50 examples of government waste

On the audit list of improper purchases they mentioned xbox but no ps3. Definitely a conspiracy here.

I hope my specific tax dollars went to the Chinese prostitutes. What a noble cause. hey maybe I deserve the Nobel Peace prize.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
a lot like california, if our budget grew naturally with the population and inflation we wouldnt be in the mess we are in right now.

some of my favorites.

3. Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties.
10. The Securities and Exchange Commission spent $3.9 million rearranging desks and offices at its Washington, D.C., headquarters.
25. Congress recently gave Alaska Airlines $500,000 to paint a Chinook salmon on a Boeing 737.
29. The Defense Department wasted $100 million on unused flight tickets and never bothered to collect refunds even though the tickets were refundable.
43. Lawmakers diverted $13 million from Hurricane Katrina relief spending to build a museum celebrating the Army Corps of Engineers–the agency partially responsible for the failed levees that flooded New Orleans.
46. Washington recently spent $1.8 million to help build a private golf course in Atlanta, Georgia.

id like to play golf this weekend. theres a course with green fees nearby that are only $13 mon-fri, i should call my congresswoman.
 
Yeah the Corps of Engineers museum surprised me. That the money came from the Katrina relief fund is the icing on the cake.
 
I work for the government, and I see them waste millions a day on the job. And this is just on the base I work at. I have no doubt that we waste trillions a year.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']I work for the government, and I see them waste millions a day on the job. And this is just on the base I work at. I have no doubt that we waste trillions a year.[/QUOTE]

To be fair, the government only spends a trillion and a half dollars every year and only takes in one trillion in receipts. So, technically, they can't spend trillions, plural.


And we want them to take over healthcare. I'm sure they'll run a tight ship there too.
 
Everybody knows the government wastes money, though that doesn't mean nobody should say anything about it or point out these crazy examples, but I think the interesting thing is that people believe the government wastes money and businesses don't (hence comments like bmull's). Of course we don't get to see all of every businesses' expenditures, and the government's intake and spending is enormous compared to any individual business, so I guess that aids in the illusion.
 
Businesses can waste all the money they want. People aren't forced to buy their products.

I know that sounds hypocritical of me but I'm usually against bigger government unless big business has failed in that sector. I think we can all agree that health care is broken and needs to be fixed. Insurance companies, hospitals, and the government could've done more to make things better but really didn't.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Businesses can waste all the money they want. People aren't forced to buy their products.

I know that sounds hypocritical of me but I'm usually against bigger government unless big business has failed in that sector. I think we can all agree that health care is broken and needs to be fixed. Insurance companies, hospitals, and the government could've done more to make things better but really didn't.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't saying who could or couldn't waste money. I was saying that people believe that businesses are more efficient and waste less than government (or are just better, period) simply by virtue of being a business, and hence you get those types of arguments - health insurance will be worse if done by the government, school would be better if it was just private, etc.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']uh, private schools do test better then public schools.[/QUOTE]

Of course they do, they don't have to deal with the students the public schools do. Public schools would do better too if they could avoid the students that private schools can, along with other things that private schools aren't legally required to do, but that would defeat the purpose of public schooling. This is the kind of disconnect I'm talking about, do you think that since private schools do better in some contexts they would be better in all contexts, simply because they're private? Are all private schools better by virtue of not being part of the government, or is it because of something they do, or the context they're in, that the public schools aren't?
 
[quote name='depascal22']Businesses can waste all the money they want. People aren't forced to buy their products.

I know that sounds hypocritical of me but I'm usually against bigger government unless big business has failed in that sector. I think we can all agree that health care is broken and needs to be fixed. Insurance companies, hospitals, and the government could've done more to make things better but really didn't.[/QUOTE]

Businesses suffer consequences for wasteful spending, government doesn't. Government can just keep asking for more, while waving important issues out there as an excuse, without having to be accountable for what they waste.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Businesses can waste all the money they want. People aren't forced to buy their products.

I know that sounds hypocritical of me but I'm usually against bigger government unless big business has failed in that sector. I think we can all agree that health care is broken and needs to be fixed. Insurance companies, hospitals, and the government could've done more to make things better but really didn't.[/QUOTE]

I don't think we can all agree that healthcare is broken and needs a government fix. I'm not sure how education was broken and needed a government fix either. I'm also trying to wrap my brain to figure out how it was ever "fixed" by the government in the first place. Isn't it a common colloquialism that the public schools are broken?

I'm also trying to figure out how my road systems in Michigan are "fixed" by this government help program when every road seems to be in disrepair, being fixed, or in need of repair shortly after being fixed - year after year- after year. And let's not even mention the complete lapse of governments overseeing the quality of bridge maintenance and repair.

