Gideon MacLeish Gideon MacLeish

A Simple Lesson in Bureaucracy

▼

A Simple Lesson in Bureaucracy

from JoeUser Forums

In the wake of the demand that we triple federal spending and tax those bastard rich to pay for it, I thought I'd offer you the other side...the primary reason why I believe that EVERY government department, EVERY program, could stand at least a 10% cut. It's also a reason why I've come to loathe the way our bureaucracy so often works.

For 5 1/2 years, as you all know, I was the manager of a group home for the developmentally disabled. I'd get to see the budgets "from the inside".

Our food and household budgets were the same from month to month, but every year we would get a budget for "big ticket" items. Ideally, this was to pay for furnishings, home maintenance issues beyond our maintenance budget, etc. Every January, we would have this budget to work with.

When I started managing, being my frugal self, I tried to pace out the budget. After all, we needed to keep a reserve in case a TV stopped functioning or something not covered by the maintenance budget or the residents' funds (in the case of items damaged directly through their actions). The first thing my supervisor taught me was that in our agency, this was a nono. This budget was ideally to be spent before January 31, under the idea that if an emergency occurred, they would HAVE to cover it, whether they wanted to or not, and that if we had money held in reserve, they would draw out of that first.

We were also taught the "if you don't use it, you lose it" principle. One year we learned in October that our food budget had been miscalculated and that we had money coming into the food budget that hadn't been provided to us. We had two and a half months to spend down the surplus, in addition to our regular food budget. As a result, our Christmas party included lobster tails on the menu...all on the taxpayer's dime.

Yet despite these surpluses, our bosses were constantly begging for extras, constantly complaining there wasn't enough money in the budget to take care of these poor, needy individuals. Every year, it was the same story: we were struggling, and these poor people would be left homeless if legislators didn't vote in X% increase.

I believe that virtually every department could be cut by 10% without the people who are most reliant on the aid feeling it at all, provided those cuts are made in the right places. Take food stamps, for instance. Federal guidelines currently state that a family of four is eligible for food stamps as long as their net income does not exceed $19,356. A family my size (family of 8) is eligible as long as the net income does not exceed $32,400. I believe that cutting at the top end of that, as well as cutting the dollar of food stamps received at the top end is not only reasonable and fair, but necessary. During the brief time we received food stamps, we received well in excess of $500 a month. It was so much more than what we needed that we found ourselves having to find ways to spend down the surplus, because there is no incentive for money not spent. Without some hard research, I would have a hard time saying exactly where the income cap should lie, but I personally believe that no family, regardless of size, should be receiving food stamps if their annual net income exceeds $25,000. Remember, this is net, not gross, income.

For too long our government has been treated like an endless trough: "if you spend it, they will pay" is the mantra of far too many bureaucrats. It is not until we begin cutting off the agencies that operate on this mentality that we will begin to see an effective change. I guarantee that if the local HeadStart program has to shut its doors November 15, somebody will find a way to fill in the gap and some heads will roll once the poor money management that resulted in the closure is exposed. Sure there will be people demanding bigger government (sadly, there always are) but the simplest way to counter that is to show them just HOW MUCH money was flushed down the drain. If people knew, for instance, how much their governments actually spend on education, they would not be so quick to demand a raise.

The figures do not lie: we are spending over $9000 per man, woman and child on the federal government. That is simply too much, and we need to figure out how to reign in the runaway spending. If we don't do it now, we will have little choice but to become a socialist nation to pay for the excess. And the entire country will suffer greatly if that happens.

politics
17,322 views 48 replies
Reply #26 from JoeUser Forums Top
Other examples of the above:

Cream of mushroom soup: 50 cents a can. The retail price for Campbell's Cream of Mushroom soup is about $1 a can.

Peas: 40 cents a can. Del Monte? 89 cents, unless you catch it on sale

Ground beef: $1.39 a pound. Usually found at over $2.00 a pound, we buy plenty of it when it's on sale.

WalMart store brand baking mix: $1.18. Bisquick? About twice that. "Brand name" pancake mix? even more!

20 lb bag of pinto beans: $8 (40 cents a pound). 1 pound bag? 79 cents - $1.00

Want to call me a liar again, Noumenon?
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler,

Actually, I have stated (and I will continually defend) that I feed my family adequately on $300/mo. Since my family is a family of 8, Noumenon believes that means that our rent, transportation, utilities, and food come to $300 a month, or $1.25/day per family member, which is something I never asserted.

Here's a clue to how we live the way we do, Noumenon. I have calculated up the retail value of our monthly food budget, and if everything we buy were bought name brand, off sale, and without coupons, we would be spending $500-600 a month. But because our menu revolves around what is on sale that week, we spend about 50% of what we would otherwise. The bread example is a good one: We buy bread that retails for about $3 a loaf for 85 cents a loaf at the thrift store. If we baked it, it would cost about the same.


Gideon. go back and read my reply

I hope you'll forgive me if I question your math? Gideon "never" made the claim that he now lives on $1 a day. He said that from when he was a child, not in todays living.


Have you "ever" made the claim that you live (present day) on $1 a day?

And as far as the $300 a month? I know it can be done. I've never questioned your ability to do it. I myself have done it with 2 kids and a wife back in 1981. We ate very well. And that was with me supplying venison for the freezer (what I did was/is called poaching, but living where I did at the time no one said spit about it). So you can imagine how well we ate.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Have you "ever" made the claim that you live (present day) on $1 a day?


No I haven't. Noumenon's calculation came from my $10/day figure for feeding my family, a figure he demands is impossible. He divided by 8 and came to $1.25, which he somehow assumed to be the total I spend on food, shelter, transportation, etc...when he lumped me in with the 20% of the world's poorest!

What he's not counting on, though, is my extremely frugal nature (I'm the bargain king; I shop smart...usually), or the fact that it is cheaper to feed large groups of people than it is to feed individuals, or the fact that it's cheaper to cook for yourself than to use processed food (spaghetti and meatballs for 8...$4...2 bucks of that is the meat! And I could make it even cheaper if we made our own sauce!), or a lot of other variables. Like the twerp on the other thread that I've taken to ignoring, Noumenon obviously has little real life experience in the matter or he'd know better.

Where I responded to you was that the comment about being the total spent on five kids in 1980 was made by Noumenon, not me. I don't know what my parents spent...but I guarantee you it was less than $500 a month, especially since my mother was working a $6 an hour job at the time!
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
No I haven't. Noumenon's calculation came from my $10/day figure for feeding my family, a figure he demands is impossible. He divided by 8 and came to $1.25, which he somehow assumed to be the total I spend on food, shelter, transportation, etc...when he lumped me in with the 20% of the world's poorest!


Sometimes I don't think he's too awfully bright!

What he's not counting on, though, is my extremely frugal nature (I'm the bargain king; I shop smart...usually), or the fact that it is cheaper to feed large groups of people than it is to feed individuals, or the fact that it's cheaper to cook for yourself than to use processed food (spaghetti and meatballs for 8...$4...2 bucks of that is the meat! And I could make it even cheaper if we made our own sauce!), or a lot of other variables. Like the twerp on the other thread that I've taken to ignoring, Noumenon obviously has little real life experience in the matter or he'd know better.


Actually I wouldn't advise it unless you're going to make a LOT of sauce! I do make my own and it costs me a little more than $1.50 per qt. The only way to save a bunch of money is if you grow your own tomatoes. Jars and lids are most of that expense.
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
Actually I wouldn't advise it unless you're going to make a LOT of sauce! I do make my own and it costs me a little more than $1.50 per qt. The only way to save a bunch of money is if you grow your own tomatoes. Jars and lids are most of that expense.


yeah...we're well stocked on jars and lids, though. I'm hoping within a year or two we can start producing a fair amount of tomatoes.

You're right though. When it comes to produce, especially produce like tomatoes with a short shelf life, sometimes canned food is cheaper. But eventually I'd like to have my own spaghetti sauce around.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

You're right though. When it comes to produce, especially produce like tomatoes with a short shelf life, sometimes canned food is cheaper. But eventually I'd like to have my own spaghetti sauce around.


Here's a cheap recipe for you:

Slice finely and stir-fry an onion in a little olive oil on the frying pan. Once it's cooked so it's just a little translucent put in a dessert spoon each of crushed garlic (from a bottle is fine and cheapest) and 'Italian herbs' (you can buy that in a jar in Oz; it's basically just an even mix of oregano and other things whose names I can't remember).

Cook your mince in the same frypan and mix with the onions. Then add a 375mL bottle of tomato paste and, once you've poured that paste in, half-fill the jar with water and add that too.

All up maybe a dollar, dollar fifty or so (australian) + meat (I like the ultra lean fat free minces, your preferences may vary although too much fat will spoil the flavour) and should be enough for four.

If you can grow onions and tomatoes where you live Gid that should cost you practically nothing. It's what I make when I'm feeling broke cos I can feed myself reasonably well with only a small risk of scurvy for a week on the 10 bucks for the ingredients.
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top
Here's a cheap recipe for you:

Slice finely and stir-fry an onion in a little olive oil on the frying pan. Once it's cooked so it's just a little translucent put in a dessert spoon each of crushed garlic (from a bottle is fine and cheapest) and 'Italian herbs' (you can buy that in a jar in Oz; it's basically just an even mix of oregano and other things whose names I can't remember).


Here in the states it's exactly the opposite. A head of garlic (or bulb) is 50 cents or less. A jar of garlic will run any where from $1.98 to $5. BTW.... the other spices in an Italian seasoning mix are basil, Marjoram, thyme, rosemary, savory and sage. The only reason I know is that I got the mix recipe from a little old Italian lady who refused to buy that "store bought junk". Oregano and basil are the 2 biggest contributors. I tend to go a little heavier on the oregano than the store bought mix.

My own recipe is a 16 oz can of tomato sauce and a 6 oz can of tomato paste plus about 8 oz of water. But other than that your recipe is the same as mine.
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
yeah...we're well stocked on jars and lids, though. I'm hoping within a year or two we can start producing a fair amount of tomatoes.


Do you mean jars and rings? Lids are a consumable item. I don't have a bunch of jars. That means that I have to buy them.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
WOW, noumenon. You consider $1 a day FOOD BUDGET the same as $1 a day food, shelter, transportation, clothing, etc budget? You're so deluded it isn't even funny!


OK, I am not the one who directly compared people living on $1 a day to your food budget of $1 a day. That was you. I recognized that it was apples and oranges. But then I decided to take your comparison on its own terms. The paper I linked to above said, people who live on $1 a day spend $0.56 to $0.75 on food. By that standard a $1 a day food budget would imply a total budget of $1.33 to $2 a day for food/shelter/clothing/etc. So you're defending your food budget by saying, "How can you think my food budget is near starvation when the poorest people in the world live on $1 a day... and I live like I make $1.50 a day!" Not that impressive.

I have to apologize for charging you with malnutrition. I acknowledged it wasn't polite.

What he's not counting on, though, is my extremely frugal nature (I'm the bargain king; I shop smart...usually), or the fact that it is cheaper to feed large groups of people than it is to feed individuals, or the fact that it's cheaper to cook for yourself than to use processed food (spaghetti and meatballs for 8...$4...2 bucks of that is the meat! And I could make it even cheaper if we made our own sauce!), or a lot of other variables. Like the twerp on the other thread that I've taken to ignoring, Noumenon obviously has little real life experience in the matter or he'd know better.


I guess I should stop arguing that you can't live off a low food budget (from my parents living in Ukraine, I know some people live off basically cabbage, black bread, and lard) and even make it healthy if you're professional about it. But I still wouldn't turn down $500 to upgrade some things like sweet potatoes, strawberries, and spinach (I can't imagine that the canned stuff is really the same food as the fresh in that instance). And I definitely wouldn't lower the food stamp budget based on how many meals Gordon MacLeish or the Iron Chef can wring out of a can of beans.

As a person who also shops sales and makes my own lentil soup, I'm not sure I would have time to do that kind of thing if I had eight kids. The food stamps would change coupon-clipping from a necessity to an option -- if I thought I could get a better return learning car repair or job hunting, I could relax and get something ready to eat.
Reply #35 from JoeUser Forums Top
Cream of mushroom soup: 50 cents a can. The retail price for Campbell's Cream of Mushroom soup is about $1 a can.


One thing I noticed about cream of mushroom soup, specifically, is that the generic version has flour for the first ingredient, instead of mushrooms. I'm not sure how big a difference that is but compared to canned peas, which are still peas, it's a bigger difference.

Whole grain bread for 85 cents a loaf, that is a pretty sweet deal. I have gone to day-old type stores in other cities and only found white Wonder bread. I usually buy whatever brand is on sale for $2. Sometimes Wal-Mart goes to $1.66. I guess if I were on food stamps I could afford the New England Brown Bread at $3.29 all the time.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
But I still wouldn't turn down $500 to upgrade some things like sweet potatoes, strawberries, and spinach


All of which can be grown in a garden in most regions in America.

I have LONG advocated for bringing back the victory garden concept and sending schoolkids home with seed packets. We need to get beyond the processed food mentality and understand where our foods actually come from. There's simply no reason we need that big of a budget to survive.

This summer I'm planning to go to DC to try to get some national party support for my 2008 campaign. While I'm there, it's my plan to meet with poliymakers that deal with this sort of thing to see if there are ways we can work to educate the poor to help them out of poverty instead of the current solution of throw money at the problem. I believe there are answers we simply haven't explored.
Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
OT: Hey Gid, I'd like to send a baby gift for little Joshua. Would you mind emailing me your mailing address?
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
figure out how to reign in the runaway spending. If we don't do it now, we will have little choice but to become a socialist nation to pay for the excess. And the entire country will suffer greatly if that happens.


Please explain to me, how the country will "suffer greatly if that happens." 'Cause I'm not getting that declaration.
Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top
SilentPoet, have you never met an American conservative before? Socialist = communist = Cuba = Eurosclerosis = the DMV = Five Year Plans. Gideon can explain it to you, but I don't really think you have anything to say to each other.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
Please explain to me, how the country will "suffer greatly if that happens." 'Cause I'm not getting that declaration.


Do you think the Soviet Union failed by accident, Lucas? If you do, your college professors have been seriously misleading you.

Socialism destroys the GNP of a nation because it removes the incentive for hard work. Why are you going to college, Lucas? Because you want a better future, right? Why should you receive the same reward for your hard work as someone who refuses to even put forth an effort?

Honestly, Lucas, it has been explained to you so many times that you must truly be learning disabled, because if you don't get it by now, you just aren't listening.


SilentPoet, have you never met an American conservative before?


I am FAR from a conservative, Noumenon, but I am an unabashed capitalist. I am not ashamed of supporting a capitalist system, but it doesn't make me a conservative, not by a long shot.

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Do you think the Soviet Union failed by accident, Lucas? If you do, your college professors have been seriously misleading you.

Socialism destroys the GNP of a nation because it removes the incentive for hard work. Why are you going to college, Lucas? Because you want a better future, right? Why should you receive the same reward for your hard work as someone who refuses to even put forth an effort?

Honestly, Lucas, it has been explained to you so many times that you must truly be learning disabled, because if you don't get it by now, you just aren't listening.


The Soviet Union failed because of corruption, and other means. That doesn't mean, however, that Socialism (Whereas the USSR was not entirely socialistic, it was a composite of Communism, Socialism, and other things.), cannot work.

Because I'm not selfish, greedy, or the like. I, ideally, support Socialism, because it is a *team* effort, everyone is included (ideally); realistically, i know it won't work because it needs everyone to work together, and therefore (reluctantly) support capitalism and hope for the best in human nature. (i.e. humans helping less fortunate humans)

~L
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top

Because I'm not selfish, greedy, or the like. I, ideally, support Socialism, because it is a *team* effort, everyone is included

So if you work hard in classes and get an "A", are you willing to "share" your grade with a student who got an "F" and never attended classes, and have both of you receive a "C"?

If you are, you can forget about grad school. If you're not, you can see why socialism is flawed thinking.

Socialism appeals to young people from disadvantaged backgrounds because they see a balancing of the scales. As you grow older, and as you see people around you who literally leach off of the work of others, you begin to see why providing them with equal pay is simply enabling their slothful habits. We can and should take care of those who are poor through no fault of their own. But the vast majority of America's poor, and a good percentage of the poor in all industrialized nations, are poor through lifestyle choices they themselves make. Private charities are more than adequate to take care of those who are truly needy; as for the slothful poor, well, maybe they need a few missed dinners to set them straight.

Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
But the vast majority of America's poor, and a good percentage of the poor in all industrialized nations, are poor through lifestyle choices they themselves make


But what then, in your opinion do we do about those who made those 'bad' lifestyle choices?

Do we say, "Bad Tom, if you want our help, you have to live a certain way"? Do put prerequisites on our help? Or, do we help them help themselves? Personally, I'd choose the latter, but each person/case is different.


So if you work hard in classes and get an "A", are you willing to "share" your grade with a student who got an "F" and never attended classes, and have both of you receive a "C"?


First off, my grades where generally C, or Bs (if B's). So *no one* is going to want to smooch off of me, and a C wouldn't be much difference. ( )

Secondly, deep down in my heart, yes - I've always been a person who'd give the shirt off my back, etc...

I say, help those less fortunate help themselves, but then again...humans can be greedy, and selfish. If more people don't start helping others, who are less fortunate, then we're all screwed.

Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Lucas,

Go away. You are not welcome here.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
Because I'm not selfish, greedy, or the like. I, ideally, support Socialism, because it is a *team* effort, everyone is included (ideally); realistically, i know it won't work because it needs everyone to work together, and therefore (reluctantly) support capitalism and hope for the best in human nature. (i.e. humans helping less fortunate humans)




ROTFLMMFAO

Sometimes people just brighten up my day with their silly comments . . . socialism will never work in this world, we're all too selfish. And I'm glad, because that loser that has the F can go suck a goat, he's not getting a even a whiff of my A's, to use Gid's example.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
Or, do we help them help themselves?


Socialism doesn't help people help themselves; neither do, regrettably, most of the welfare programs here in the US.

In fact, the only successful welfare system I've ever seen was run by a church, and even that was far from perfect and invaded by moochers at times. Other than that, it's just a joke.
Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top
First off, my grades where generally C, or Bs (if B's). So *no one* is going to want to smooch off of me, and a C wouldn't be much difference. ( )


I do want to say, though. I don't want to go near a doctor that went to your school! Hate to know the doctor got by on "sympathy" and not on skill!