By now even a deaf homeless guy in Peoria knows the debate on the deficit and all the worthless plans to save some cash…..most of the savings will come on the backs of the poor and middle class……now there is a good idea if you truly want a two class system…….but I got to looking around for some savings that would not add to the woes of the working people in this country…..the very people that the government says they are protecting, at least the next generation……and if you believe that…..I have a bridge in Brooklyn that is for sale….any takers?
My short search on-line came up with two possible savings programs…..
(Newser) – The Abrams tank sounded pretty remarkable in reports chronicling its arrival in Afghanistan more than two years ago: The 68-ton machine is propelled by jet engines and has a main gun that can destroy a house from more than a mile away. But since its debut, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have been pushing to upgrade the tank, devoting $436 million to the cause. Except as the AP explains, senior Army officials keep telling Congress they’re not interested. “If we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way,” says the Army’s chief of staff.
The Army says it doesn’t need to buy more tanks until 2017; Congress wants the Army to buy earlier models that have been upgraded with things like better microprocessors and color flat panel displays, at a cost of about $7.5 million each. “The Army is on record saying we do not require any additional M1A2s,” said the deputy director of the Army budget office this month. And while tank-proponents Rep. Jim Jordan and Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio insist our safety is at the root of it all—”we are supposed to spend taxpayer money in defense of the country,” says Jordan—the AP notes the country’s only tank plant happens to be located in Lima, Ohio. Such a pet project is nothing new, but the Abrams example is notable due to the certainty of the Army’s position. “When an institution as risk-averse as the Defense Department says they have enough tanks, we can probably believe them,” says a director with Citizens Against Government Waste.
And the next possible savings is in the international realm……..
U.S. officials have long complained about corruption in Afghanistan’s government—and now it’s come out that one of the biggest contributors to said corruption was the United States itself.
In one of the most disturbing tales yet of payoffs, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) spent more than a decade delivering tens of millions of dollars in cash to the office of President Hamid Karzai, according to an investigation led by Matthew Rosenberg of The New York Times.
The newspaper learned that American dollars—what one former Afghan official called “ghost money”—were put into suitcases, backpacks and even plastic shopping bags and dropped off in secret in the hopes it would buy influence with Karzai and warlords.
Instead, the payments undermined U.S. efforts to help Afghanistan develop a legitimate, democratic government.
“The biggest source of corruption in Afghanistan,” one American official told the Times, “was the United States.”
Mohammed Zia Salehi, the administrative chief of the Afghan National Security Office in charge of distributing the CIA cash, was arrested in July 2010, accused, among other transgressions, of smuggling cash out of the country. He made a call to Hamid Karzai and was instantly released.
According to Matthew Rosenberg, Salehi, referring to the contradiction of the U.S. government trying to fight corruption in Afghanistan, while at the same time forking over millions of dollars of cash, said, called himself, “an enemy of the FBI and a hero to the CIA.”
In a follow-up story, Karzai acknowledged the CIA payments, claiming the money was used for “various purposes.” Those close to Karzai said the cash went to pay off warlords, lawmakers and others whom the president courted for support. Karzai shrugged off the controversy, noting that his Office of National Security still receives monthly cash payments from the CIA. Later, his office issued a statement that some of the money was used to treat wounded soldiers, but others suggested that it wasn’t wounded soldiers who were receiving “treats.”
Granted these two programs will not solve our deficit problem, but any savings will help and these two we can live without….now ask yourself why these types of expenditures are seldom mentioned when looking for solutions……
Here’s a flash for you deficit hawks…….food stamps is NOT wasteful spending……buying tanks nobody wants IS!
How about my readers….any ideas on how to lessen the deficit?