BBO Discussion Forums: Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? - BBO Discussion Forums

Winstonm, on 2017-May-16, 06:09, said:

You have pretty much described yourself.

awm, on 2017-May-15, 15:34, said:

The participation rate is near an all time low. Low unemployment is due to the method used to determine the unemployment rate. The moment one is dropped from unemployment insurance that person is no longer counted as one looking for a job.

Quote

This is due to the aging of the population.

Quote

Employer based health insurance is mostly good for the public.
Obamacare exchange health insurance isn't access to healthcare. The public pays insurance premiums and still must pay a deductible before the insurance kicks in. Americans without health insurance before Obamacare are worst off today than in 2008. Under Obamacare 44% of all insurance payouts is due to the sickest 1%. Healthy Americans are being ripped off. They are forced to pay for the sick.
Most health insurers have dropped out of the exchanges. They can't make money.
Obamacare is collapsing. The dimms wont admit it.

The Washington Post May 19, 2017:

Quote

Of course, Trump fans will claim the tag never happened, that gouging is illegal, and Trump has nothing hiding in his trunks.

Zelandakh, on 2017-May-19, 09:35, said:

I agree but I think this will be more than "a useful exercise". This will be an "overdue exorcism" on the Department of Defense--given the leadership's intransigence to resolving this situation. This problem has been around for at least 15 years, yet the DoD hasn't resolved the problem MATERIALLY (notice I didn't say completely but materially). The year-end accounting adjustments just appear to get larger and more insidious over time. The problem was just $2.3 trillion back-in-the-day (2002). See link below from CBS News that talks about the $2.3 trillion "GRAND PLUG" -- (in layman terms --"We don't know what this amount is and we can provide no support for the number-- we just add this amount here to balance our disheveled accounting records").

http://www.cbsnews.c...e-war-on-waste/

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld was trying to sound the alarm back in 2001 about this grandiose problem but it got lost in the 09/11 news cycle.

This is how I read the problem. And it's not of the sensational variety. This is from Reuters which I consider to be a reputable business news source.

http://www.reuters.c...y-idUSKCN10U1IG

The DoD is fudging or cooking the books from an accounting standpoint and have an excessive number of unsupported accounting entries at year-end to even know if the entries they are posting to the accounting records make sense. And when the internal auditors won't opine that the consolidated financial statements fairly represent the financial condition of the U.S. government, we should be sounding alarms. When auditors are disclaiming opinions--not even giving a qualified opinion--but completely disclaiming, we should be even more upset.

NOTE: Wall Street usually dumps the stocks of companies that have horrible internal control structures and routinely practice accounting shenanigans of this scale and scope -- especially for over 15 years!

RedSpawn, on 2017-May-19, 14:19, said:

I doubt that anyone disagrees that poor accounting is a problem, and there are lots of other problems with US military spending too. But why should that mean other problems should be swept under the rug? When you start by exaggerating the accounting problem by two orders of magnitude, you don't give the impression that you're looking for a serious discussion.

I've got to say this is the funniest line in the WC in a while.

RedSpawn, on 2017-May-17, 17:04, said:

Hmm, let's see, who is ultimately responsible for ensuring the executive branch functions properly? Where does the buck top? Oh, the president? And who was president in 2016? Oh, a Democrat, you say? Wait, are you suggesting Fox news would tend to err on the side of criticising a Democratic president?

cherdano, on 2017-May-19, 15:09, said:

Defense Secretary Rumsfeld was trying to sound the alarm back in 2001 about this grandiose problem but it got lost in the 09/11 news cycle.

George Bush was the president when I first heard about it in 2001 when the problem was $2.3 trillion. See link below:

http://www.cbsnews.c...e-war-on-waste/

However, I don't see this as a Republican or Democratic issue. The "divide and conquer" mentality allows the DofD to avoid fixing the underlying problem when we try to color this as a political issue.

This $6.5 trillion fiasco is a major internal control and financial reporting problem. It is also a serious mismanagement problem that is indicative of the type of leadership in the Department of Defense (DoD). In fact, it's the lack of leadership in the DoD and its seemingly impervious empire-like culture that is preventing this problem from being resolved FIFTEEN years after Donald Rumsfeld sounded the alarm.

I want to be clear, the scale and scope of this problem is much larger than partisan politics.

I am sure Zelandakh had a healthy level of professional skepticism when I first said $6.5 trillion and I don't blame him for asking for a more credible source to substantiate this figure (which I happily supplied).

I posted earlier that I couldn't understand the mind of the Trump fan; I think I now have a better grasp.

The Trump fan, it seems to me, is the faith-based personality; Faith must be maintained, regardless of facts, in order to retain whatever illusion the believer originally bought.

Faith is the belief in one some-thing rather than accepting and acknowledging the world is comprised of everything.

This, from the Washington Post, may well be why Trump seems to be coming unhinged in his efforts to stop the investigation:

Quote

Winstonm, on 2017-May-19, 17:44, said:

Looks like ISIS has infiltrated the FBI to stop Jared Kushner from straightening out the situation in the Middle East.

PassedOut, on 2017-May-20, 06:45, said:

I thought Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Nixon epitomized corruption but I was wrong; they were simply political sleeze. Those occupying the WH at this time are darker, more corrupt, and much more dangerous because of their sole interest in self enrichment - like characters from a Mario Puzo novel.

Quote

What positive could you be up to if you were acting in concert with a known adversarial country but wanted to hide that action and information from the U.S. intelligence agencies? Whose idea was it to develop this back channel?

Obama is stubbed by the Saudis while Trump is given the red carpet.

jogs, on 2017-May-20, 11:48, said:

Any idea why?

Winstonm, on 2017-May-18, 14:14, said:

Nice try.

Plenty of people have cited potential criminal charges that could have been brought against Sec. Clinton related to the mishandling of classified information. So, that was clearly a criminal investigation. It needed outside management by an independent counsel to remove any taint of the "fix is in".

The investigation into the Trump campaign hasn't yielded any criminal charges as yet. Some may be forthcoming or not. The counsel was put in place to help make the result of the investigation to be beyond reproach whatever it finds.

Most of what has been reported so far has been smoke rather than fact. Most of it is attributed to "unnamed sources" which amounts to unconfirmed allegations not facts. Yet those tenuous assertions are repeated and treated as dead certain fact by the left.

Sorry, but former Director Mueller is a "Special Counsel" to independently manage the investigation, find the truth, and take it where that leads. He's not a "Grand Inquisitor" like you'd like him to be.

PassedOut, on 2017-May-20, 11:56, said:

Obama's idea of foreign policy was to ignore and punish our friends while trying to suck up to our enemies.

So, it isn't surprising that a new administration which says to our friends and allies "We've got your back" and means it would be treated far differently.

BTW, isn't it interesting that the great "Islamophobe" Donald Trump is being feted by the Saudis while the great "Islamophile" Barack Obama was given short shrift by them?

You'd think that if Donald Trump remarks about "radical Islamic terrorists" were very offensive to them that they'd treat him no differently or worse than Barack Obama.

With the respect to Trump media coverage, say it isn't so?

Please click the link below.

https://heatst.com/c...ump-media-bias/

Interestingly, FOX news (coincidentally under new management and leadership without the late Roger Ailes) is the only one news channel sampled that even had anything close to an allegedly balanced coverage of the President.

Fascinating.

rmnka447, on 2017-May-20, 14:04, said:

Or, maybe there's a better explanation: The Saudi Obama Snub: A Positive Sign

Quote

Could it be that with a weak president like Trump, one very susceptible to flattery and with no concept of reality, the Saudis are thrilled to know that they are free to misbehave? I don't look forward another Saudi planned, financed, and executed 9/11 attack on the US. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

PassedOut, on 2017-May-19, 14:53, said:

???

How did I exaggerate the problem? It is a $6.5 trillion problem now. It was a $2.3 trillion problem then in 2001. This is not just a "fix the computer" type of situation. The entire internal control structure at DoD contains so many material weaknesses that internal auditors are rendering disclaimers of opinions over our consolidated US government financial statements. The internal auditors specifically call out DoD as the "serious" offender.

Government Accountability Office Report -- Inspector's General Report

http://www.gao.gov/p...cts/GAO-15-341R

Quote

This is a nice way of saying that the Department of Defense, which gets some of the largest federal budget appropriations, can not issue reliable financial statements (including balance sheets) which will help it to reliably report a significant portion of its assets, liabilities, and costs. If you can't reliably report what assets you truly own, then how can you take a legitimate detailed physical inventory of them? I don't even want to see how DoD manages the cash accounts it has at the Treasury, if it can't even handle its own inventory and property, plant, and equipment accounts.

Again, list one company on the stock exchange that could perform this kind of accounting alchemy over 15 years and still be in business? Sure, the U.S. government and its subsidiaries are sovereign entities (which is different than corporate business entities), but both entities need decent internal controls to function properly. And to call it a problem of the size of $6.5 trillion in adjustments when our debt is about $19.8 trillion just shows you how "out of control" the problem is emanating from ONE department. The scale and scope of this problem is simply undeniable.

I am not anti-military. I am, however, anti-mismanagement, anti-graft, anti-corruption, and want to see reasonable internal controls in our DofD. This will help the DoD provide meaningful reports that Congress, internal auditors, and the public at large can review to determine if the DoD is efficiently and effectively managing resources to conduct "the people's business".

This is what our forefathers wanted. It is supposed to be part of the checks and balances system that makes our government the envy (and not the laughing stock) of other nations.

Stay tuned.

rmnka447, on 2017-May-20, 14:04, said:

Come on, you are better than that. These kind of superficial arguments don't prove anything.

Just imagine President Hillary Clinton would get this kind of reception in Saudi-Arabia. Wouldn't you consider it proof that the Saudis think their 10 million $ Clinton Foundation donations are paying off as investment?

rmnka447, on 2017-May-20, 14:04, said:

The Saudis have done their homework. They know to own Trump all you have to do is lavish him with praise.