GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby frezik » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:04 pm UTC

Republicans have released their list of "Pork" items in the stimulus package:

* $650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.

The program is out of money and needs to be done. Since it was decided long ago that the government would be in charge of the public airwaves, this doesn't seem like something you can just back away from now.

* $88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).

Wouldn't this be useful? The Coast Guard takes care of emergency response, one of the most basic functions of government.

* $448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.

:shock: Republicans are opposing that :shock:

* $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees.
* $200 million in funding for the lease of alternative energy vehicles for use on military installations.

Would this save money in the long run? Would they be bought from American car companies, who are some of the ones most desperate to get stimulized? Would this help develop more fuel efficient vehicles in general? The answers are likely "yes, yes, and yes", and therefore is exactly the sort of thing the stimulus should be targeting.

* $1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.

A regular Census is another basic government need, and is required by the constitution (for purposes of redistricting congressional seats, at the very least). If it didn't get funding now, it'd just get put in another budget later.

* $75 million for "smoking cessation activities.

Combined with a public health insurance (which, admittedly, most Republicans also don't like), this makes a lot of sense.

* $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges.

Political Ad, 2010: "Mark Congresscritter voted against funding schools. I'm Sam Shady, and I approve this message."

* $75 million for salaries of employees at the FBI.
* $500 million for state and local fire stations.
* $650 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.
* $88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.
* $412 million for CDC buildings and property.

More basic government needs.

* $500 million for flood reduction projects on the Mississippi River.

After a huge screwup with Katrina, is this something Republicans really want to fight?

* $6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

While the "green" term does get abused a lot, this is another area that potentially saves money in the long run.

* $850 million for Amtrak.

Better public transport is definately something that should be in the stimulus.

While there is some stuff in here that genuinely seems like pork (like "A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film."), a lot of it just seems to be for the sake of filling out the list.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Gunfingers » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:13 pm UTC

This'll probably be fixed in a few minutes, but right now the caption under the image says "The Senate is currently the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus bill." I'm looking forward to finding out what the missing word is. I choose to assume it's "sexing".

On the actual topic, a lot of the things you define as "basic government needs" sound to me like things the federal government need not have a hand in at all. States' rights and all that. Not all of them, but a lot of them.

I was also thrown by the idea of the Coast Guard needing an ice breaker, but then i remembered that Alaska is a state now.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Garm » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:22 pm UTC

One thing about the states rights vs basic government needs bit. If the fed ponies up cash for those services the state governments – most of which are running into budget problems – can spend the money that would be budget for said services elsewhere. Like on job training or other such things.

Just in general it looks like the Republicans have decided that their path to glory lies in obstructing Obama whenever possible.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Aikanaro » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:25 pm UTC

Maybe the republicans are opposing the new homeland security center, because it'll be the democrats in charge, and the dems who get to decide who gets wiretapped without warrants, who gets held without bail or charges, etc.? :P
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

User avatar
william
Not a Raptor. Honest.
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby william » Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:36 pm UTC

As for states' rights--yeah, the state governments, because they are required to balance the budget, are kinda getting fucked over right now. Anything the fed does to prevent them from having to spend money will help. That, and that the stimulus bill has money to the state government in the bill.
SecondTalon wrote:A pile of shit can call itself a delicious pie, but that doesn't make it true.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Jahoclave » Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:55 pm UTC

Aikanaro wrote:Maybe the republicans are opposing the new homeland security center, because it'll be the democrats in charge, and the dems who get to decide who gets wiretapped without warrants, who gets held without bail or charges, etc.? :P

My thoughts exactly.

The thing I really don't get is, a lot of the things the GOP is against are large scale construction projects. CONSTRUCTION JOBS! Those are jobs that are going to go to people who are going to spend that income, not add it to their investment portfolio. Some of the public health stuff they can make their bs arguement, but a lot of what they're against is actual job creation. If I was trying to make a stimulus package I'd be looking to find any government building that they ever conceived of building and add it in. Tax cuts are great and all, but they really don't help you too well when you don't have a job.

It just bothers me that what they're opposing seem to be really great ideas that at the very least have long term benefits. Many of these jobs that'll be created are going to be exclusively for Americans because they can't be done anywhere else.

It just seems the GOP is content on telling the average American to go fuck themselves, when the rich feel like trickling down their tax cut savings you'll be stimulized.

User avatar
Bakemaster
pretty nice future dick
Posts: 8915
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:33 pm UTC
Location: One of those hot places

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Bakemaster » Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:56 pm UTC

The GOP has to do this so that later they can point at it as evidence of their fiscal conservatism. It doesn't matter what they actually call pork because the vast majority of voters will either never know about the details, or forget them a week later.
Image
c0 = 2.13085531 × 1014 smoots per fortnight
"Apparently you can't summon an alternate timeline clone of your inner demon, guys! Remember that." —Noc

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby frezik » Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:31 pm UTC

Garm wrote:Just in general it looks like the Republicans have decided that their path to glory lies in obstructing Obama whenever possible.


That's my impression, as well. Thing is, I'm not sure what that gets them, besides sticking to a fiscal conservative ideal. If the stimulus remains popular and the economy ends up showing real progress, the Republicans stand to take a deathblow in 2010/2012. OTOH, if the stimulus doesn't really help, the democrats only stand to take a flesh wound (a big one, but still only a flesh wound). Going the idealistic route at this point seems like a lot to bet the party on.
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby 22/7 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:46 pm UTC

Bakemaster wrote:The GOP has to do this so that later they can point at it as evidence of their fiscal conservatism. It doesn't matter what they actually call pork because the vast majority of voters will either never know about the details, or forget them a week later.
This is exactly what I was thinking, especially when I saw some of the stuff that the OP was pointing out. Also, remember that anyone in Congress right now who also happens to be a Republican is in a no-lose scenario. All they have to do is complain about the stimulus bill (regardless of what's in it) and that it does too much of some things and not enough of other things and then last minute vote for it. You do this because if it does well, you voted for it. If it doesn't do well, you can point at your name on the pork list and say, "see, I tried to warn you that this wasn't a good plan." And when someone says, "then why did you vote for it," you can respond, "because doing something was better than doing nothing and with all these Democrats in Congress and with another one in the White House, we weren't going to be able to get a good stimulus package through in time to help the American people." You'll also want a bald eagle sitting on your shoulder for the duration of the interview.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5396
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby mosc » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:01 pm UTC

I am amused that many of the things on here, particularly the larger ones, are things passed by the previous administration that were simply not funded. Basically, it's a fix of the last budget as well as a stimulus. The true cost of the previous administration is being shown. When you chronically underfund certain things for 8 years, they need money so damn bad by the end of it that you end up writing them a big "sorry we were ignoring you for 8 years" check.

Also, a lot of these so called "pork" investments will be huge job boons. Amtrak is infrastructure and non-outsourcable jobs. It's also owned by the government and we could actually MAKE money off of it if things were run correctly. Can anybody tell me what fire stations do with $500 million? I bet the hire some firemen. Maybe buy some new trucks. Last time I checked, their trucks were made by car manufacturers. A huge percentage of that money is going straight to jobs. Added fire protection is a nice fringe benefit.

The biggest item is 6 billion for environmental improvements in government infrastructure. I can't think of a more direct way to create a green economy than this. It also cuts the governments carbon footprint which will save us money long term. Similarly, $600M for green cars seems right in line. It helps US manufacturers invest in making green cars if they know they have a serious buyer lined up. That means more auto jobs and more green production capability.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby 22/7 » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:08 pm UTC

mosc wrote:Also, a lot of these so called "pork" investments will be huge job boons. Amtrak is infrastructure and non-outsourcable jobs. It's also owned by the government and we could actually MAKE money off of it if things were run correctly. Can anybody tell me what fire stations do with $500 million? I bet the hire some firemen. Maybe buy some new trucks. Last time I checked, their trucks were made by car manufacturers. A huge percentage of that money is going straight to jobs. Added fire protection is a nice fringe benefit.
While many of the smaller firetrucks (think very small mountain towns or very rural towns of less than 1000 people) are made by Ford or GM, it's my understanding that most of the "regular" size trucks are made by truck companies or companies with truck divisions like Peterbuilt, Volvo, Mercedes, etc. Of course, how many of these would actually be built in the US is anybody's guess.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

stapleface
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:38 am UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby stapleface » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:08 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:You'll also want a bald eagle sitting on your shoulder for the duration of everything in life.


agreed

User avatar
segmentation fault
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:10 pm UTC
Location: Nu Jersey
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby segmentation fault » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:23 pm UTC

mosc wrote:I am amused that many of the things on here, particularly the larger ones, are things passed by the previous administration that were simply not funded.


they do that so they can essentially say "look these liberal socialist plans fail."
people are like LDL cholesterol for the internet

User avatar
SummerGlauFan
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:27 pm UTC
Location: KS

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby SummerGlauFan » Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:26 pm UTC

There is a lot of pork on that bill, but the things the OP posted are either strictly necessary, are good, money-saving/generating things which are good to begin with.

Now I have to go get a bald eagle.
glasnt wrote:"As she raised her rifle against the creature, her hair fluttered beneath the red florescent lighting of the locked down building.

I knew from that moment that she was something special"


Outbreak, a tale of love and zombies.

In stores now.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Telchar » Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:16 pm UTC

I think the majority of the opposition comes from throwing these things in an economic stimulus bill and not in other seperate items. That you think they should be paid for is one thing, but keeping them from being debated on their own merits by throwing them under a stimulus bill is questionable for SOME of the items (digital converter boxes comes to mind readily, but there are others.)
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5396
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby mosc » Tue Feb 03, 2009 10:40 pm UTC

Digital converter boxes is a great example of something thought up by the previous administration ($40 coupons for everyone) and passed by the previous administration that was simply not FUNDED by the previous administration. You can choose to fund the program or not I guess but they're already issuing the damn things so you're just going to punish the people who didn't jump on it right away before the program runs out of money and you're left out in the cold with nothing but Bush lies.

Like I said, a lot of the supposed pork is budgetary fixes from the past administrations promises.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Lumpy
I can has morbid obesity?
Posts: 1450
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:19 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Lumpy » Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:14 pm UTC

Can anybody tell me what fire stations do with $500 million?


I could, but it'd be a lot easier just to point at it and act appalled in order to gain support from the sheer emotional shock, while appealing to the common wisdom that scientists don't know anything that you could learn by asking a street-wise garbage collector or plumber.

In a similar manner, if there were funding for building an e-waste recycling plant in Oregon, I would simplify it as "Those Democrats in Congress want to waste $87 million of your money just to throw away trash." If you say it on enough cable news appearances, it doesn't have to make sense.

User avatar
Mabus_Zero
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:30 am UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Mabus_Zero » Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:38 pm UTC

I think I'm moving to Australia and declaring myself stateless....
Image

Specialization is for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Princess Marzipan » Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:50 pm UTC

Gunfingers wrote:This'll probably be fixed in a few minutes, but right now the caption under the image says "The Senate is currently the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus bill." I'm looking forward to finding out what the missing word is. I choose to assume it's "sexing".
There's no missing word. "currently" should be "accidentally".
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby The Reaper » Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:50 am UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:
Gunfingers wrote:This'll probably be fixed in a few minutes, but right now the caption under the image says "The Senate is currently the nearly $900 billion economic stimulus bill." I'm looking forward to finding out what the missing word is. I choose to assume it's "sexing".
There's no missing word. "currently" should be "accidentally".

The Senate accidentally a whole bottle of $900 billion economic stimulus bill.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Telchar » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:58 am UTC

mosc wrote:Digital converter boxes is a great example of something thought up by the previous administration ($40 coupons for everyone) and passed by the previous administration that was simply not FUNDED by the previous administration. You can choose to fund the program or not I guess but they're already issuing the damn things so you're just going to punish the people who didn't jump on it right away before the program runs out of money and you're left out in the cold with nothing but Bush lies.

Like I said, a lot of the supposed pork is budgetary fixes from the past administrations promises.



That's fine, and I agree with you, but it is NOT economic stimulus. Don't put it in an economic stimulus package.

I could say the same thing about "smoking cessation activities" and a lot of other things in the bill.

I'm fine with passing economic stimulus, especially infrastructure projects, and I'm probably fine with the majority of the pork on its own, but putting stuff in an economic stimulus bill that isn't economic stimulus is bad, as it discourages honest and open discourse.
Last edited by Telchar on Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:01 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Jahoclave » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:00 am UTC

Telchar wrote:
mosc wrote:Digital converter boxes is a great example of something thought up by the previous administration ($40 coupons for everyone) and passed by the previous administration that was simply not FUNDED by the previous administration. You can choose to fund the program or not I guess but they're already issuing the damn things so you're just going to punish the people who didn't jump on it right away before the program runs out of money and you're left out in the cold with nothing but Bush lies.

Like I said, a lot of the supposed pork is budgetary fixes from the past administrations promises.



That's fine, and I agree with you, but it is NOT economic stimulus. Don't put it in an economic stimulus package.

Money spent, jobs created, stimulus happens. Other things besides tax cuts do that stimulating thing.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Telchar » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:03 am UTC

Jahoclave wrote:Money spent, jobs created, stimulus happens. Other things besides tax cuts do that stimulating thing.


A terrible definition. What jobs does this create?

If your going to define "economic stimulus" as "government spending money" then the term becomes meaningless.

You need spending in here that stimulates the economy better than x. There has to be a reasonable rate of return and THAT doesn't have it. If you wanna pass it, then great, pass it. But calling it "economic stimulus" is disengenous because, unless somone can show me otherwise, that money could be spent elsewhere to more effect.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
armandtanzarian
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:17 am UTC
Location: Des Moines, IA
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby armandtanzarian » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:12 am UTC

This is not terribly surprising. Remember when Sarah Palin railed against 'fruit fly research' (something to do with the Dorsophilia flies that is widely used in biotech research)?

User avatar
mercurythief
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby mercurythief » Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:05 am UTC

I'm not convinced that any of those projects would stimulate the economy more than simply giving every person in the U.S. $3,000.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Garm » Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:09 am UTC

Telchar wrote:
Jahoclave wrote:Money spent, jobs created, stimulus happens. Other things besides tax cuts do that stimulating thing.


A terrible definition. What jobs does this create?

If your going to define "economic stimulus" as "government spending money" then the term becomes meaningless.

You need spending in here that stimulates the economy better than x. There has to be a reasonable rate of return and THAT doesn't have it. If you wanna pass it, then great, pass it. But calling it "economic stimulus" is disengenous because, unless somone can show me otherwise, that money could be spent elsewhere to more effect.


So you're saying that spending money won't help stimulate the economy? I'm confused here. Essentially, by definition, the stimulus bill is a spending bill.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Bubbles McCoy
Posts: 1106
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:49 am UTC
Location: California

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Bubbles McCoy » Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:46 am UTC

There's a distinct difference between run-of-the mill spending and "stimulus" spending. The government has plenty of day-to-day business to take care of with spending, such as managing the airwaves in a fair manner. Stimulus is spending that the government would not usually undertake, but does out of economic necessity. The latter is specifically undergone during an economic downturn, while not of utmost importance they should generally be kept seperate.

User avatar
Jauss
Posts: 1441
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:49 am UTC
Location: PDX
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Jauss » Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:21 am UTC

mercurythief wrote:I'm not convinced that any of those projects would stimulate the economy more than simply giving every person in the U.S. $3,000.

