3:56 pm, March 4, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 8
       

  • Hiring Freeze Hangover?
    Celtic Wolf
    Arbitrary answers to critical financial situations indicate a failure to diagnose the problem fully at hand. One for three sounds more like a trial and error solution, than a well thought out solution to the issue. That is if it is true the the number of federal employees is directly related to the amount of national debt or the costs of two to three wars. Congress needs to be honest and address the true set of issues. If they still seek to reduce federal workforce numbers, then do so. Yet do it with some common sense. Decide if you want to reduce the $155k a year folks. Decide if you want to reduce the SES ranks or the managerial ranks. The current plan is a ludicrous as the solutions to other issues that got us all in this mess in the first place. What could happen if we decide to reduce the number of Senators by 50%, or the number of Representatives by 30%? We need better ideas coming out of Washington. We need to start looking at the original problem and fix that first. For example, why attack Libya, what good is it to be in Afghanistan or Iran? What good is it to create a Welfare State? and most of all What good is it to have a Debt Ceiling that is not controlled?
    Celtic Wolf
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Debt relief?
    Moderate
    How to reduce the deficit is much more difficult than one thinks. The Republicans want to reduce debt based on their political philosophies. All legislators will reduce debt as long as it does not involve their districts. So what does the leave us?-------- I agree that we should not have been involved in Libya unless the country agressed against us. It makes no sense to start retaliating aginst them 20 years after they bombed a plane. It should have been done after it was proven that they did that. Iraq was a political thing that has cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Afghanistan is another story. The Taliban, at minimum shielded Al Qhada from us. Al Qhada agressed against us on numerous occasions. The Taliban should never regain power.-----------Unfortunately we have welfare. if not, then we have people dying of starvation. A better plan is to train these people to be gainfully employed.-------- Thank George Bush for the depression that has made the excess spending necessary.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • DEBT RELIEF?????
    Cindi
    You were doing real good till the last comment.-----------According to the Congressional Budget Office (COB) the President’s budget would result in $1.43 trillion and $1.16 trillion deficits for FYs 2011 and 2012.---------While President Obama claimed his budget would produce $7.2 trillion in deficits over the next decade, CBO calculated $9.5 trillion in deficits. That is more debt than the federal government accumulated from 1789–2010 combined. -------President Obama harshly criticized his predecessor for overseeing $300 billion budget deficits even while financing a war. Yet the President’s budget would run annual deficits reaching $1.2 trillion by 2021------- Under President Obama’s budget proposal, taxpayers would see large tax increases, bigger government, and slower economic growth. Obama declared that “I didn’t come here to pass our problems on to the next President or the next generation—I’m here to solve them,” would, over the next decade, drop an additional $80,000 per household in debt onto the laps of our children and grandchildren.--------- You may not consider this a recessions/depression information, but you have to agree this is an irresponsible budget proposal by any standard.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Hi Cindi
    Moderate
    Your last phrase is not accurate. i do not have to agree... The budget is a projection. Obama made a determination that it is necessary to spend our way out of this economic downturn.Thus we have the huge deficits. He made the determination because he believes it is better to have the debt rather than have the economic downturn turn into a major depression ala the 1929 depression.------- If you look up the statistics you will find that Hoover kept a tight money policy even after the market crash of 1929. This resulted in aggravating the downturn into a longer downturn. When Roosevelt came into office he loosened things up and unemployment started going down until money was tightened in around 1937. Then unemployment went upsharply. We did not fully recover until World War 2.---- Hopefully, Obama's policies will result in recovery. At that time, hopefully, we will reduce the debt and start running surplusesthat will reduce the accumulated debt.--- I believe this policy is much better than passing out a depression to our children.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Basically True
    StarTrek1701
    I agree in principle regarding your comments about Libya, Afganistan, Iraq, etc. As with many things, there has to be someone with a vested interest in having us there (i.e. arms dealers and manufacturers). Why can't our government ever take a backseat to these foreign issues; issues that often have a religious component? Why does the U.S. have to be the World's police force? What we should be doing is letting these factions just fight it out; possibly to the point of destroying themselves. Then, if there is anything left that is of any value, we step-in and pick-up the pieces. At the risk of being nerd-ish, we could learn a lesson from Gene Roddenberry's "Star Trek" by adopting a policy of non-interference. But, of course, that would take common sense.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • It Is All a Sham...a Fraud
    StarTrek1701
    All of this (pay freezes, RIFs, increasing the cost of health care, etc.) has just one goal, to demoralize and reduce the size of the Federal government to the point that it can no longer provide the kind of service to the American public that we do now. Then, the private contractors, who have been lining the pockets of politicians for the last few years (specifically the Tea Partiers), can then step in to fill those gaps. I am so ashamed to call myself a Republican.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Easy Path To Failure
    MAZ
    Looking at where we are going with Government employees and what Congress is doing with them, one has to conclude that Congress will get what they pay for ... people who will be just happy to have a job. There will be less dedication, less customer/public support and less quality. Just admit that you have to get past beating up people who made much less than others when things were good as a trade off for stability ... now that things are not so good and they are doing better than most does not make them bad people or stupid worthless employees. Congress is not going to reduce the workforce in ways that build for the future or encourage the brightest and best to come to work for the Federal Government. They are going to loose their best and keep the happy and hire those folks who will be just happy to have a job. This works in small biz where eduction and security clearances are not needed ... but it does not work in Government where things are complicated, you have advisaries working to steel your information and operational capabilities. The brightest and best are being told to avoid Government Service and the advice is for good reasons and looking into the future it looks like good advice ... I just wonder if this is how a modern, progressive, successful Government needs to survive another 200 + years. I don't think so, and I don't think Congress cares ... they miss the point to spend wizley, to be smart and to build for a future, they seemed dead set on tearing apart for a future of less ... they like most company CEOs need and want short term success not long term strategies that takes time and effort to develop, model and test before you implement. But hey ... toss out a budget ... give it a whirl ... see what happens, you can just not do one next year if what you did this year is a total mess. Oh sorry ... you didn't do one this year because it's takes to much work and forethought ... guess your not the brightest and best, your just happy to be in Washington with a job that has max public power and influence. You go Congress.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Easy Path To Failure
    Celtic Wolf
    Congress may be seeking, like any big business, to stay in the money making business. So by making government run as inefficiently as possible, and blame federal employees, they get two things done - they cause an un-skilled workforce and they cause more reason to hire contractors and raise taxes -- a vicious cycle. So what Congress is doing today with Fed Bashing may be simply building a future of ten or more years of high taxes, high economic woes, and creating work for themselves, as opposed to solving anything, Congress is purposely creating financial chaos to justify their existence - what a web they are weaving.
    Celtic Wolf
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }