Trump's budget

[Ibanez]

Eliminate the SEC. Its worthless

The SouthEastern Conference is still relevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

What a Stupid Motherfvcker. And you voted for this turd......lol

Who voted for Trump??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mrklean]

What a Stupid Motherfvcker. And you voted for this turd......lol

Who voted for Trump??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not Me

[Ibanez]

Who voted for Trump??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not Me

Neither did most people on this board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Eliminate the SEC. Its worthless

Why? Has Goldman infested that, too?

[Jjoey52]

The Department of Energy was set up by WIN BUTTON Gerald Ford to find new sources of energy. I don't think they ever found any, abolish it and take what is necessary to other departments.

Get rid of NEA, Dept of Education, Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS. I am sure there are still more but that is a decent start.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

Eliminate the SEC. Its worthless

Why? Has Goldman infested that, too?

Point Ivytalk


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

[SDHornet]

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

Because that wasn't going to happen anyways.

You and your establishment ilk should be just fine with his budget...lots of expenditures for big gov programs and more wasteful defense spending.

[AZGrizFan]

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

Because that wasn't going to happen anyways.

You and your establishment ilk should be just fine with his budget...lots of expenditures for big gov programs and more wasteful defense spending.

Yeah, I'm sure there was a budget out there that dems would have voted for.

[kalm]

Why? Has Goldman infested that, too?

Point Ivytalk


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not sure if serious...

[CAA Flagship]

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

[Aho Old Guy]

Uhhh, Gentlemen?

In case you are interested, you can read it and weep (or chuckle?), here. (PDF)

64 pages – 12+ are blank, including the final 7 pages. Best single word description: Sophmoric. Best double word description: Ridiculously Sophmoric (high school sophmoric at that).

Quite a bit misleading, too. Example: “The President’s 2018 Budget requests $28.0 billion for DOE, a $1.7 billion or 5.6 percent” reduction. Surprise (or, not) Alert: Of that ‘$28.0 billion’ 73%+ is for the DoD. It’s not going anywhere.

So in reality it’s roughly a 23% cut to ‘supply, conservation, emergency preparedness, policy and regulation.”

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

In denial, much? Fill in the blanks for us, Cletus:
Republicans In Congress Voicing Support For Trump's 'Blueprint'
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________

Good luck!




Carry on.

edit: I fergit (perils of old age)

This little 'nugget' has gotten little if any attention:
"Provides $120 million to restart licensing activities for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste
repository and initiate a robust interim storage program."

Kinda calls into question the wisdom behind eliminating the "Chemical Safety Board" huh?

[CID1990]

Sounds like Trump's trying to blow up most of the Federal government


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chizzang]

Sounds like Trump's trying to blow up most of the Federal government

I completely disagree...
How so:
By adding funding to the largest lobby groups pet projects..?
and getting rid of things with no lobby support..?

Seems like quite the opposite to me
However I like your romanticizing of it - it's very Alphagriz of you

Note:
You blow up the "government" from within (because he's within the government)
By destroying it's largest most crony based factions - and he ain't doing that at all

[Grizalltheway]

Sounds like Trump's trying to blow up most of the Federal government

I completely disagree...
How so:
By adding funding to the largest lobby groups pet projects..?
and getting rid of things with no lobby support..?

Seems like quite the opposite to me
However I like your romanticizing of it - it's very Alphagriz of you

Note:
You blow up the "government" from within (because he's within the government)
By destroying it's largest most crony based factions - and he ain't doing that at all

Yeah, it's nice that we can spend hundreds of millions on securing Trump Tower and his family's travel but Meals on Wheels and Big Bird are just too expensive to keep around.

[Aho Old Guy]

Sounds like Trump's trying to blow up most of the Federal government


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Methinks he wants to blow-up something else besides the Govt. If looks as if he wants Congress to ‘Bust the Caps’ on non-defense spending in FY17, too, cutting $15 billion (already 7-8 months into the fiscal year?) --- $3 billion to be ‘re-directed’ to The Wall, $8 billion to Overseas Contingency Operations, and $4 billion to Homeland Security and USAID (?).

