yuh oh

[BuffyMars]

oi vei (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535608,00.html)

[bigwood33]

And the 'prez says that the record stimulus package that he so proudly passed had not "pork" in it. No pork my a$$.

[jason]

im still waiting on my stimulus check....

would be nice to put new appliances in my new kitchen....

[BuffyMars]

well clearly he is a fan of ham sandwiches, pork chops, pork tenderloins, and pork croquettes. im jussayin.

[pirate4state]

lol @ Thundercrack

[Pick6]

Have you heard about this one?


Critics Worry Measure to Save Wild Horses Is Taxpayer Drain

A bill that would save wild horses and burros in the western United States from controlled killings and set aside millions of acres for them is heading to the Senate after being passed in the House of Representatives this month.


Taxpayers could be on the hook for $700 million if a measure to put wild horses back home on the range passes Congress.

A bill that would save wild horses and burros in the western United States from controlled killings and set aside millions of acres for them is heading to the Senate after passing the House of Representatives this month.

But the price tag, at a time of economic recession and gaping deficits, has some lawmakers champing at the bit to bridle the movement to finance and save these symbols of the American West.

"People have lost their jobs. They can't keep their homes. And the answer to people losing their homes is -- let's go spend $700 million for homes and welfare for wild horses," said Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.

"The leaders of this Congress have more concern for creating a home for horses than jobs for Americans," said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah.

Wild mustangs and burros have been under federal protection for nearly 40 years, but the fast-growing population has become unmanageable.

Under the Restore Our American Mustangs Act, the number of acres that the estimated 36,000 wild horses roam would increase from 33 million to 53 million -- an area larger than New York and New England put together, or about 10 square miles per horse.

Horse lovers have been adopting the animals to save them from being put down, but in this economy, such adoptions have dramatically declined.

Advocates of the bill say it could actually save money by reducing the amount spent on keeping the horses in pens.

"It's not good for the horses and it's wasting money, frankly," said Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va.

Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., called the current program "terribly ineffective."

But foes see the plan as a clear drain on taxpayer dollars. The new bill would provide millions for contraception, rounding up thousands of animals each year for castration and even birth control pills. The Congressional Budget Office estimated it would cost about $200 million over the next five years, and up to $500 million after 2013 to secure the additional land.

"This is bad environmental policy. It's bad grass policy," said Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by Pick6
Have you heard about this one?




yeah i have...and i am so incredibly torn as an animal rights advocate. i think it is a wondeful idea in theory. but taxpayers should never have to foot the bill.

EVER.

that is why there are non-profit organizations. designed by people who have giving hearts and want to help because they are good people.

the government would do well to butt out of trying to govern our money.

oh lordy...ima stop there.

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by bigwood33
And the 'prez says that the record stimulus package that he so proudly passed had not "pork" in it. No pork my a$$.
He said "pork", not porkin'.:D

[SintonFan]

Only 8% of the "Stimuli package" has been spent and our President has declared the recession over. Can we get the other 92% back? :)
.
Wait a minute.... UPDATE!
Some economists and business leaders are calling for a second "stimuli package".
One of them being a economic adviser to the President himself.:doh:
Link (http://www.slate.com/id/2222449/)

[bigwood33]

We already have the largest single year deficit EVER/ So hell, why not? It's only money...These politicians pi$$ off.

[rockdale80]

Originally posted by Pick6
Have you heard about this one?


Critics Worry Measure to Save Wild Horses Is Taxpayer Drain

A bill that would save wild horses and burros in the western United States from controlled killings and set aside millions of acres for them is heading to the Senate after being passed in the House of Representatives this month.


Taxpayers could be on the hook for $700 million if a measure to put wild horses back home on the range passes Congress.

A bill that would save wild horses and burros in the western United States from controlled killings and set aside millions of acres for them is heading to the Senate after passing the House of Representatives this month.

But the price tag, at a time of economic recession and gaping deficits, has some lawmakers champing at the bit to bridle the movement to finance and save these symbols of the American West.

"People have lost their jobs. They can't keep their homes. And the answer to people losing their homes is -- let's go spend $700 million for homes and welfare for wild horses," said Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.

"The leaders of this Congress have more concern for creating a home for horses than jobs for Americans," said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah.

Wild mustangs and burros have been under federal protection for nearly 40 years, but the fast-growing population has become unmanageable.

Under the Restore Our American Mustangs Act, the number of acres that the estimated 36,000 wild horses roam would increase from 33 million to 53 million -- an area larger than New York and New England put together, or about 10 square miles per horse.

Horse lovers have been adopting the animals to save them from being put down, but in this economy, such adoptions have dramatically declined.

Advocates of the bill say it could actually save money by reducing the amount spent on keeping the horses in pens.

"It's not good for the horses and it's wasting money, frankly," said Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va.

Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., called the current program "terribly ineffective."

