Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

If Congress doesn't get it's shit together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

-

-
They should just raise taxes...or something

dbackjon wrote:If Congress doesn't get it's shit together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wonder what the conk business owners that rely upon the park or the conks planning a trip there think?

Who really wants to go to the sun, anyway? It's a big hot bastard.

Assuming I'm able to get it worked out I was hoping that would be part of my Glacier NP/ASU winning tour in late August this year.

Colossal waste of money. Dig 5 1/2 months, open the park at the top for 6 weeks, starts snowing again, road closed for next 5 months.

Here's an idea....PUT THE PARK AT THE BOTTOM!

dbackjon wrote:If Congress doesn't get it's **** together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BS. FY 2003-FY 2012 NPS budget has RISEN from 2.529 billion to 3.286 billion. The NPS budget has increased THIRTY PERCENT according to their own budget document.
http://home.nps.gov/applications/budget ... istory.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if you factor in 03'-12' inflation of 25% 03'-12' according to the BLS.gov inflation calculator, the NPS budget has still increased above inflation.

The guy in the yahoo article put forth the same BS we constantly hear out of Washington. They refer to slowdowns in the rate of growth as a cut. Well, a slowdown in the rate of growth isn't a cut.

BDKJMU wrote:

dbackjon wrote:If Congress doesn't get it's **** together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BS. FY 2003-FY 2012 NPS budget has RISEN from 2.529 billion to 3.286 billion. The NPS budget has increased THIRTY PERCENT according to their own budget document.
http://home.nps.gov/applications/budget ... istory.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if you factor in 03'-12' inflation of 25% 03'-12' according to the BLS.gov inflation calculator, the NPS budget has still increased above inflation.

The guy in the yahoo article put forth the same BS we constantly hear out of Washington. They refer to slowdowns in the rate of growth as a cut. Well, a slowdown in the rate of growth isn't a cut.

Which is EXACTLY what the whole sequester thing is: a slowdown of a GROWTH rate, not an actual cut. They hysteria surrounding it is fucking comical.

AZGrizFan wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
BS. FY 2003-FY 2012 NPS budget has RISEN from 2.529 billion to 3.286 billion. The NPS budget has increased THIRTY PERCENT according to their own budget document.
http://home.nps.gov/applications/budget ... istory.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if you factor in 03'-12' inflation of 25% 03'-12' according to the BLS.gov inflation calculator, the NPS budget has still increased above inflation.

The guy in the yahoo article put forth the same BS we constantly hear out of Washington. They refer to slowdowns in the rate of growth as a cut. Well, a slowdown in the rate of growth isn't a cut.

Which is EXACTLY what the whole sequester thing is: a slowdown of a GROWTH rate, not an actual cut. They hysteria surrounding it is **** comical.

The MSM, helping the Administration in fear mongering, would have you believe everything will fall apart March 1st if something isn't done right away....

Here's the truth...since I'm facing it daily, I know...

If a federal employee is going to be furloughed, they must get 30 days notice...NO ONE has gotten official notices yet...just warnings...

We are facing 22 days of furlough if sequester lasts all year...to maintain insurance, etc, everyone will get two days a pay period or one day a week...

To get the 22 days in by the end of the year, we have to start furloughs by the pay period that starts April 22nd...

So, as you can see...nothing HAS to happen on March 1st...it will only happen if the administration wants something bad to happen...

andy7171 wrote:Colossal waste of money. Dig 5 1/2 months, open the park at the top for 6 weeks, starts snowing again, road closed for next 5 months.

Here's an idea....PUT THE PARK AT THE BOTTOM!

Going to the Sun Road is within Glacier Park, not the road that takes you to the park.

Col Hogan wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Which is EXACTLY what the whole sequester thing is: a slowdown of a GROWTH rate, not an actual cut. They hysteria surrounding it is **** comical.

The MSM, helping the Administration in fear mongering, would have you believe everything will fall apart March 1st if something isn't done right away....

Here's the truth...since I'm facing it daily, I know...

If a federal employee is going to be furloughed, they must get 30 days notice...NO ONE has gotten official notices yet...just warnings...

We are facing 22 days of furlough if sequester lasts all year...to maintain insurance, etc, everyone will get two days a pay period or one day a week...

To get the 22 days in by the end of the year, we have to start furloughs by the pay period that starts April 22nd...

So, as you can see...nothing HAS to happen on March 1st...it will only happen if the administration wants something bad to happen...

Could be true, but cuts CAN have real affects.

kalm wrote:

Col Hogan wrote: The MSM, helping the Administration in fear mongering, would have you believe everything will fall apart March 1st if something isn't done right away....

Here's the truth...since I'm facing it daily, I know...

If a federal employee is going to be furloughed, they must get 30 days notice...NO ONE has gotten official notices yet...just warnings...

We are facing 22 days of furlough if sequester lasts all year...to maintain insurance, etc, everyone will get two days a pay period or one day a week...

To get the 22 days in by the end of the year, we have to start furloughs by the pay period that starts April 22nd...

So, as you can see...nothing HAS to happen on March 1st...it will only happen if the administration wants something bad to happen...

Could be true, but cuts CAN have real affects.

Yea, I could lose 20% of my income...

But it will be worth it if we can start getting the spending problem under control...

$500 Billion a year in interest payments and growing...

Col Hogan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Could be true, but cuts CAN have real affects.

Yea, I could lose 20% of my income...

But it will be worth it if we can start getting the spending problem under control...

$500 Billion a year in interest payments and growing...

