Ron Paul Suggests Axing 5 U.S. Federal Departments (and Budgets), page 1

Ron Paul Suggests Axing 5 U.S. Federal Departments (and Budgets), page

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

Topic started on 20-10-2011 @ 11:58 AM by ParAvion

Ron Paul Suggests Axing 5 U.S. Federal Departments (and Budgets)

politics.slashdot.org

"Presidential hopeful Ron Paul's new proposal to slash federal spending would wipe out large chunks of the government's research portfolio. The congressman from Texas and Republican candidate has unveiled a budget plan to reduce the deficit that would eliminate five federal departments: Energy, Commerce, Interior, Education, and Housing and Urban Development. In one fell swoop, such a step would erase, among other programs, the Energy Department's $5-billion Office of Science, the $4.5-billion National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the $750-million National Institute of Standards

(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:
news.sciencemag.org

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 11:58 AM by ParAvion

I really like Ron Paul, I really do, but axing of some of the government agencies mentioned seems excessive. Is it Ron Paul's plan to completely remove all Federal support to the sciences? I am not sure, but it looks that way.

Yes the states can look after many things, and the people can buck up and look after themselves in many areas. Yet is it not a collective will in many areas, mostly science, that made the USA such a super power and beacon for freedom that we see it as today.

I like the man, I really do, but he needs to back off on his stance in regards to science, research and development... do you really want corporations to hold the technological edge? Corporations that are sovereign to none...

Just to add - I normally visit 3 main sites to get an overview on things, that being ATS, Slashdot and CNN, I see ATS as a good place to find news that the mainstream won't touch, CNN as basically government shills and Slashdot as a good area for neutral academic type discussion. In saying this I ask you, the reader to take special heed of the comments about this on Slashdot... well not all, but it should be realised that there are many smart people that frequent that site, people worth listening to...

politics.slashdot.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 20-10-2011 by ParAvion because: added some more

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:10 PM by thegoods724

have you not heard of those bogus scientific studies, they are a complete waste of time... this to me doesnt seem like much of a dent in the bucket on spending, but they probably are worthless unefficient spending that should be eliminated. Along with it about 700 billion in military spending and that should be good.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:10 PM by Skewed

reply to post by ParAvion

I understand the concern here.

What I think will happen is that in the broad spectrum these departments overall have done more damage than anything else. That said, within these departments, there are areas that actually provide a legitimate benefit to the citizens. Things like NOAA, I believe will be rolled up into other departments. I believe that his plan is to get rid of all the malfeasance in one strike, then take the good parts and move them elsewhere to a more sustainable department.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:11 PM by princeofpeace

Ron Paul is an IDIOT plain and simple. His ideas while they sound nice would NOT work in THIS world. Cat lives in fantasy land.

edit on 20-10-2011 by princeofpeace because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:11 PM by pteridine

reply to post by ParAvion

What Ron Paul thinks and what his intentions are will not effect the country. While he has many good ideas, he is not part of the Republican good ol' boy network. Those in the network have to display no particular talent [Dubya, Reagan] to be nominated or elected and those outside can't even be be nominated.
I agree that dismantling Federal R&D would not be good for the nation. Much of our existing technology has a basis in Federal R&D.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:14 PM by Skewed

reply to post by princeofpeace

They will, for those of us who wish to practice personal responsibility.

Those that do not wish to have personal responsibility, well, then I guess you will be screwed then.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 12:30 PM by pavil

reply to post by ParAvion

You may quibble about this program or Department but major changes have to occur in the size of our government if we are ever to get the deficit under control. You really can't tax people more, it will be counterproductive in the end. Even if we tax people more, the history of the US Government is that it will just spend the tax increase rather than trim our deficit. Government must shrink in order for us to stop being a major Debtor nation like some third world country.

At least the man has a plan..... Have you looked at the other plans out there......they kick the proverbial deficit can down the road and use rosy assumptions to make them look feasible.

Regardless of tax increases, without cuts to our Federal Budget, things aren't going to get better. Yes, there will be pain with the cuts, but keeping the status quo just makes things worse in the long run.

edit on 20-10-2011 by pavil because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 01:16 PM by EarthCitizen07

How about we start with DHS and especially the TSA???? NONE like these two branches for good reason, they are intrusive and accomplish very little actual security. Then cut down on the cia and nsa budget, cut down on classfied dod projects, cut down on the bogus "war on drugs" bs, dismantle the FED, restructure nasa so they can actually accomplish SOMETHING which is better than NOTHING.

Need more ideas? Give me a break. The man is a nwo clown!

He says "lets audit the fed and then create competing currencies". Yeah that will really work man.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 01:17 PM by PapaEmeritus

reply to post by ParAvion

Im looking at it the same way Paul is. They have yet to show any resulst for the money they use. Get rid of them. We dont need them.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 02:56 PM by usernameconspiracy

Originally posted by Skewed
reply to post by ParAvion

Things like NOAA, I believe will be rolled up into other departments. I believe that his plan is to get rid of all the malfeasance in one strike, then take the good parts and move them elsewhere to a more sustainable department.

That's the most likely scenario. He won't say it, but NOAA would certainly not be disbanded...unless he's a complete moron. Wait....

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 03:54 PM by whaaa

I hope Dr. Paul disbands the Agency that is responsible for his and his family protection and safety. He should take personal responsibility for his own safety instead of wasting taxpayer money.

Dementia is settling in on the old man!!

He has some good ideas; this ain't one of em!!

I wonder if the people employed by the agencies he targeted will be voting for him now? I doubt it. And do you have any idea how many private contractors rely on those agencies for their livelihood?

He just sunk any chances of being nominated by the GOP. His only hope is a third party run for the WH and I doubt if he can raise the money required for a viable campaign.

A couple more brilliant ideas like this and even his staunch devotees will be bailing on him.

edit on 20-10-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 04:03 PM by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by thegoods724
have you not heard of those bogus scientific studies, they are a complete waste of time... this to me doesnt seem like much of a dent in the bucket on spending, but they probably are worthless unefficient spending that should be eliminated. Along with it about 700 billion in military spending and that should be good.

You're right! Those eggheads just waste our hard earned tax dollars on all kinds of 'science' that has nothing to do with us average every-day working stiffs.

Think of all the Walmarts you could build with the money you save, and everybody would have a job, to boot!

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 04:14 PM by Pervius

We had a great Air Force in 1947 when our Air Wings were under the US Army. Army Air Corps.

It became a separate military branch due to the booming economy following WWII.

Parties over. Get rid of the separate service secretary, Secretary of the Air Force.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 04:45 PM by Erongaricuaro

Cutting government administration at the department level within agencies is not a new idea. Worthwhile programs within those targeted departments can be shifted to a different branch of management and hopefully with better goals and more positive results.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 04:48 PM by GeorgiaGirl

I'm a teacher. I say CUT the federal department of education. Let the states make decisions about education rather than funneling money through Washington that they decide to send back to us in the states. Ron Paul is right about that one.

reply posted on 20-10-2011 @ 10:29 PM by David9176

That's sure to create jobs.