It sounds good in theory, but the problem with nothing but tax cuts/refunds is that people would probably not spend much of it in this economic climate (except for stuff like the water bill that's over due and the rent for their almost foreclosed house.) They'd hold on to it so they'd have something in case they lose their jobs, which while smart on the short term, individual level would only make the whole crisis get worse because of how the system feeds off itself.
"Four out of five dentists prefer asses to hearts." - The Mighty Thesaurus

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:30 pm UTC

Jauss wrote:
mercurythief wrote:I'm not convinced that any of those projects would stimulate the economy more than simply giving every person in the U.S. $3,000.

It sounds good in theory, but the problem with nothing but tax cuts/refunds is that people would probably not spend much of it in this economic climate (except for stuff like the water bill that's over due and the rent for their almost foreclosed house.) They'd hold on to it so they'd have something in case they lose their jobs, which while smart on the short term, individual level would only make the whole crisis get worse because of how the system feeds off itself.

Yeah, I would pay a third of that to my landlord and just hold on to the rest so that I had a few months of rent buffer to get a job.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby 22/7 » Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:58 pm UTC

Additionally (was this mentioned earlier?) things like public transportation infrastructure will not only create jobs to build booths, lay track, build buses, etc., but will also create jobs because people will need to operate that infrastructure. The best part? After they're done building it, if it's well designed and managed, it has the potential to make money back for the government, which will reduce the tax burden on the rest of us since the program will be mostly self-sufficient if not profitable.
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

scwizard
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 6:29 pm UTC
Location: New York City
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby scwizard » Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:58 pm UTC

$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

This is the very definition of pork.

Carbon trapping coal power plants are terribly expensive wasteful and inefficient compared to properly placed solar or wind power plants. The direction we want to aim in the long term is nuclear, away from anarchic coal.
This is nothing more than giving into coal lobbyist's desires. Of course the coal lobbyists want it, because it's a hack to make coal look good so they can be like "hey look, coal doesn't actually cause global warming see!"

And they said "near-zero emissions", I bet it's still releasing a ton of CO2 into the atmosphere.

$6 billion to turn federal buildings into "green" buildings.

Six billion is a lot. It's a good idea in theory, but I see this money getting spent with zero accountability.
~= scwizard =~

User avatar
Endless Mike
Posts: 3204
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:04 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Endless Mike » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:31 pm UTC

I'm not sure that giving hybrid vehicles to government employees would really save anything even in the long run. Most government car travel is done by highway, where hybrids show little to no fuel economy improvements over gasoline-engined cars with similar interior space. Certainly not enough to justify the added cost. Putting them on military bases, however, is an excellent idea, since those vehicles rarely get over 30 mph (if that), and that's where the vast majority of savings is found.

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby 22/7 » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:54 pm UTC

What? You mean like the Civic which bumps from between 29-36 up to 45? Ok, so the US government probably won't ever buy one of these wonderfully engineered vehicles, opting instead for an Aura (bump of 1 mpg highway), but still. They're out there! They exist!
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Jahoclave » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:59 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Additionally (was this mentioned earlier?) things like public transportation infrastructure will not only create jobs to build booths, lay track, build buses, etc., but will also create jobs because people will need to operate that infrastructure. The best part? After they're done building it, if it's well designed and managed, it has the potential to make money back for the government, which will reduce the tax burden on the rest of us since the program will be mostly self-sufficient if not profitable.

Which reminds me of something Richard Carrier mentioned in one of his books. A fourth branch of government for government owned businesses.

Though, I do see the problem with the coal power plant. Then again, I just wish we'd stop fucking around with coal. There's nothing clean about it, even "clean" coal has toxic waste you have to dispose of.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Telchar » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:05 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:Additionally (was this mentioned earlier?) things like public transportation infrastructure will not only create jobs to build booths, lay track, build buses, etc., but will also create jobs because people will need to operate that infrastructure. The best part? After they're done building it, if it's well designed and managed, it has the potential to make money back for the government, which will reduce the tax burden on the rest of us since the program will be mostly self-sufficient if not profitable.