Nothing like a new shooting war to bring Americans together ... 'Kumbaya, My Lord. Kumbaya!'

[Vidav]

The Department of Energy was set up by WIN BUTTON Gerald Ford to find new sources of energy. I don't think they ever found any, abolish it and take what is necessary to other departments.

Get rid of NEA, Dept of Education, Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS. I am sure there are still more but that is a decent start.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Those aren't even a drop in the bucket.

[Ivytalk]

Point Ivytalk


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not sure if serious...

Shirley, I can be serious.

[JohnStOnge]

I suspect Trump submitted an extreme budget he knows has no shot but looks at the situation as though it's a business deal where he stakes out a position then negotiates away from it. The problem is that the extreme nature of his proposal is going to be used to demonize the Republican Party to an even greater extent.

Because that wasn't going to happen anyways.

You and your establishment ilk should be just fine with his budget...lots of expenditures for big gov programs and more wasteful defense spending.

I'll provide an example that's beyond the social stuff. You all know that I have criticized the way in which Climate Science is presented. But that doesn't mean I don't think there should be Climate Science. To assume that there is no possibility that human activity can have an impact on the Climate is foolish. And, politically, most people in the US are at least somewhat concerned about it (see http://www.gallup.com/poll/190010/conce ... -high.aspx).

Yet we have this from the Trump Administration:

phpBB [video]

That just makes the Republican Party and the Conservative side look stupid.

[kalm]

Because that wasn't going to happen anyways.

You and your establishment ilk should be just fine with his budget...lots of expenditures for big gov programs and more wasteful defense spending.

I'll provide an example that's beyond the social stuff. You all know that I have criticized the way in which Climate Science is presented. But that doesn't mean I don't think there should be Climate Science. To assume that there is no possibility that human activity can have an impact on the Climate is foolish. And, politically, most people in the US are at least somewhat concerned about it (see http://www.gallup.com/poll/190010/conce ... -high.aspx).

Yet we have this from the Trump Administration:

phpBB [video]

That just makes the Republican Party and the Conservative side look stupid.

But they were holding that position long before Trump.

[Jjoey52]

Being that these same scientists claiming global warming were screaming about another ice age not too many years ago leaves me to doubt their credibility.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Being that these same scientists claiming global warming were screaming about another ice age not too many years ago leaves me to doubt their credibility.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah...these were the same scientists 40 years ago, with same level of tech, computer models, and measurements...

[JohnStOnge]

Being that these same scientists claiming global warming were screaming about another ice age not too many years ago leaves me to doubt their credibility.

I've referenced that situation myself but it did not involve the kind of consensus that's going on now. You can look at an abstract "pushing back" on the idea that there was ever a "global cooling" consensus at http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10. ... BAMS2370.1.

In any case this is the only planet we have to live on. It is foolish to say we are going to put blinders on; to say that trying to understand what's going on with the climate and how our own activity might impact it is a waste of money. That's crazy. The money spent on that kind of science is a drop in the bucket in the context of the Federal budget and saying we won't spend that drop in the bucket in an effort to understand as best we can what's happening with a system we depend on for our survival is absolutely nuts.

We can debate the conclusions. We can argue about whether or not the public is being sufficiently advised about what it takes to infer cause and effect. We can argue about the certainty associated with the projections. But saying we should close our eyes and not attempt to see is not defensible.

Meanwhile the same people won't make any attempt at all to address the real issue we have with long term fiscal sustainability. They just stick their heads in the sand with respect to the entitlement programs issue. Won't look at Social Security. Won't look at Medicare.

[CAA Flagship]

Being that these same scientists claiming global warming were screaming about another ice age not too many years ago leaves me to doubt their credibility.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah...these were the same scientists 40 years ago, with same level of tech, computer models, and measurements...

Garbage In = Garbage Out