Cutting Spending: Stop the Waste

[hotel4dogs]

wonder how much the inauguration is costing?

[M&K's Retrievers]

wonder how much the inauguration is costing?

It shouldn't cost me a penny.

[Gerry Clinchy]

Another $8 Billion (yes that is a "B" this time) could be saved on Headstart.

Don't know if you read it the other day ... Human Services agency has sat on the results for 4 YEARS!

They did their own study on the effects of HeadStart. Truthfully, the program's premise sounded like good sense to me, so I'm really pretty stunned at the study's results (remember, from the govt agency who actually runs the program). First they did a study tracking HeadStart kids v. control group through 1st grade. The HeadStart kids showed no advantage over the control group by 1st grade. I guess they didn't want to believe that, so they extended the study through 3rd grade. By 3rd grade, not only did the HeadStart group show no advantages from being in that program, some of those kids scored worse on some parts of the study parameters than kids who never went to HeadStart.

Evidently, something that looked good on paper didn't work out. At the very least, one would have to say that the theory was not implemented correctly to produce any results anticipated. Remember, this is not some right-wing think tank ... it's a study done by the very govt agency that administers the program.

Estimates are that $180 Billion (yes, that's a "B") have been spent upon HeadStart since its inception.

So far that's $8,400,300 PER YEAR ... over 10 years (which is the way the politicians like to frame their "savings") that is $84,003,000.

I also agree with putting a cap on the amount a President can spend on his "recreational" flying in expensive Air Force One (both of them, since they always put two of them in the air). Probably could have brought POTUS whole family to DC area for a holiday vacation and celebration at Camp David for less than it cost to send the POTUS to HI for 2 weeks.

It just occurred to me ... does the POTUS ever spend any time in Chicago, where he still has a residence, and where he spent most of his adult life? Never seem to hear about him going there. Truthfully, I can't blame him for preferring HI to Chicago.

[Golddogs]

It shouldn't cost me a penny.

If I recall corectly, the only gov expense is the actual inaguration. All the balls and parties are privately funded. I seem to recall a big stink when Reagan was inaugurated because of the opulent ball Nancy planned.

[starjack]

Maybe we can use this thread to annotate the many wasted tax dollars that simply do not have to be spent.

For example, we are paying $184.26 for Bill Clinton's premium cable TV. My basic package from Dish is about $55. That gives you all the news stations, which a former President might be considered to truly "need". That would be a savings of about $130/mo, or $1,560. We're also paying for the Carter's cable TV. If we throw in GW and HW Bush (though figures for Bush were not mentioned), that's $6240/year. That's $62,400 over 10 years. All these fellas could easily afford to pay for cable TV entirely out of their own pocket, having far more in income than the average Joe making $60K a year. So, why do we pay for it?

As with "corporate welfare", sould we call this POTUS welfare?

Clinton is provided

nearly $1 million dollars allocated to him from the government to cover post-presidency expenses like personnel, travel, rent and postage.

That seems quite generous ... you can buy a lot of services for $1 million a year. For 5 former POTUSes tha's $5 million a year ... plus the Secret Service protection (which they will now get for life).

Seems like they could do just fine much less.

Right on the money if we could cut all the wasteful spending we would have enough money to put armed guards in every school. Hell we would have some left over.

[Gerry Clinchy]

Right on the money if we could cut all the wasteful spending we would have enough money to put armed guards in every school. Hell we would have some left over.

This would be the whole point in cutting out programs that do NOT work. Take 1/2 the savings and put them into programs that DO work.

I am still stymied by the failure of HeadStart. As a psych major in college, it seems that good pre-school programs should be a success for kids who otherwise might have a less enriched experience in pre-school years. Small children have an amazing capacity for learning. How could the govt fail so badly in providing the kind of enrichment that seems to be so beneficial to children of these ages? By comparing the HeadStart kids to a control group of similar background (outside of the program), it seems downright impossible.

In the case of HeadStart it seems downright stupid to continue a costly program that is have zero positive results and even putting some children farther behind than if we just left them alone!

We might spend some of that money to find out why this has failed so badly. We might actually come up with something that actually works.

[starjack]

I work in and around the green bay schools. I and others call headstart a goverment baby sitting. The schools want it there for all the fed. money they are getting. But have talked to some of the head start teachers and they really feel the kids are just toyoung for being in that kind of structured enviroment.

[caryalsobrook]

This would be the whole point in cutting out programs that do NOT work. Take 1/2 the savings and put them into programs that DO work.

I am still stymied by the failure of HeadStart. As a psych major in college, it seems that good pre-school programs should be a success for kids who otherwise might have a less enriched experience in pre-school years. Small children have an amazing capacity for learning. How could the govt fail so badly in providing the kind of enrichment that seems to be so beneficial to children of these ages? By comparing the HeadStart kids to a control group of similar background (outside of the program), it seems downright impossible.

In the case of HeadStart it seems downright stupid to continue a costly program that is have zero positive results and even putting some children farther behind than if we just left them alone!

We might spend some of that money to find out why this has failed so badly. We might actually come up with something that actually works.

You point out in Headstart, a program whose goals are noble but whose results have been nil. One might learn that the Fed.kk gov. is structurally incapable of implementing such a program. The Fed. Gov. is full of such programs and the answer is always to just SPEND MORE MONEY ON THE FAILED PROGRAM because that is the cause for failure. Until we recognize this fact as a people, we will continue to spend money on such failed programs, reducing the willbeing of society as a whole.

[Franco]

Here are some areas that could be eliminated that annually cost a couple of hundred million and some into the billions;

Corporate Welfare & 90% of the subsidies
Foreign Aide
Foreign Bribes
Cut military spending but not Defense spending
Dept of Education
Dept of Energy
HUD
90% of the Endowments and Grants
War On Drugs (that would save more lives than all of Obama's 21 edicts on gun control)
IRS and go with a flat tax where everyone pays, ends loopholes
end the wars, bring the troops home and place some on the boarder
eliminate Congresses' medical and pensions to match the tax payers
cut Congresses' pay until we have a budget surplus
eliminate Public Sector unions
cut medicaid benefits, foodstamps and turn welfare into workfare
cut back on unemployment benefits
Obamacare
&
the EPA

these are just a few to get started with

[HPL]

This would be the whole point in cutting out (or re-instituting) programs that do NOT work.

In the case of HeadStart (assault weapon bans) it seems downright stupid to continue (re-institute) a costly program that is have zero positive results and even (possibly) putting some (people) children farther behind (at greater risk) than if we just left them alone!

We might spend some of that money to find out why this has failed so badly. We might actually come up with something that actually works.

Just wanted to point out that stupidity seems to be the way the feds roll.