Free: Contests & Raffles.
I'm a little sorry to say this, but with the debt as high as it is deep cuts have to be made. There also can be no sacred cows, so as much as I dislike cuts to "things I like" I recognize we need to take drastic measures.
cutting the forest service doesn't hurt my feelings, fire money is a cash cow that is so mis managed its unreal . I know i have recieved lottsa of it and didn't earn hardly any of it, I was just one of thousands. They have some sort of oligist for everything know to man. Go back to being a revenue generating agency and I will be supportive of them like I used to be.
I'm a little sorry to say this, but with the debt as high as it is deep cuts have to be made. There also can be no sacred cows, so as much as I dislike cuts to "things I like" I recognize we need to take drastic measures. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Quote from: Special T on May 23, 2017, 03:13:11 PMI'm a little sorry to say this, but with the debt as high as it is deep cuts have to be made. There also can be no sacred cows, so as much as I dislike cuts to "things I like" I recognize we need to take drastic measures. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using TapatalkBut thats not really the case with this budget. there are plenty of sacred cows (homeland security, VA, DOD) that not only didn't get cut in the proposal but instead got increases. As a veteran, I can strongly say that the military does not spend money efficiently. A drastic measure would be holding agencies accountable for every penny they spend, instead of saying "the only way to fix our military is to throw more money at it!" I understand we have issues with our budget and there is waste in the government. I think most people agree with that position. But if we are concerned with balancing our budget and removing wasteful spending, shouldn't we be as critical of 550 billion as we are of 13 billion?? Shouldn't we be more critical because if the margin is the same its still a better return?My analogy: Its like stealing from your kids' piggy bank to pay the heating bill but never bothering to weatherstrip or seal your windows or put on a sweater. You're just going to keep burning up that small money to pay the bill without attacking the problem at its root.Eventually that little piggy bank goes empty and since you didn't fix the problem to begin with, now you've got 50 other broken things in your house.
The White House released it's proposed 2018 federal budget. Here are things of note for outdoorsmen:US Fish and Wildlife Service-Eliminates the US Fish & Wildlife Service Sportsmen and Recreational Access program. This program purchases land which then opens federal National Wildlife Refuges to new or expanded fishing/hunting activities. Essentially, the land is purchased solely for these new opportunities. This is elimination saves about $2.5 million dollars-Eliminates purchasing lands for National Wildlife Refuges. Saves about $36 million dollars-Reduce a little over half a million dollars from USFWS Federal Wildlife Officers (uniformed game wardens) but no reduction in staffing-Reduce $1.5 million from the USFWS Office of Law Enforcement (Detectives) which includes 5 Special Agent positions-9.5% cut total to the US Fish & Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service-10% cut to the National Park ServiceForest Service-Technically the National Forest System would see an increase in funding of $240 million, BUT this is because Trump proposes moving wildland fire from it's own program under the US Forest Service to a program under the National Forest System. Realistically, the National Forest System would see a 7.5% cut from current funding.-89% decrease in the funding for purchasing new lands for National Forests
Quote from: bigtex on May 23, 2017, 02:41:48 PMThe White House released it's proposed 2018 federal budget. Here are things of note for outdoorsmen:US Fish and Wildlife Service-Eliminates the US Fish & Wildlife Service Sportsmen and Recreational Access program. This program purchases land which then opens federal National Wildlife Refuges to new or expanded fishing/hunting activities. Essentially, the land is purchased solely for these new opportunities. This is elimination saves about $2.5 million dollars-Eliminates purchasing lands for National Wildlife Refuges. Saves about $36 million dollars-Reduce a little over half a million dollars from USFWS Federal Wildlife Officers (uniformed game wardens) but no reduction in staffing-Reduce $1.5 million from the USFWS Office of Law Enforcement (Detectives) which includes 5 Special Agent positions-9.5% cut total to the US Fish & Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service-10% cut to the National Park ServiceForest Service-Technically the National Forest System would see an increase in funding of $240 million, BUT this is because Trump proposes moving wildland fire from it's own program under the US Forest Service to a program under the National Forest System. Realistically, the National Forest System would see a 7.5% cut from current funding.-89% decrease in the funding for purchasing new lands for National Forests I've not dove into this too much yet but answer me this if you can, are these cuts in increases, as are most of his proposed "budget cuts" the D"s are loosing their collective minds over again, while keeping the uniformed liberal voter base in the dark......or are these actual cuts in existing funding/staffing with no/zero increase in budget?