Facebook got a $429 million tax refund on 1.1 billion in profits.

kalm wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
Yea, I could lose 20% of my income...

But it will be worth it if we can start getting the spending problem under control...

$500 Billion a year in interest payments and growing...

Facebook got a $429 million tax refund on 1.1 billion in profits.

And that has what to do with sequester???

Col Hogan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Facebook got a $429 million tax refund on 1.1 billion in profits.

And that has what to do with sequester???

Part of it is spending, but when your corporate taxes go from near 40% of receipts in the 60's to less than 10% today, you have to make that up somewhere or suffer the consequences.

kalm wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
And that has what to do with sequester???

Part of it is spending, but when your corporate taxes go from near 40% of receipts in the 60's to less than 10% today, you have to make that up somewhere or suffer the consequences.

No argument that the tax code needs fixing...

But right now, the administration is not interested in REALLY fixing the tax code...they just want more money so they don't have to cut as much...

kalm wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
And that has what to do with sequester???

Part of it is spending, but when your corporate taxes go from near 40% of receipts in the 60's to less than 10% today, you have to make that up somewhere or suffer the consequences.

A Few Points:
1) You're talking percentages, how does it look when you consider actual dollars. Sure corporate taxes have dropped considerably as a percentage of total fed govt revenue but what how has the actual amount of dollars collected in corporate taxes trended?
2) It's a global economy and countries are competing for corporate investment so there is a cause and effect. Raise the corporate tax rates and you give companies more incentive to keep profits overseas and/or to relocate their headquarters overseas. Corporations are meant to make money not necessarily to be patriotic. Raising the corporate tax rate could have a negative impact on tax revenues.
3) Higher corporate taxes just mean less money for salaries/bonuses, R&D, etc. which impacts other tax revenues in both the short and long term (that cause and effect thing can be a b!tch).

This doesn't mean that the corporate tax code couldn't use a little real reform. You don't set corporate tax rates based on what they were 50 years ago, you set them based on what it takes to compete in a global economy now and in the future.

Chizzang is right - we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.

dbackjon wrote:If Congress doesn't get it's shit together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The road should be clear when nature clears the road.

As far as park funding goes...some of that spending really needs to be cut. I love parks, and believe we should preserve even more land, but the parks should fund themselves.

Col Hogan wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Which is EXACTLY what the whole sequester thing is: a slowdown of a GROWTH rate, not an actual cut. They hysteria surrounding it is **** comical.

The MSM, helping the Administration in fear mongering, would have you believe everything will fall apart March 1st if something isn't done right away....

Here's the truth...since I'm facing it daily, I know...

If a federal employee is going to be furloughed, they must get 30 days notice...NO ONE has gotten official notices yet...just warnings...

We are facing 22 days of furlough if sequester lasts all year...to maintain insurance, etc, everyone will get two days a pay period or one day a week...

To get the 22 days in by the end of the year, we have to start furloughs by the pay period that starts April 22nd...

So, as you can see...nothing HAS to happen on March 1st...it will only happen if the administration wants something bad to happen...

And yet, every department will have MORE money than they had this time last year...and somehow a catastrophy is brewing.

dbackjon wrote:If Congress doesn't get it's shit together and avoid the Budget Crisis.

National Park funding has dropped over 15% in the past 10 years. Further cuts would mean the Park Service could not afford to plow the road, or fix it from winter damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-natio ... 16300.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good. This should help support the admin's global warming initiatives by lowering the carbon footprint of the visitor while also providing a welcome respoite from SUV deaths to the local wildlife. A win-win for all involved....

Cluck U wrote: I love parks, and believe we should preserve even more land, but the parks should fund themselves.

That is certainly something that should be the goal. I can understand if certain parks (property) just can't generate the revenue to meet the operational budget. I'm OK with taxpayer money going towards parks up to a certain extent. But there are a lot of programs that need to move towards funding themselves.

Several years ago, there was a list of organizations that the Admin doled out money to as part of pork tied to some new legislation. One of the beneficiaries was some national organization for the arts. I remember it being $50 million. If "the arts" cannot fund itself, it needs to have a national benefit for receiving funds. I'm having a hard time coming up with a benefit that grand to keep feeding it money. At a minimum, youth sports programs provide excercise which can be considered a national benefit. But I don't know how much federal money these programs receive. They may get local benefits with the use of local taxpayer funded playing facilities, but that's about it as far as I know. Generally it is funded by the participants. Major league baseball funnels money down to youth organizations to help feed their product. Broadway and Hollywood should do the same. If painters and sculptors can't make a living selling their shit to consumers, then they should not receive taxpayer money either. Same goes with other categories under the "arts" umbrella.

I think the Federal Government owns way too much land. I don't know how much it should own. Can't put my finger on that. But you look at a map and you can see that it's out of control. Especially in the West.

If the overall proportion of land owned by the Federal government was like it is in the East maybe that'd be OK. But you look at a map and it looks like it owns like 90% of the land in the West. To me there should be no State where the Federal government owns more than half the land. And really I don't think it should be more than maybe 10%. Like I said it's hard to put a finger on it but what's depicted below is, to me, clearly too much.

Good. People shouldn't be up there anyway if they cant get there on their own. wanna go see it up there? get a pack mule and some good gear. otherwise, stay home and leave it wild. I bet the wildlife up there is dancing the jig about this.

Col Hogan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Facebook got a $429 million tax refund on 1.1 billion in profits.

And that has what to do with sequester???

Wouldn't be a sequester if those who most benefit from our system paid their fair share.