IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
   XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons   
   XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns   
   XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival   
   From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.   
   BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
      
   On 2/18/2015 8:22 PM, nickname unavailable wrote:   
   > On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 5:45:05 PM UTC-6, dav...@agent.com wrote:   
   >> The twisted priorities of a graying nation   
   >> By Robert J. Samuelson, Feb. 9, 2015   
   >>   
   >> We are gutting government.   
   >>   
   >> It is an extreme irony of the Obama presidency that a proud liberal —   
   >> someone who believes in government's constructive role — is presiding   
   >> over the harshest squeeze on government since World War II. What's   
   >> happening is simple: Spending on the elderly and health care is slowly   
   >> overwhelming the rest of the federal government. Spending on other   
   >> vital activities (from defense to financial regulation) is being   
   >> sacrificed to cover the growing costs of a graying nation.   
   >>   
   >> This is the central budget issue of our time. It is largely ignored,   
   >> as it was in the recent unveiling of the administration's 2016 budget.   
   >> President Obama consistently avoids it; most Republicans take refuge   
   >> in his silence. Without political leaders to define the debate, the   
   >> media find it hard to clarify the conflicts and choices. Policy   
   >> proceeds by default: Spending on the elderly receives a pass; cuts   
   >> fall on other programs.   
   >>   
   >> The result is a spectacular skewing of priorities. Anyone who doubts   
   >> this should study the 2016 budget documents.   
   >>   
   >> Start with the Congressional Budget Office. Based on current laws, the   
   >> CBO projects that annual federal spending will grow by $2.6 trillion,   
   >> or 75 percent, between 2014 and 2025. Almost 90 percent of the   
   >> increase comes from three sources: Social Security, health spending   
   >> (heavily tilted toward the elderly despite recent Medicare savings)   
   >> and interest on the federal debt. Spending on most other programs   
   >> doesn't keep pace with inflation.   
   >>   
   >> We know this from Obama's budget documents. One table adjusts major   
   >> spending categories for inflation and population increases. From 2016   
   >> to 2025, "real" population-adjusted spending grows 27 percent for   
   >> Social Security and 24 percent for Medicare, while spending drops 19   
   >> percent for defense and 17 percent for "domestic discretionary"   
   >> programs. ("Domestic discretionary" spending is a catch-all that   
   >> includes law enforcement, housing, education, energy, food safety and   
   >> more.)   
   >>   
   >> What the dry figures don't convey is the degradation of government at   
   >> the agency and program level. This is occurring, though documenting   
   >> its extent is hard. Francis Collins, head of the National Institutes   
   >> of Health, estimates that the agency's budget has lost nearly 25   
   >> percent of its purchasing power in the last decade. NIH used to   
   >> approve one of three grant proposals; the ratio now is one of six.   
   >> Presumably, younger researchers suffer most. Some public-health   
   >> problems (say, resistance to existing antibiotics) may be underfunded.   
   >>   
   >> The Internal Revenue Service blames budget cuts and reduced staffing   
   >> for delays in mailing refunds and responding to taxpayer questions. In   
   >> 2014, only about two-thirds of callers got through to an agent, and   
   >> waiting times averaged nearly 20 minutes. (In 2004, nearly 90 percent   
   >> got through, with typical waiting times of 2.5 minutes.) The national   
   >> parks have also been hit. Since 2010, their funding has decreased 12   
   >> percent in inflation-adjusted dollars, and the backlog of deferred   
   >> maintenance has topped $11 billion, says the National Parks   
   >> Conservation Association, an advocacy group.   
   >>   
   >> We are allowing demographics to determine national priorities. Nowhere   
   >> is this more apparent than defense, which is scaling back (the Army   
   >> alone is cutting an estimated 120,000 active-duty troops from its   
   >> wartime peak) just when foreign threats seem to be rising. So   
   >> demographics even shape global strategy.   
   >>   
   >> It's the path of least resistance. Ideally, we would eliminate   
   >> nonessential and ineffective programs (farm subsidies, Amtrak), begin   
   >> to trim Social Security and Medicare benefits (gradual increases in   
   >> eligibility ages and lower benefits for wealthier recipients), and pay   
   >> for the rest of government with higher taxes. But both Obama and   
   >> Republicans evade this unpopular exercise.   
   >>   
   >> Instead, they've embraced a policy of slow-motion spending   
   >> strangulation. The problem is not the "sequester," which automatically   
   >> cuts outlays. It is the spending limits required to stay within the   
   >> outlay "caps" needed to avoid sequester. Though the effect in any   
   >> single year is modest, the cumulative impact is huge. Since 1990,   
   >> spending on defense and domestic discretionary programs has averaged   
   >> 7.4 percent of national income (gross domestic product). In 2014, that   
   >> was 6.8 percent of GDP, near a post-World War II low. Under Obama's   
   >> budget, it's projected at 4.5 percent in 2025.   
   >>   
   >> At some point, this ratcheting down of spending may become politically   
   >> unsustainable. (Note: Obama has already proposed increases for   
   >> national parks.) To the extent that Obama's budget projections reflect   
   >> unrealistic spending assumptions, future deficits are understated.   
   >>   
   >> We all ought to want effective and efficient government. But   
   >> government is being strangled as the rising costs of baby-boomer   
   >> retirees reduce the capacity of other programs to fulfill their   
   >> missions. Obama would worsen the problem. Unable to pay for existing   
   >> programs, he would add more (for "free" community college and more   
   >> preschool programs, among other things) that would intensify the   
   >> competition for scarce funds.   
   >>   
   >> Obama imagines himself a champion of better government. In reality, he   
   >> is an agent of gutted government.   
      
   Obama shows us that Bigger Government is a failure. Just look at all the   
   Obama Failure.   
      
   That gives us reason to gut that bloating that Liberals created.   
      
   Obama is the poster child for failed government.   
      
      
   Obama points out the Failure himself, he told us Cuba policy has failed   
   after 50 years because it has NOT succeed in those 50 years, well he's   
   also saying that the *WAR ON POVERTY*  which is also over 50 years old   
   has failed and needs to be changed.   
      
   Yes it's Liberalism it's self that has failed after 50 years and it's a   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)