There also can be no sacred cows
For 9 agencies the average sum of the cuts works out to 16.74%, if we took that critical of a look at our military budget it would result in approximately $92 billion put back on the table. That's a much better return than that same margin across all those rinky dinky other departments and yet its one of the only departments that isn't having to defend its current funding and is getting even more funding in the budget proposal. zero accountability, limited oversight, massive internal bureaucracy and a blank check for additional spending is how we got into this mess to begin with and yet we continue to allow it to happen with our largest expenditure. Why not a flat percentage cut across all departments?
Why not a flat percentage cut across all departments?
Agency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the board.
Cuts must be made!
Quote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay for
Quote from: dwils233 on May 24, 2017, 04:27:17 PMWhy not a flat percentage cut across all departments? Agency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the board.
Quote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:00:22 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay forIt has been noted in other topics you are opposed to Trump. So like most anti-trumpers, I'm sure no matter what Trump does you would be opposed.
Quote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:03:40 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:00:22 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay forIt has been noted in other topics you are opposed to Trump. So like most anti-trumpers, I'm sure no matter what Trump does you would be opposed. I'm not just anti Trump tho...i criticize both sides I know if it were my budget and I had to make cuts I wouldn't also be making stupid expenses that's on.ly purpose is a political tool...you can't cry for cuts in one hand and grab for more money with the otherWith that said I'm not against cuts and proper money allocation....things can always get better
Quote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:20:53 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:03:40 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:00:22 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay forIt has been noted in other topics you are opposed to Trump. So like most anti-trumpers, I'm sure no matter what Trump does you would be opposed. I'm not just anti Trump tho...i criticize both sides I know if it were my budget and I had to make cuts I wouldn't also be making stupid expenses that's on.ly purpose is a political tool...you can't cry for cuts in one hand and grab for more money with the otherWith that said I'm not against cuts and proper money allocation....things can always get betterIt depends on one's views. I would agree with even larger cuts at some of those agencies and I still agree with spending the same or more on our military, but we also need to eliminate wasteful spending by the military so that we get the security we are paying for.
Quote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:26:41 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:20:53 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:03:40 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:00:22 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay forIt has been noted in other topics you are opposed to Trump. So like most anti-trumpers, I'm sure no matter what Trump does you would be opposed. I'm not just anti Trump tho...i criticize both sides I know if it were my budget and I had to make cuts I wouldn't also be making stupid expenses that's on.ly purpose is a political tool...you can't cry for cuts in one hand and grab for more money with the otherWith that said I'm not against cuts and proper money allocation....things can always get betterIt depends on one's views. I would agree with even larger cuts at some of those agencies and I still agree with spending the same or more on our military, but we also need to eliminate wasteful spending by the military so that we get the security we are paying for. More funding = more to spend and wasteLess funding = less to spend and wasteWhy is wildland fire a wasteful division? Because it's essentially a blank check. The military is essentially the same thing. I like a strong military but you don't reduce waste by throwing more money at the same entity.
Quote from: bigtex on May 24, 2017, 05:29:59 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:26:41 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:20:53 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 05:03:40 PMQuote from: kentrek on May 24, 2017, 05:00:22 PMQuote from: bearpaw on May 24, 2017, 03:03:46 PMCuts must be made! we gotta save money for the wall mexico is gona pay forIt has been noted in other topics you are opposed to Trump. So like most anti-trumpers, I'm sure no matter what Trump does you would be opposed. I'm not just anti Trump tho...i criticize both sides I know if it were my budget and I had to make cuts I wouldn't also be making stupid expenses that's on.ly purpose is a political tool...you can't cry for cuts in one hand and grab for more money with the otherWith that said I'm not against cuts and proper money allocation....things can always get betterIt depends on one's views. I would agree with even larger cuts at some of those agencies and I still agree with spending the same or more on our military, but we also need to eliminate wasteful spending by the military so that we get the security we are paying for. More funding = more to spend and wasteLess funding = less to spend and wasteWhy is wildland fire a wasteful division? Because it's essentially a blank check. The military is essentially the same thing. I like a strong military but you don't reduce waste by throwing more money at the same entity.I would like to see wasteful spending cut from all parts of government!
