Vault 7 - Happening

[Okeefenokee]

Yes, however that is not the function that it serves any more. The population hasn't needed 'protecting' for 150ish years. They're completely incompetent at facing the actual threats to our well-being - cyber attack, climate change, corporate rule.

Wow, amazing... big government can't solve it all... color me shocked.

Perhaps it needs to revert back to what it was to become functional again? That be a shock... wouldn't it?

Ummm sure. Slash the military budget (currently around 54% of Discretionary), and get back to me.

I'm pretty sure that the size of the government is not the topic that we were discussing.

currently around 15% of the total budget,

[heydaralon]

What I would like to know is why that pie chart has allocated so little to making sure that all federal buildings are up to code when it comes to transgendered and transabled folks.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Remove the overhead of covering the over-inflated costs of health insurance, and just give people health care, and you'll have nearly a trillion a year to cover the costs of internet security.

Realistically 100 billion would suffice. The rest could go for education and infrastructure.

Sooooooooooo government stays the same size, just shuffles the chips around. Don't get me wrong, I'm for it. Just don't pretend that this is a "small government" purity virtue.

Actually, you remove just the part I suggest, you reduce the government by almost 20%.

You give the money to entities that already exist, it's a win-win. You make sure they spend it on the actual issue, and not overheard. (Beaurocrats)

Only a person that thinks government is the answer to everything g would expand it after shuffling money to other entities.

It's not really that difficult.

You removed it from one recipient, and gave it to another.. Government did not shrink under the TC plan.
Also, it's worth mentioning that you can't 'ensure where the money goes' without more regulations.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Maybe not related??

https://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2017/0 ... w_xBCwh91k

My laptop's clock is exactly 1 hour ahead right now.. thought I was losing my mind..

[The Conservative]

Sooooooooooo government stays the same size, just shuffles the chips around. Don't get me wrong, I'm for it. Just don't pretend that this is a "small government" purity virtue.

Actually, you remove just the part I suggest, you reduce the government by almost 20%.

You give the money to entities that already exist, it's a win-win. You make sure they spend it on the actual issue, and not overheard. (Beaurocrats)

Only a person that thinks government is the answer to everything g would expand it after shuffling money to other entities.

It's not really that difficult.

You removed it from one recipient, and gave it to another.. Government did not shrink under the TC plan.
Also, it's worth mentioning that you can't 'ensure where the money goes' without more regulations.

Actually it would significantly. You don't do IT obviously.

[SuburbanFarmer]

ok

[The Conservative]

Let me give you an example. When I worked in a NOC (which is pretty much what is required to beef up security) one person was responsible for 1,000 people. With 20 Billion dollars, you could create a SuperNOC, which if you connect directly to the pipeline, before it's split between the ISPs and other entities, you could effectively stop attacks before they get out of control.

The way the system is designed right now, and how people "think" it's designed are two different things... this isn't something you normally would see in any company. This would be a building the size of the Prudential for that purpose alone, but probably underground. Either way, you'd be looking at taking the NSA, CIA, FBI technology groups and combining them into this entity. Make it a real internet security force... just like how Homeland Security was meant to do...it was meant to take the entities that already existed and put them under one roof, instead it became its own monster.

You could get rid of Homeland Security, and put this idea into place... you'd save a lot more than just a trillion.

[SilverEagle]

Actually, you remove just the part I suggest, you reduce the government by almost 20%.

You give the money to entities that already exist, it's a win-win. You make sure they spend it on the actual issue, and not overheard. (Beaurocrats)

Only a person that thinks government is the answer to everything g would expand it after shuffling money to other entities.

It's not really that difficult.

You removed it from one recipient, and gave it to another.. Government did not shrink under the TC plan.
Also, it's worth mentioning that you can't 'ensure where the money goes' without more regulations.

Actually it would significantly. You don't do IT obviously.

So how do you measure the size of government TC? You're saying that in your reducing the government by almost 20% plan that 20% of the government workers are laid off. Then putting the funding for that 20% into other government entities? You reduced the number of government employees but not the size of the government if you're just taking that pool of money and dumping into another section of the government. GCF is correct.

[The Conservative]

You removed it from one recipient, and gave it to another.. Government did not shrink under the TC plan.
Also, it's worth mentioning that you can't 'ensure where the money goes' without more regulations.

Actually it would significantly. You don't do IT obviously.

So how do you measure the size of government TC? You're saying that in your reducing the government by almost 20% plan that 20% of the government workers are laid off. Then putting the funding for that 20% into other government entities? You reduced the number of government employees but not the size of the government if you're just taking that pool of money and dumping into another section of the government. GCF is correct.

Taking 1 Trillion (a year) out of one project and splitting it between existing means that Trillion can be used to more effect properly. Think of it this way, 20 Billion for the idea I have, give the rest of the money to the education, and infrastructure to produce programs to actually create real jobs... heaven forbid.

Infrastructure jobs could fund a new "New Deal" in where the money is used to pay people to work on beefing up our infrastructure, instead of paying a few corporations to force people to get health insurance. Infrastructure jobs across the country, fixing roads, repairing lines, improving everything could pay for decades of workers...

You'd allow people to live, you'd also allow those people to save money and spend money as they deem fit. Want to make shovel ready jobs, you don't do it by giving it to corporations that don't produce anything... you give it to entities that produce things...

Hell, if it's true there are more jobs than qualified people... if the people in the government are qualified to do their jobs, then they should be able to find a job fast and easy enough.

Lets be honest, if you removed Homeland Security, and ObamaCare, the US would not implode, if anything it would probably run better.

[SilverEagle]

Actually it would significantly. You don't do IT obviously.

So how do you measure the size of government TC? You're saying that in your reducing the government by almost 20% plan that 20% of the government workers are laid off. Then putting the funding for that 20% into other government entities? You reduced the number of government employees but not the size of the government if you're just taking that pool of money and dumping into another section of the government. GCF is correct.

Taking 1 Trillion (a year) out of one project and splitting it between existing means that Trillion can be used to more effect properly. Think of it this way, 20 Billion for the idea I have, give the rest of the money to the education, and infrastructure to produce programs to actually create real jobs... heaven forbid.

Infrastructure jobs could fund a new "New Deal" in where the money is used to pay people to work on beefing up our infrastructure, instead of paying a few corporations to force people to get health insurance. Infrastructure jobs across the country, fixing roads, repairing lines, improving everything could pay for decades of workers...

You'd allow people to live, you'd also allow those people to save money and spend money as they deem fit. Want to make shovel ready jobs, you don't do it by giving it to corporations that don't produce anything... you give it to entities that produce things...

Hell, if it's true there are more jobs than qualified people... if the people in the government are qualified to do their jobs, then they should be able to find a job fast and easy enough.

Lets be honest, if you removed Homeland Security, and ObamaCare, the US would not implode, if anything it would probably run better.

TC, how do you measure the size of a publicly traded company? By the number of employees or it's market cap size? Just in case you don't know the correct answer is market cap size. So with that in mind you need to think of the expenditures of government in terms of percentage of GDP. By moving money from one bucket to another bucket does not effect the expenditure percentage of GDP the government represents. Therefore.....no the government has NOT shrunk.