In fact, besides lighthouses, air traffic control, social welfare, subsidized housing, subsidized medicare, redistributive social security, I'm having a hard time thinking of ANY government program that fixes anything instead of making the problem worse. Oh, wait, scratch air traffic and everything else off that list too. Lighthouses are the only thing that government can do right. Everything else takes raising taxes, putting a bureaucrat in charge and sending him to a nice steak dinner with wine and a prostitute.

Ehh, whatever the problems are, I'm sure they are just the result of underfunding.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Businesses can waste all the money they want. People aren't forced to buy their products.

I know that sounds hypocritical of me but I'm usually against bigger government unless big business has failed in that sector. I think we can all agree that health care is broken and needs to be fixed. Insurance companies, hospitals, and the government could've done more to make things better but really didn't.[/QUOTE]

Our health care system is fine, considering the US is a capitalist country. If the US was a socialist country, or a communist country, then yeah, I'd say our system is pretty fucked up. I think what most people have a problem with is capitalism, not health care.

And if you think it's bad now, wait til the government intervenes. The average life span in the US will fall back to about 50 years.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Our health care system is fine, considering the US is a capitalist country. If the US was a socialist country, or a communist country, then yeah, I'd say our system is pretty fucked up. I think what most people have a problem with is capitalism, not health care.

And if you think it's bad now, wait til the government intervenes. The average life span in the US will fall back to about 50 years.[/QUOTE]

Capitalism is simply a method of free trade on a free market with goods privately owned. The only people who would have an issue with capitalism are people who have grown up buying the governments bullshit, when capitalism and communism are now simply political buzzwords to manipulate the minds of children and make you slaves to big brother. When the government gets done this 'capitalist' country will look no different then 'communist' Russia.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Our health care system is fine, considering the US is a capitalist country. If the US was a socialist country, or a communist country, then yeah, I'd say our system is pretty fucked up. I think what most people have a problem with is capitalism, not health care.

And if you think it's bad now, wait til the government intervenes. The average life span in the US will fall back to about 50 years.[/QUOTE]


Hahaha, hey Crotch, you're not going to live past 50 you sorry son of a bitch. You'd better move to the US and get some health insurance.
 
[quote name='AdultLink']Capitalism is simply a method of free trade on a free market with goods privately owned. The only people who would have an issue with capitalism are people who have grown up buying the governments bullshit, when capitalism and communism are now simply political buzzwords to manipulate the minds of children and make you slaves to big brother. When the government gets done this 'capitalist' country will look no different then 'communist' Russia.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Health care is a free and open market. If they choose to charge large amount that only some can afford it, then so be it. I don't think the government has any right to interfere with that. (Even though they have tried, and succeeded in some cases.)

I don't know about anybody else, but I think that the health care system is fine. I think that if the government tries 'fixing' it, then they'll just screw it up. At work, we have a motto, "If it ain't broke, fix it until it is".
 
You're right, it's absolutely fine. The people who can't afford it or get accepted shouldn't have it anyway, right? Surplus population and all that.
 
I can't tell if Access is kidding or not, honestly. It's just....I mean, just read those two posts, I just can't tell.
 
My favorite:

4. Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them–costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually–fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.
Click to expand...

edit: oh man,

8. A GAO audit classified nearly half of all purchases on government credit cards as improper, fraudulent, or embezzled. Examples of taxpayer-funded purchases include gambling, mortgage payments, liquor, lingerie, iPods, Xboxes, jewelry, Internet dating services, and Hawaiian vacations. In one extraordinary example, the Postal Service spent $13,500 on one dinner at a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse, including “over 200 appetizers and over $3,000 of alcohol, including more than 40 bottles of wine costing more than $50 each and brand-name liquor such as Courvoisier, Belvedere and Johnny Walker Gold.” The 81 guests consumed an average of $167 worth of food and drink apiece.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Btw, we are not a capitalist country anymore than we're a socialist country. In a truly capitalist country there would be no social programs. You may like that idea, but i don't.

We like to categorize countries into neat little groups, but few to no countries fit into any single political system.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I can't tell if Access is kidding or not, honestly. It's just....I mean, just read those two posts, I just can't tell.[/QUOTE]

Sorry. :lol: But no, I'm not kidding. And no, I'm not trying to kill people off. I just think that government run health care would be even worse than what we have now. I'm all for making health care more affordable, but I don't think that the current proposed plan will work.

But then again, I'm not really an expert. From what I've been reading, it won't work out too well. But maybe I'm missing something. :/
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Btw, we are not a capitalist country anymore than we're a socialist country. In a truly capitalist country there would be no social programs. You may like that idea, but i don't.

