It should be remembered that ALL of these services were provided quite effectively on considerably less money than we're spending now. Look at the budget for, say, ten years ago. The government spent $1.2 trillion dollars less back then, adjusted for inflation. Show me ONE of the services you listed that didn't exist back then in sufficient amounts. Maybe those jobs aren't the problem?
Every time somebody threatens the bloated government budget, somehow the first thing they say will need to be cut is something like "oxygen for babies in hospitals." I'm listening to a barrage of education union ads on the radio here in California about laying off teachers, teachers, and more teachers. I have yet to hear anybody talking about cutting some goddam education bureaucrats on the upper levels. Those jobs never seem to be threatened by lower budgets.
Current Events » in reply to Per an economist from the University of Missouri
Re: government employees
The whole thread (33 posts)
- Ryan budget proposals released
- This is how serious the spending issue is
- Spending
- Re: Per an economist from the University of Missouri
- Per an economist from the University of Missouri
- The real hoot
- Re: Re: Retiring officers in the military
- Re: government employees
- Re: Retiring officers in the military
- So you want a few million government employees on the dole, too?
- Retiring officers in the military have the same sweet package.
- Re: Re: Per an economist from the University of Missouri
- Re: Per an economist from the University of Missouri
- This is how serious the spending issue is