Exactly. I love the idea of economic stimulus infrastructure building. Have people work on sewer reconstruction, land management with the BLM, building flood infrastructure on the Mississippi, and infilling housing in urban areas.

This works as stated above unless your in a state like mine, where we build roads to fail so we can get more government money to rebuild them...cause all we have is a shitload of roads.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Jahoclave » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:10 pm UTC

Telchar wrote:
22/7 wrote:Additionally (was this mentioned earlier?) things like public transportation infrastructure will not only create jobs to build booths, lay track, build buses, etc., but will also create jobs because people will need to operate that infrastructure. The best part? After they're done building it, if it's well designed and managed, it has the potential to make money back for the government, which will reduce the tax burden on the rest of us since the program will be mostly self-sufficient if not profitable.


Exactly. I love the idea of economic stimulus infrastructure building. Have people work on sewer reconstruction, land management with the BLM, building flood infrastructure on the Mississippi, and infilling housing in urban areas.

This works as stated above unless your in a state like mine, where we build roads to fail so we can get more government money to rebuild them...cause all we have is a shitload of roads.

You live in Missouri too? Oh wait, we don't fix our roads.

I just happen to consider a lot of those massive building projects for governmental buildings and renovations to be pretty stimulus based as well.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5396
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby mosc » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:53 pm UTC

scwizard wrote:
$2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.

This is the very definition of pork.

Carbon trapping coal power plants are terribly expensive wasteful and inefficient compared to properly placed solar or wind power plants. The direction we want to aim in the long term is nuclear, away from anarchic coal.
This is nothing more than giving into coal lobbyist's desires. Of course the coal lobbyists want it, because it's a hack to make coal look good so they can be like "hey look, coal doesn't actually cause global warming see!"

And they said "near-zero emissions", I bet it's still releasing a ton of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Look, this is important. Like it or not, you have about 200,000,000,000 watts of coal generation in the united states and there are NO even REMOTELY practical solutions for replacing that in the short term (and by short term I mean the next 25 fucking years). In other words, we're stuck with coal for a very long time and it is incredibly dirty. This is important because it can be deployed to existing coal plants. This is important because despite being inefficient, when the coal plant already exists and you're not building a new one from scratch, it starts to look a lot more attractive.

You need to accept that coal is the main power source for the united states and that's not going to change any time soon (especially with the country's nuclear phobias). You need to accept that it's just about the dirtiest fuel imaginable. You need to accept that billions spent on research trying to clean up the technology is money well spent and will create jobs.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby Princess Marzipan » Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:55 pm UTC

Or we could spend two billion dollars educating people on the facts that nuclear power isn't actually all that fucking dangerous.

WIND POWER causes more deaths per kilowatt generated than nuclear.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5396
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby mosc » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:01 pm UTC

I would support a couple billion for a pro nuclear advertising campaign. That's a shit ton of money though. You could probably buy half the super bowl ad time with that.

Nuclear is the only way to save ourselves from global warming catastrophe and we need to embrace it NOW as it takes years if not decades to build these things. Nuclear is the only fuel that could replace coal and gas within 25 years. You'd need to build about 250 new plants. Probably cost a few trillion. What a pittance to spend for such gain.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: GOP Bailout "Pork" List

Postby The Reaper » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:20 pm UTC

mosc wrote:I would support a couple billion for a pro nuclear advertising campaign. That's a shit ton of money though. You could probably buy half the super bowl ad time with that.

Nuclear is the only way to save ourselves from global warming catastrophe and we need to embrace it NOW as it takes years if not decades to build these things. Nuclear is the only fuel that could replace coal and gas within 25 years. You'd need to build about 250 new plants. Probably cost a few trillion. What a pittance to spend for such gain.

I concur. <3 nukes

But what happens to the coal mining jobs and such?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests