Republicans are always hammering the talking point that government spending is wasteful. As a knee jerk, we often try to prove that it is not, and in the process stake out a losing position. Some government spending is not at all wasteful, but some is extremely wasteful. There is a good measuring stick for determining wastefulness. The higher an item is on Republican spending priorities, the more wasteful it is.
I sometimes get into debates with my fellow progressives over whether we should ever talk about the idea of waste in government sending. Some of my friends argue that we shouldn’t because it only reinforces conservative talking points but my view is very different that that. I believe that most Americans feel very strongly that there is waste in government spending, that we will never talk them out of that idea, and that when we ignore the subject, we leave that fertile ground wide open to conservatives to define what waste is on their own terms.
Then there’s this: there is a lot of waste in government spending. It’s just a fact we should deal honestly with. But here’s where the conservatives get it all wrong: it is not wasteful to make sure a hungry 8 year old gets a school lunch; it isn’t wasteful for an 85 year old with no pension to have their $15,000 a year in Social Security keep up with inflation, or to get decent health care through Medicare; it isn’t wasteful to invest in the future by teaching our kids, helping students go to college, and building roads and bridges. What is wasteful in government spending is when we directly subsidize huge corporate interests: sweetheart contracting deals, lobbyist-designed special tax loopholes, and direct subsidies to big profitable companies.
Far worse than simple corporate subsidy waste, though, is when we hand out money to companies to do things that actively harm us. One of the worst examples of this right now is the federal government, through the Export-Import Bank, is directly subsidizing overseas carbon-vomiting coal production. Because Ex-Im is handing out money to extract coal in places like Australia, this doesn’t even create American jobs. Meanwhile, it is going to contribute dramatically to over-heating the planet even faster. It is an obscenity that our government is doing this… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Crooks and Liars>
The author is spot-on! Watch this video on climate change.
Every penny Republicans take out of YOUR pocket to give to the Koch Brothers and their ilk, helping them to destroy the earth, is wasteful spending of the most obscene kind.
12 Responses to “Wasteful Government Spending”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
From the Crooks and Liars article "The Export-Import Bank, which backs loans to boost US exports abroad, has financed a number of coal projects in the past few years. And this support is growing: Funding for fossil fuel projects has shot up from just under $3 million in fiscal year 2009 to $9.6 billion in 2012. Loans for renewable energy, meanwhile, have barely moved an inch. " – three million to nine BILLION in three years! What on EARTH?!!!
Then there's "Great Barrier Reef Fracking: The Ex-Im Bank has funded fracking in the Great Barrier Reef, one of the great natural wonders of our planet. The Bank committed $5 billion to two natural gas facilities located amidst an array of rare and protected marine species. A spectrum of environmental groups have filed suit against the bank for their financing of the project.
"South Africa Coal-Fired Power Plant: In 2011, the Ex-Im Bank provided $805 million for the Kusile power plant in South Africa, one of the world’s largest coal-fired power plants. Before the loan was even made, hazardous pollutants in the area exceeded acceptable levels. Because of the potential environmental fallout, Ex-Im’s move was strongly opposed by civil society organizations in South Africa and abroad, as well as by US medical experts.
"India Coal Plant: The Ex-Im Bank pledged $900 million in 2010 to the massive Sasan power plant in northern India. The Bank initially opposed the project for violating a federal carbon policy, but reversed its decision “due to pressure from the administration,” according to the Sierra Club. The project caused an outcry in the area after more than two dozen workers were killed when a smokestack collapsed and other residents were reportedly displaced to make way for the plant’s construction.
"The good news is that environmental groups have taken notice and have filed not one, but two lawsuits in the hopes of blocking these kinds of loans."
Thanks for this TC – it is terrifying and we need to know about it – yet it contains hope – may God bless those environmental groups forever and all like them!
I don't know if I have missed it (I read the article twice) but I couldn't see which the enviornmental groups were – 'cos I would like to support them!
I did not see it either. If you do a search for 'Oppose Fracking', I betcha a buck that you find a bunch.
I agree that we should not be giving out corporate welfare. Special interest lobbyists give the Crooks on the Hill too many perks to stop the pork. Almost impossible to stop. Another one of the biggest wastes is paying Congressmen and women to do nothing.
Excellent presentation by the SciShow. Deniers still will not listen though.
Patty, I fully agree, although Congressional perques is a tiny amount, compared to welfare for the 0.1%.
Hope we can get this under control before my house is Florida goes under… 🙂
At this point I don't believe I will have time to bend over and kiss my a$$ good-bye…. 😎
Richard, I strrongly suggest that you buy yourself a SCUBA, 😉
Yeah, speaking as a veteran, even the ridiculously bloated DoD budget isn't ALL waste. Things like military personnel salaries, retired military personnel benefits, even supplies for support units are not overdone. I know my age is showing here, but I was in military payroll before it was computerized, and we had to manually balance out every account twice a year. How well I remember having to save our adding machine paper in whole rolls in order to run it through again on the back (we got four times through if it was wide enough) because we couldn't get more till the next fiscal year. But the DoD does waste a lot on dumb things.
I'm all for spending on those things, and those are the thinbgs Republicans would cut. IUcould do without the spending on the joint strike fighter, which has cost many billions, has never flown a combat mission, and the military says it does NOT want.
Isn't that what can be paraphrased as "suicide by a thousand cuts"? The corporate hand raping and pillaging Mother Earth and her creatures, human and wild.
Suicide (Latin suicidium, from sui caedere, "to kill oneself") is the act of intentionally causing one's own death.
During my banking career, I spent time learning commercial lending and commercial mortgage financing. One of the prime areas of responsibility was the environmental impact of the project, and my responsibility, as a representative of a bank, for ensuring that any assets pledged were not adversely affected by environmental concerns . . . for example, large law suits and clean up costs for oil spills etc. Clearly, in my mind, the Ex-Im bank has violated this concept. If it had honoured this concept, then financing of fossil fuel projects in other countries would not be happening because the environmental and societal repercussions worldwide would be understood as excessive risk. And it is the intentionality of this risk taking that really blows my mind. The first concern is, as usual "money".
Republicans require an environmental impact statement too. Unlerss something adversely impacts the environment, they don't want it.
As a former state government employee, I am well aware of the waste in government spending. I saw it time and again, every time we got a new governor, we got changes that benefited friends of the new administration. I am sure it is the same in D.C.
Yes, but on a MUCH larger scale.