But foes see the plan as a clear drain on taxpayer dollars. The new bill would provide millions for contraception, rounding up thousands of animals each year for castration and even birth control pills. The Congressional Budget Office estimated it would cost about $200 million over the next five years, and up to $500 million after 2013 to secure the additional land.

"This is bad environmental policy. It's bad grass policy," said Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo.


This story sounded shady to me so I did a little bit of research on it. When presenting a story the way you did, or copied, it looks completely different from the reality of it. First of all, the bill that this is essentially restoring was in place under all presidents and congress from 1971 until Dec. of 2004. Secondly, this budget is over several years and equates to less than $2 per person over 5 years.


ROAM (http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/)

Burns amendment allowing sell and slaughter of wild mustangs (http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/resources/burns_amend.html)

Unbiased bill information (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1018)


Thanks for the time. :)

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by rockdale80
This story sounded shady to me so I did a little bit of research on it. When presenting a story the way you did, or copied, it looks completely different from the reality of it. First of all, the bill that this is essentially restoring was in place under all presidents and congress from 1971 until Dec. of 2004. Secondly, this budget is over several years and equates to less than $2 per person over 5 years.

ROAM (http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/)

Burns amendment allowing sell and slaughter of wild mustangs (http://www.wildhorsepreservation.com/resources/burns_amend.html)

Unbiased bill information (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1018)

Thanks for the time. :)

point is...if people don't want to pay the $10.00 they shouldn't have to.

[Pick6]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
point is...if people don't want to pay the $10.00 they shouldn't have to.

Exactly.

[Reds fan]

Originally posted by rockdale80
Secondly, this budget is over several years and equates to less than $2 per person over 5 years.



Thanks for the time. :)

How about per taxpayer?:rolleyes: Regardless, it Is a waste of our money.

[rockdale80]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
point is...if people don't want to pay the $10.00 they shouldn't have to.

Well I didnt want to pay my share of $750 billion to keep a business afloat either, but I did. That point can be made for all government spending. If someone was anti-war, does that exempt them from paying for that in the form or tax?

Everyone says my point is partisan based, but it is more the idea of hypocrisy. Look who signed the bill into law 48 years ago and think about the 44 years it was in effect and how many republicans did nothing to change it until 2005. Now it is absurd to reenact this bill, but only because the democrats are in control? I am not saying I agree with it, because that seems like a tremendous amount of money that could be going elsewhere, but I think we should do something to help save a beautiful wild animal like that. ;)

[rockdale80]

Originally posted by Reds fan
How about per taxpayer?:rolleyes: Regardless, it Is a waste of our money.

I can think of several things that are....

Like a bridge to nowhere? ;)

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by rockdale80
Well I didnt want to pay my share of $750 billion to keep a business afloat either, but I did. That point can be made for all government spending. If someone was anti-war, does that exempt them from paying for that in the form or tax?

Everyone says my point is partisan based, but it is more the idea of hypocrisy. Look who signed the bill into law 48 years ago and think about the 44 years it was in effect and how many republicans did nothing to change it until 2005. Now it is absurd to reenact this bill, but only because the democrats are in control? I am not saying I agree with it, because that seems like a tremendous amount of money that could be going elsewhere, but I think we should do something to help save a beautiful wild animal like that. ;)
.
It IS absurd, not because dems are in control but because what is being spent now in trillions is going to ruin this country and it's future. Money that is not even there is burning a hole in their collective pockets.
750 million dollars on wild horses? Sorry... someone is getting their pockets lined.:eek:

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by rockdale80
Well I didnt want to pay my share of $750 billion to keep a business afloat either, but I did. That point can be made for all government spending. If someone was anti-war, does that exempt them from paying for that in the form or tax?

Everyone says my point is partisan based, but it is more the idea of hypocrisy. Look who signed the bill into law 48 years ago and think about the 44 years it was in effect and how many republicans did nothing to change it until 2005. Now it is absurd to reenact this bill, but only because the democrats are in control? I am not saying I agree with it, because that seems like a tremendous amount of money that could be going elsewhere, but I think we should do something to help save a beautiful wild animal like that. ;)

youre preaching to the choir. i dont think americans should pay for any of it. i don't think the government belongs in our money. period. and i am not bipartisan. i am no partisan. i think they are both full of doodoo and make no damn sense. :D

[BuffyMars]

i believe this generation is getting to be a part of something historical (granted it is still brewing)--and that is knocking them both off of their high horses.

[rockdale80]

Originally posted by BuffyMars
youre preaching to the choir. i dont think americans should pay for any of it. i don't think the government belongs in our money. period. and i am not bipartisan. i am no partisan. i think they are both full of doodoo and make no damn sense. :D

I wont disagree with that.... I lean left, but I will be the first to tell you that the policies in place currently and the actions of the last 2.5 years sure make it seem like nothing has changed..... I hoped for better and truly hope it gets turned around.

[BuffyMars]

Originally posted by rockdale80
I lean left.....

you should probably get that checked out....sounds serious! maybe a chiro? i have an awesome chiro if you need a recommendation. ;)