Everyone needs to remember that a "cut" is not really a cut. If they were issued $1 last year, and the same $1 this year, that is considered a "cut". If it is not more than a 5 or 6 percent increase, it is still considered a "cut".
Quote from: idahohuntr on May 24, 2017, 04:40:36 PMAgency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the boardthat sounds like a sacred cow argument I'm mostly joking, but that is an argument that is used to why we can never cut the military (too much risk/consequence of failure) and thats the argument that breeds waste, ineffeciencies and bureaucracy.
Agency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the board
Quote from: dwils233 on May 24, 2017, 04:49:59 PMQuote from: idahohuntr on May 24, 2017, 04:40:36 PMAgency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the boardthat sounds like a sacred cow argument I'm mostly joking, but that is an argument that is used to why we can never cut the military (too much risk/consequence of failure) and thats the argument that breeds waste, ineffeciencies and bureaucracy. While I still prefer targeted v. across the board cuts I agree with your point...and that's exactly how we end up with county, state, federal budgets all going to police/fire/safety while everything else gets cut. On the federal side, simply cutting budgets will not reduce inefficiencies, waste and bureaucracy that gobbles up money...Congress needs to severely cut the regulations federal agencies are required to adhere to in purchasing goods, services, and conducting business...that will cut huge amounts of waste.
Quote from: idahohuntr on May 24, 2017, 04:40:36 PMAgency missions and consequence of failure are not equal. I prefer targeted cuts vs across the board.that sounds like a sacred cow argument I'm mostly joking, but that is an argument that is used to why we can never cut the military (too much risk/consequence of failure) and thats the argument that breeds waste, ineffeciencies and bureaucracy.
Quote from: huntnphool on May 24, 2017, 03:22:24 PMQuote from: bigtex on May 23, 2017, 02:41:48 PMThe White House released it's proposed 2018 federal budget. Here are things of note for outdoorsmen:US Fish and Wildlife Service-Eliminates the US Fish & Wildlife Service Sportsmen and Recreational Access program. This program purchases land which then opens federal National Wildlife Refuges to new or expanded fishing/hunting activities. Essentially, the land is purchased solely for these new opportunities. This is elimination saves about $2.5 million dollars-Eliminates purchasing lands for National Wildlife Refuges. Saves about $36 million dollars-Reduce a little over half a million dollars from USFWS Federal Wildlife Officers (uniformed game wardens) but no reduction in staffing-Reduce $1.5 million from the USFWS Office of Law Enforcement (Detectives) which includes 5 Special Agent positions-9.5% cut total to the US Fish & Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service-10% cut to the National Park ServiceForest Service-Technically the National Forest System would see an increase in funding of $240 million, BUT this is because Trump proposes moving wildland fire from it's own program under the US Forest Service to a program under the National Forest System. Realistically, the National Forest System would see a 7.5% cut from current funding.-89% decrease in the funding for purchasing new lands for National Forests I've not dove into this too much yet but answer me this if you can, are these cuts in increases, as are most of his proposed "budget cuts" the D"s are loosing their collective minds over again, while keeping the uniformed liberal voter base in the dark......or are these actual cuts in existing funding/staffing with no/zero increase in budget?The federal and State of WA budget operate the same. You either increase, decrease, or keep budget levels the same as the previous approved budget. So as an example the Natl Park Service would see a 10% decrease in the funding they have right now.