We like to categorize countries into neat little groups, but few to no countries fit into any single political system.[/QUOTE]

I don't think there are any countries that fit selectively into one group. I would just prefer that America lean more toward the capitalist side rather than the socialist side.
 
Well we still have a long way to go before we're socialists. Interfering in a few key industries doesn't make us suddenly socialist.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Hahaha, hey Crotch, you're not going to live past 50 you sorry son of a bitch. You'd better move to the US and get some health insurance.[/QUOTE]
Oh, tell me about it. The only thing keeping us from dying in the streets is the fact that all of our street-building money has been siphoned away to pay for the healthcare that we aren't getting.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Well we still have a long way to go before we're socialists. Interfering in a few key industries doesn't make us suddenly socialist.[/QUOTE]

No, but it's the first step. Check out this quote.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened...." ... "I no longer need to run as a Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." - Norman Mattoon Thomas (1944)

And if you think of it, it wouldn't be implausible for this to happen. Although I doubt I'd be around to see it happen. I'd still prefer that we stay capitalist though.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']No, but it's the first step. Check out this quote.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened...." ... "I no longer need to run as a Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." - Norman Mattoon Thomas (1944)

And if you think of it, it wouldn't be implausible for this to happen. Although I doubt I'd be around to see it happen. I'd still prefer that we stay capitalist though.[/QUOTE]
I would just like to point out that Saskatchewan has had medicare since 1962, and that all of Canada has had it since 1966. Apparently, the long, slow descent into socialism is really fucking long and slow.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']I would just like to point out that Saskatchewan has had medicare since 1962, and that all of Canada has had it since 1966. Apparently, the long, slow descent into socialism is really fucking long and slow.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say it was going to happen, I just said it could. And a socialized health care system would be another step in that direction.

Also, I hope if we do have a socialized health care system, that it doesn't end up like Canada's. The ONLY good thing I hear about the health care in Canada is that it's free. :/
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']I didn't say it was going to happen, I just said it could. And a socialized health care system would be another step in that direction.

Also, I hope if we do have a socialized health care system, that it doesn't end up like Canada's. The ONLY good thing I hear about the health care in Canada is that it's free. :/[/QUOTE]

I hear they're dying daily by bleeding to death while waiting in line for the emergency room. That's why the average Canadian life expectancy has dropped down to only 3 years longer than in the US.
 
My favorite:
13. Health care fraud is estimated to cost taxpayers more than $60 billion annually.


Excellent, let's turn it all over to the government!
 
[quote name='SpazX']I hear they're dying daily by bleeding to death while waiting in line for the emergency room. That's why the average Canadian life expectancy has dropped down to only 3 years longer than in the US.[/QUOTE]

Every article I read says that Canadian health care is on a slow decline. Yes, it's better than the US for now, but it won't be that way for long. Look at this article.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/hl856.cfm
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Every article I read says that Canadian health care is on a slow decline. Yes, it's better than the US for now, but it won't be that way for long. Look at this article.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/hl856.cfm[/QUOTE]

Well, like I was saying, life expectancy has dropped considerably. Right now it's at 81 in Canada, but before they instituted public health care it was over 9,000!!!!!

Ah, now I feel better.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']Every article I read says that Canadian health care is on a slow decline. Yes, it's better than the US for now, but it won't be that way for long. Look at this article.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/hl856.cfm[/QUOTE]
It's something that has needed far better management than it has received. In my province, for example, the massive deficits of an earlier Progressive Conservative government forced one former NDP (traditionally our most socialist-ish political party) premier to close a shit-ton of hospitals in rural areas.

EDIT: fucking bullshit like this doesn't help us, either.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Of course they do, they don't have to deal with the students the public schools do. Public schools would do better too if they could avoid the students that private schools can, along with other things that private schools aren't legally required to do, but that would defeat the purpose of public schooling. This is the kind of disconnect I'm talking about, do you think that since private schools do better in some contexts they would be better in all contexts, simply because they're private? Are all private schools better by virtue of not being part of the government, or is it because of something they do, or the context they're in, that the public schools aren't?[/QUOTE]

As someone who would do away with public schools entirely, I feel compelled to respond. I do think that inserting fair competition into just about any sector, including schools, will improve results. I think examples of charter schools begin to bear this out, although obviously that is not nearly the same as a wholesale privatization.

Given the amount of money spent on education in this country, it's criminal that achievement has flatlined or decreased in the past 30-40 years.

http://4brevard.com/choice/international-test-scores.htm
http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/history/edhistory.pdf

1981 US Dept of Education funding = $14 billion
2008 = $68.5 billion

http://www.nyfera.org/PDFchoice/10 Facts about K12 Funding.pdf

Expenditures per pupil (adjusted for inflation, so these are comparable)
1965 = $3,300
2001 = $9,000

EDIT: this is updated further: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

2006 = $9,391

Also:
NOTE: Beginning in 1980-81, state administration expenditures are excluded from "current" expenditures. Current expenditures include instruction, student support services, food services and enterprise operations.
Click to expand...

