Federal Agencies that should be completely eliminated

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

I'll repeat this concpet for you. It is in both the cultural and financial best interests of the nation to encourage and to fund the arts.

A load of crap. Meaningful Art isnt created in a govt pressure cooker.

Well, that explains a lot about your shitty, anti-intllectual outlook over the last eight years. :roll:

Oh is this going to be the new terrorist for the left? Anti-intellectual? I am terrified I tell you, TERRIFIED!

But it is good to see you provided some proof of all the wonderful art and culture the govt created in your unsurprisingly weak rebuttal of my comment.

 

[umbrella39]

#1 DEA
#2 FCC
#3 NSA
#4 DHS
#5 TSA

 

[First]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: eskimospy

After the conclusion of major involvment in Afghanistan on our part I would cut the DoD budget anywhere from 33-50%.

That would be monumentally stupid.

No it wouldn't. Feel free to explain why you think so though.

Because that large of a cut doesn't justify the risk of losing tens of thousands of perfectly worthwhile government defense jobs with expanding global security concerns. I might reduce troop levels, but that hardly would account for the 33-50% reduction you just proposed. The DoD is far more than just troops.

 

[CanOWorms]

National Endowment for the Arts should be cut. It is against the evolution of a society. The people should be in charge of culture, not the government. Look at how unsuccessful Canada or Europe have been with extensive control of their cultures.

Defense spending needs to be maintained to maintain technological prowess. Luddites should not be allowed to flourish.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
The hippie is strong in this thread.

It must be nice to be so niave and think we dont need strong defense. I think Obama's first act should be to buy everyone a puppy!

Or it might be nice to have seen the world, and have been in the military, and then from rational analysis determine that our military budget is far in excess of our needs.

The only thing our military budget needs to cut is Iraq. Like right now.

Nope. Our military budget is huge for one simple reason, we insist on what is known as 'command of the commons'. (the sea, and airspace above 15,000 feet) Fielding and maintaining effective equipment that can do this around the globe is hideously expensive. Moreover, sophisticated countries are less and less intimidated by this power due to the advent of relatively inexpensive weapondry that can challenge this power in the areas below 15,000 feet and near the shorelines of hostile nations. (for examples check the ineffectiveness of our airpower in Bosnia, and the war game scenario against Iran)

My contention is that this mastery of common areas does not bring us benefits commensurate with it's enormous cost, and that's what I'd ditch. But yeah, everyone who wants to cut the DoD budget is just some pot smoking hippie.

Can you cite any risk management assessment that concludes 33-50% of the DoD budget should be cut based on a cost/benefit analysis of their role in protecting national security? I'd be real interested in looking at it.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Evan
Because that large of a cut doesn't justify the risk of losing tens of thousands of perfectly worthwhile government defense jobs with expanding global security concerns. I might reduce troop levels, but that hardly would account for the 33-50% reduction you just proposed. The DoD is far more than just troops.

Right, because those jobs are actually productive and add so much to the economy.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: palehorse
Anarchy FTL... :roll:

Right wing military fascism FTL. :roll:

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
#1 DEA
#2 FCC
#3 NSA
#4 DHS
#5 TSA

For each:
Reduce, consolidate, or eliminate? Also, please be sure to break DHS down into all its parts when responding. After all, "eliminating" the Coast Guard is a bit ridiculous...

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: palehorse
Anarchy FTL... :roll:

Right wing military fascism FTL. :roll:

Since when were those the only two options?!

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Evan
Because that large of a cut doesn't justify the risk of losing tens of thousands of perfectly worthwhile government defense jobs with expanding global security concerns. I might reduce troop levels, but that hardly would account for the 33-50% reduction you just proposed. The DoD is far more than just troops.

Right, because those jobs are actually productive and add so much to the economy.

Please specify what you mean by "those jobs."

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: palehorse

I'll repeat this for you:

"Culture" is something that occurs naturally in every society. There is no reason why it would need to be financed by any Federal government.

I'll repeat this concpet for you. It is in both the cultural and financial best interests of the nation to encourage and to fund the arts.

Please quantify and qualify the direct impact of the NEA on "the arts."

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Gand1
NEA provides Americans with a little something called culture. We waste plenty of money in many other areas that could be cut.

You don't need the government to provide culture. That comes from the citizens.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: palehorse
Since when were those the only two options?!

History has shown that is pretty much the case. Empire after empire rises and falls with no end in sight.

Please specify what you mean by "those jobs."

Oh sorry, I meant money pits, not jobs.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
The NSA is also an internal agency meant to look inside our borders for threats.

That's absolutely false.

The CIA is a global agency meant to look externally.

True, but their strategic focus does not currently include military-specific intelligence requirements, and rightfully so. That gap is where the DIA comes into play...

The FBI is meant to do internal investigation work which isn't entirely the same as the NSA's mandate.

The missions of the NSA and FBI are completely unrelated.

I would agree with ATF going to the FBI, getting rid of the DHS and go back to pre-DHS methods

Sounds good.

...and the DEA I have no feelings one way or another towards.

The war on drugs is something I am partially for, because a lot of drugs are harmful. The flipside of that, is if you make it legal it becomes taxable and will help to thin out our population that decide to OD on them.

Don't forget that future government-subsidized medical care would skyrocket... a lot of druggies are the same people who don't have insurance and would subsequently qualify for whatever nationalized healthcare plan we end up with. My guess is that the tax revenue generated from drug sales would pale in comparison to the cost of treating all the losers who might OD... believing that they would simply die off is just wishful thinking.

I did mistype a few things in my post, because I wasn't entirely paying attention but my point was that each has a purpose that doesn't overlap the other agencies.

With the drug stuff, I was talking if the government didn't subsidize medical costs. If (rather it appears when) they do, I am for keeping them illegal. We as humans have compasion and *generally* feel the need to help others in distress, so when an idiot OD's on drugs we feel the need to help them and save their life. It would be a lot cheaper if we didn't.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
National Endowment for the Arts should be cut. It is against the evolution of a society. The people should be in charge of culture, not the government. Look at how unsuccessful Canada or Europe have been with extensive control of their cultures.

Defense spending needs to be maintained to maintain technological prowess. Luddites should not be allowed to flourish.

I am undecided about that one, but does the NEA really have that much control? I know they have an influence to try and boost things so to speak but that is very different than government trying to control culture wouldn't you say?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: palehorse
Since when were those the only two options?!

History has shown that is pretty much the case. Empire after empire rises and falls with no end in sight.

That's just plain ignorant.

Oh sorry, I meant money pits, not jobs.

ok, once again, which specific "money pits" or "jobs" are you referring to?

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: umbrella39
#1 DEA
#2 FCC
#3 NSA
#4 DHS
#5 TSA

For each:
Reduce, consolidate, or eliminate? Also, please be sure to break DHS down into all its parts when responding. After all, "eliminating" the Coast Guard is a bit ridiculous...

I'll do it for him.

DEA-reduce/consolidate/eliminate take your pick. As it stands right now with no universal health system, reduce is the way to go.

FCC-Reduction in their control. They don't need to be the "morality police" and fine everybody for things they deem are not "moral" or whatever.

NSA-nothing should be done here, I disagree with umbrella39 on this one.

DHS-eliminate it. Go back to the way the agencies it control operated prior to the creation of it. They were working fairly well as is, and the DHS just adds bloat to them. Don't get rid of the agencies under them (like the Coast Guard), but remove the DHS oversight.

TSA-there are pros and cons to doing anything with them, so they should just be reworked and then maybe reduced over time.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Evan

Can you cite any risk management assessment that concludes 33-50% of the DoD budget should be cut based on a cost/benefit analysis of their role in protecting national security? I'd be real interested in looking at it.

Procurement has increased from $55b in FY2000 to $170b in FY2008.

R & D has increased from $38b in FY2000 to $79b in FY2008.

Operation and Maintenance has increased from $109b in FY2000 to $257b in FY2008

The overall increase in spending has increased from $335b in FY2000 to $693b in FY2008.

The number of military personnel overall has remained static.

These figures do not include funding for veterans benefits or health.

Nor do the figures include funding 'stashed' way in other parts of the Federal Budget.

A 'portion' of the expenses may certainly be attributed to the GWOT but generally speaking the costs of Afghanistan/Iraq are not included.


btw - Your question is nebulous without defining your view of 'national security'. It can be argued that the military is responsible for national defense - national security is a product of intelligence and law enforcement.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: palehorse
ok, once again, which specific "money pits" or "jobs" are you referring to?

U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Army, DoD

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
I did mistype a few things in my post, because I wasn't entirely paying attention but my point was that each has a purpose that doesn't overlap the other agencies.

On that we agree. Most individual agencies in the Intelligence Community (IC) serve a specific function, fill a specific intelligence gap, or possess unique skills. While the IC is certainly not perfect, it continues to undergo refinement every year. In fact, it's one of the few government mechanisms that has actually improved, consistently, over the last eight years. The creation of the ODNI went a long way in making that happen.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: umbrella39
#1 DEA
#2 FCC
#3 NSA
#4 DHS
#5 TSA

For each:
Reduce, consolidate, or eliminate? Also, please be sure to break DHS down into all its parts when responding. After all, "eliminating" the Coast Guard is a bit ridiculous...

Eliminating organizations does not nor should it imply that their specific parts should be eliminated, I just honestly didn't feel like typing out a couple pages of text. But to answer your specific question, the Coast guard can go back to the DOT, for example. Semper Paratus.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: palehorse
ok, once again, which specific "money pits" or "jobs" are you referring to?

U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Army, DoD

LOL... nevermind! I didn't realize that you were a fucking nutcase...

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Craig234
None come to mind. We should cut the defense budget 50% IMO. We'd still have the biggest military budget of any nation in the world.

Well, we'd have to quit defending the world which BTW I am very much in favor of.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: umbrella39
#1 DEA - kill
#2 FCC - reorganize
#3 NSA - kill
#4 DHS
#5 TSA

For each:
Reduce, consolidate, or eliminate? Also, please be sure to break DHS down into all its parts when responding. After all, "eliminating" the Coast Guard is a bit ridiculous...

Eliminating organizations does not nor should it imply that their specific parts should be eliminated, I just honestly didn't feel like typing out a couple pages of text. But to answer your specific question, the Coast guard can go back to the DOT, for example. Semper Paratus.

Would you ever consider placing the Coast Guard under DoD control? If not, why not?

And you'd honestly "kill" the entire NSA, thus destroying most of the U.S.' SIGINT capabilities?! Wow... that's a scary thought!

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
I did mistype a few things in my post, because I wasn't entirely paying attention but my point was that each has a purpose that doesn't overlap the other agencies.

On that we agree. Most individual agencies in the Intelligence Community (IC) serve a specific function, fill a specific intelligence gap, or possess unique skills. While the IC is certainly not perfect, it continues to undergo refinement every year. In fact, it's one of the few government mechanisms that has actually improved, consistently, over the last eight years. The creation of the ODNI went a long way in making that happen.

Without a doubt the IC, along with the agencies under the DHS (prior to the creation of the DHS) are 2 areas where the federal government isn't severly screwed up. Are there issues? Definitely, but there always will be. Most other agencies outside of those 2 areas are bloated and can be reduced/eliminated.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: palehorse
LOL... nevermind! I didn't realize that you were a fucking nutcase...

Trillions of dollars lost in an accounting black hole, thousands dead, hundreds of thousands displaced, and I'm the nutcase, gotcha.