"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...
" on Sun, 22 May 2011 18:08:35 -0700
(PDT) typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On May 22, 6:37 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:


If you're going to descend into bitching about trivial costs, you're
only
going to delude yourself about our real problems. Deal with the real
ones
first. Then you can bitch about the trivia all you want. Just don't
waste
the country's time and energy bitching about things that are so small
you
can hardly measure them, while the big ones are eating us alive. Leave
that
to the Tea Party.


I believe it is important to cut all the trivial costs. If you do not
cut trivial costs, you will never have the courage to cut the big
ones.

If it is only a few cents per person, then by all means, let us
eliminate that "few cents". "Take care of the pence and the pounds
will take care of themselves."

Nonsense. The big budget items aren't things you can nibble a few cents at a
time. And you can take all the things you *can* nibble, add them up, and
they'll amount to so little they get lost in the rounding.

The big items need serious solutions, or we get nowhere.



usefulness. But PP gets $75 million in federal funding. That's 5.35 x
10^-6
of the federal budget.

Are you going to get serious about this, or are you going to play
child's
games?

If you are going to be serious, you have to take the same approach on
all costs. Saying you are only going to look at big programs is
really saying cost cutting does not matter.

I'd start with the question "Why is this the Business of the
Federal Government?" Then go on with "Do you favor funding the other
side, too?"

tschus
pyotr

Meanwhile, insuring health care is eating us alive, while you're arguing
over Big Bird and Head Start.

That's why I'm skeptical that we'll get anywhere. The politicians can make
plenty of hay off of people like you and Roger, and avoid the big -- and
politically costly -- issues that are running us into the ground.

--
Ed Huntress