That means the increase is even more, because starting in 1980 they stopped including some expenditures in the data.

Given all of these facts, don't you think we need a wholesale change? The system isn't working, especially for the poorest among us, who often send their children to inner-city schools that consistently turn out "graduates" with little or no skills needed to succeed whatsoever.
 
I would never say that public education in the US isn't in need of improvement, but comparing public schooling to private schooling and then saying that it would be better if all schools were private is ignoring, well, pretty much everything. I don't think privatizing inner city schools would make those students do better in school. They would have to care first, and that's not really a school-related problem. It's not that simple of an issue, like most.

That was my point, as an extension of the "everything is worse with the government" line of thinking. It ignores context to find a simple answer. Everything isn't worse if it involves the government. Everything isn't better if it involves capitalistic business. Or vice versa.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I would never say that public education in the US isn't in need of improvement, but comparing public schooling to private schooling and then saying that it would be better if all schools were private is ignoring, well, pretty much everything.[/QUOTE]

We've tried doing education the government way. It's gotten our system to where it is today: we spend a lot of money for poor results. I'd argue that saying we need to keep a public school monopoly, the current system, is ignoring reality, not wanting to make a fundamental change.

It's funny that people on the left will make the same argument on health care (what we have isn't working, high costs and poor results) and argue for a government takeover, while on education they don't call for privatization when the government has failed (or in the many other areas where the government has failed).
 
[quote name='The Crotch']It's something that has needed far better management than it has received. In my province, for example, the massive deficits of an earlier Progressive Conservative government forced one former NDP (traditionally our most socialist-ish political party) premier to close a shit-ton of hospitals in rural areas.

EDIT: fucking bullshit like this doesn't help us, either.[/QUOTE]

WOW. 20 in a million people are organ donors. I thought it was much higher than that. WTF are people doing with their organs after they die? I totally agree. We could save millions of more lives if people were organ donors.

Also, I fail to believe that a similar system would have any better management in the US. Especially since the population of the US is 10x that of Canada. I don't think it would be a very easy system to implement or maintain.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']No, but it's the first step. Check out this quote.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened...." ... "I no longer need to run as a Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." - Norman Mattoon Thomas (1944)

And if you think of it, it wouldn't be implausible for this to happen. Although I doubt I'd be around to see it happen. I'd still prefer that we stay capitalist though.[/QUOTE]
Assuming that were true, if that quote is from 44, it should have happened already. Besides, both parties have changed drastically since the 40s.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Assuming that were true, if that quote is from 44, it should have happened already. Besides, both parties have changed drastically since the 40s.[/QUOTE]

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html
usgs_line.php


Just sayin'.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'] It's funny that people on the left will make the same argument on health care (what we have isn't working, high costs and poor results) and argue for a government takeover, while on education they don't call for privatization when the government has failed (or in the many other areas where the government has failed).[/QUOTE]

Do the countries which surpass us in education have fully privatized school systems? (I'm really asking, I'm thinking they don't, but I don't know)
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']WOW. 20 in a million people are organ donors. I thought it was much higher than that. WTF are people doing with their organs after they die? I totally agree. We could save millions of more lives if people were organ donors.

Also, I fail to believe that a similar system would have any better management in the US. Especially since the population of the US is 10x that of Canada. I don't think it would be a very easy system to implement or maintain.[/QUOTE]

Because if you're an organ donor, the doctors don't try everything possible. If you aren't, then they try harder. That's the reason I'm not an organ donor. Told this by a nurse. And that right there is a scary as fuck thought. I'd have a document stating that my organs and tissue can be used after I die, but I'm not going to publicly state it on my id to make sure they don't try shit like that.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']What does that prove?[/QUOTE]

That our political system has slowly become more socialist in the last 100+ years. The government has grown massively not only in overall size, but in the percentage of GDP it eats up.

[quote name='SpazX']Do the countries which surpass us in education have fully privatized school systems? (I'm really asking, I'm thinking they don't, but I don't know)[/QUOTE]

Good point. I won't claim to be an expert on other countries' educational systems, but I don't know of any that are fully privatized.
 
[quote name='Access_Denied']No, but it's the first step. Check out this quote.

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened...." ... "I no longer need to run as a Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." - Norman Mattoon Thomas (1944)

And if you think of it, it wouldn't be implausible for this to happen. Although I doubt I'd be around to see it happen. I'd still prefer that we stay capitalist though.[/QUOTE]
Hmm. I did my usual thing and look what I found...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top