Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The problem with government....continued | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 16 2013, 03:58 PM (33 Views) | |
| IUCOLTFAN | Aug 16 2013, 03:58 PM Post #1 |
|
Coach
|
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/16/dhs-spends-600000-buy-100000-homes-report/ The Homeland Security Department spent $600,000 apiece to build houses in Arizona that would have gone for less than $100,000, according to a report in the Arizona Republic that’s raising questions in Congress. “This type of spending is irresponsible as our nation faces significant budget deficits and the men and women in the Border Patrol face cuts in overtime that are essential to their mission,” Rep. Ron Barber, the Arizona Democrat in whose district the homes were built, said in a statement Friday. The Republic said Homeland Security built 21 homes and bought 20 other mobile homes for $15 million. Comparable homes go for between $70,000 and $100,000, the paper said. The homes were build to be rented to border agents and officers. Homeland Security officials repeatedly refused to answer the newspaper’s questions about the project, the Republic said. Mr. Barber is the ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee’s oversight panel, and said he will use that role to get to the bottom of the spending. Proof of that much waste and overspending and they REFUSE to answer questions about it?? What does the taxpayer do when the abusers aren't even elected and apparently don't even have to answer or be held accountable? Edited by IUCOLTFAN, Aug 16 2013, 03:59 PM.
|
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | Aug 16 2013, 04:41 PM Post #2 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
That behavior would be rewarded by being fired in the private sector. In the public sector, nobody cares, or the offender is put on PAID administrative leave. :banghead: |
| |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Aug 20 2013, 06:21 AM Post #3 |
|
Coach
|
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/19/Study-NY-Welfare-Recipients-Eligible-For-More-In-Benefits-Than-Teachers-Make |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | Aug 20 2013, 09:18 AM Post #4 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
Is it a coincidence that Obama is from Hawaii? The study, conducted by the CATO Institute, says in many states welfare pays better than work. Topping the list of wage-equivalent benefits for a mother and two children was Hawaii at $60,590. Idaho came in last with $11,150. The study found that 33 states and the District of Columbia offer welfare benefits that pay recipients more than an $8-an-hour job would. Twelve states and the District of Columbia offer welfare packages that pay better than a $15-an-hour job does. "There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy," writes CATO senior fellow Michael Tanner. "But they're also not stupid. If you pay them more not to work than they can earn by working, many will choose not to work." |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:55 PM Jul 10
|








7:55 PM Jul 10