Quote from: bigtex on May 24, 2017, 03:25:40 PMQuote from: huntnphool on May 24, 2017, 03:22:24 PMQuote from: bigtex on May 23, 2017, 02:41:48 PMThe White House released it's proposed 2018 federal budget. Here are things of note for outdoorsmen:US Fish and Wildlife Service-Eliminates the US Fish & Wildlife Service Sportsmen and Recreational Access program. This program purchases land which then opens federal National Wildlife Refuges to new or expanded fishing/hunting activities. Essentially, the land is purchased solely for these new opportunities. This is elimination saves about $2.5 million dollars-Eliminates purchasing lands for National Wildlife Refuges. Saves about $36 million dollars-Reduce a little over half a million dollars from USFWS Federal Wildlife Officers (uniformed game wardens) but no reduction in staffing-Reduce $1.5 million from the USFWS Office of Law Enforcement (Detectives) which includes 5 Special Agent positions-9.5% cut total to the US Fish & Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service-10% cut to the National Park ServiceForest Service-Technically the National Forest System would see an increase in funding of $240 million, BUT this is because Trump proposes moving wildland fire from it's own program under the US Forest Service to a program under the National Forest System. Realistically, the National Forest System would see a 7.5% cut from current funding.-89% decrease in the funding for purchasing new lands for National Forests I've not dove into this too much yet but answer me this if you can, are these cuts in increases, as are most of his proposed "budget cuts" the D"s are loosing their collective minds over again, while keeping the uniformed liberal voter base in the dark......or are these actual cuts in existing funding/staffing with no/zero increase in budget?The federal and State of WA budget operate the same. You either increase, decrease, or keep budget levels the same as the previous approved budget. So as an example the Natl Park Service would see a 10% decrease in the funding they have right now. So you are saying those areas are receiving cuts from last years budget and will have zero increase in their budget under this plan?
Quote from: huntnphool on May 24, 2017, 09:54:44 PMQuote from: bigtex on May 24, 2017, 03:25:40 PMQuote from: huntnphool on May 24, 2017, 03:22:24 PMQuote from: bigtex on May 23, 2017, 02:41:48 PMThe White House released it's proposed 2018 federal budget. Here are things of note for outdoorsmen:US Fish and Wildlife Service-Eliminates the US Fish & Wildlife Service Sportsmen and Recreational Access program. This program purchases land which then opens federal National Wildlife Refuges to new or expanded fishing/hunting activities. Essentially, the land is purchased solely for these new opportunities. This is elimination saves about $2.5 million dollars-Eliminates purchasing lands for National Wildlife Refuges. Saves about $36 million dollars-Reduce a little over half a million dollars from USFWS Federal Wildlife Officers (uniformed game wardens) but no reduction in staffing-Reduce $1.5 million from the USFWS Office of Law Enforcement (Detectives) which includes 5 Special Agent positions-9.5% cut total to the US Fish & Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service-10% cut to the National Park ServiceForest Service-Technically the National Forest System would see an increase in funding of $240 million, BUT this is because Trump proposes moving wildland fire from it's own program under the US Forest Service to a program under the National Forest System. Realistically, the National Forest System would see a 7.5% cut from current funding.-89% decrease in the funding for purchasing new lands for National Forests I've not dove into this too much yet but answer me this if you can, are these cuts in increases, as are most of his proposed "budget cuts" the D"s are loosing their collective minds over again, while keeping the uniformed liberal voter base in the dark......or are these actual cuts in existing funding/staffing with no/zero increase in budget?The federal and State of WA budget operate the same. You either increase, decrease, or keep budget levels the same as the previous approved budget. So as an example the Natl Park Service would see a 10% decrease in the funding they have right now. So you are saying those areas are receiving cuts from last years budget and will have zero increase in their budget under this plan?Correct.
Unless this country balances it's budget and quits spending more than it takes in an eventual crash is imminent, the farther in debt we go, the more we owe on interest, the bigger the eventual crash will be. Liberal spenders do not seem to understand basic bookkeeping principals, all they understand is giving handouts to the voters to get re-elected while feathering their own bed.
My brother is in the middle of selling his place right now, and doesn't plan on replacing it.
Quote from: Special T on May 25, 2017, 09:50:31 AMMy brother is in the middle of selling his place right now, and doesn't plan on replacing it.Is he going to live in an RV? Tent?
Quote from: Special T on May 23, 2017, 03:13:11 PMI'm a little sorry to say this, but with the debt as high as it is deep cuts have to be made. There also can be no sacred cows, so as much as I dislike cuts to "things I like" I recognize we need to take drastic measures.Well said, I agree!
