues with gestational healthcare for poor pregant mothers. We already have an issue with that in our country.

    Atleast some Republicans have addressed this and i admire them for it. Take Mike Huckabee a staunch anti-abortion politican who has the class and the seriousness to look at the cause and effect of the things he proposes. I've heard the man speak many times about abortion, infant mortality and gestational healthcare as one issue. Most of the right doesn't.

    ReplyDelete

Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.