100 Million Dollars Isn't A Lot Of Money?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Burp, Apr 20, 2009.

  1. Burp
    Offline

    Burp Always carry, never tell

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,133
    Thanks Received:
    193
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +193
    Robert Gibbs says 100 million dollars isn't a lot of money in Washington D.C. A few weeks ago Biggs said 8 billion in appropriations (pork) wasn't a lot of money.

    JENNIFER LOVEN, AP: The $100 million target figure that the president talked about today with the Cabinet, can you explain why so small? I know he talked about -- you know, you add up 100 million and 100 million, and eventually, you get somewhere, but it would take an awfully long time to add up hundred million (inaudible) in the deficit. Why not target a bigger number?

    GIBBS: (Smiling) Well, I think only in Washington, D.C. is a hundred million dollars...

    LOVEN: You sound like you're joking about it, but it's not funny.

    GIBBS: I'm not making jokes about it. I'm being completely sincere that only in Washington, D.C. is $100 million not a lot of money. It is where I'm from. It is where I grew up. And I think it is for hundreds of millions of Americans.

    LOVEN: The point is it's not a very big portion of the deficit.

    TAPPER: You were talking about an appropriations bill a few weeks ago about $8 billion being minuscule -- $8 billion in earmarks. We were talking about that and you said that that...

    GIBBS: Well, in terms of -- in...(CROSSTALK)

    TAPPER: ...$100 million is a lot but $8 billion is small?

    GIBBS: Well, what I'm saying is I think it all adds up just as the president said, just as Jennifer was good enough to do in her question. If you think we're going to get rid of $1.3 trillion deficit by eliminating one thing, I'd be -- and the administration would be innumerably happy for you to let us know what that is.

    Today's Qs for O's WH - 4/20/2009 - Political Punch
    -----

    And then today Obama pledged 100 Billion to the IMF.

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Monday proposed a $100 billion U.S. loan to the International Monetary Fund to boost the IMF's resources and urged a bigger stake in the IMF for emerging powers.

    Obama proposes $100 billion U.S. loan for IMF | Politics | Reuters
    -----

    He has no problem spending other people money.
     
  2. Iriemon
    Offline

    Iriemon VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,745
    Thanks Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +99
    $100 million isn't even spit in the bucket. It's a silly gesture.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Article 15
    Offline

    Article 15 Dr. House slayer

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    24,673
    Thanks Received:
    4,832
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +4,859
    No, it isn't.
     
  4. Indiana Oracle
    Offline

    Indiana Oracle The Truth is Hard to Find

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    Messages:
    639
    Thanks Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    NW Indiana
    Ratings:
    +65
    The Prophet is pulling the tired trick of representing a reduction in planned spending increases as "savings". Yet another lie.

    It is such an established fact as I have stopped remembering all the sources (although I am sure they are still aroung), but any even partially serious attempt to lower government spending would run into the 100s of billions.
     
  5. Sarah G
    Offline

    Sarah G When Nothing Goes Right, Go Left Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    47,686
    Thanks Received:
    11,834
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    NW Ohio
    Ratings:
    +24,039
    Well in the grand scheme of things, he is absolutely right. You are not going to make a dent in the deficit by eliminating one thing. If you had to manage all of that money, you might see that it is all relative.

    It is a lot to very small countries or perhaps someone who wins a hundred million in the lottery but in Washington these days, it is not a lot of money.
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    It's relative to what you're talking about.

    As it regards the national budget it's not a lot of money.


    Relative to my income it's quite a lot.
     
  7. Sinatra
    Offline

    Sinatra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    8,013
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,005
    So it appears we all agree this was a ludicrous gesture by the Obama team - $100 million in requested cuts to government departments whose budgets extend into the hundreds of billions is a farce.

    I agree with what another said - real reductions in government spending would be counted in the tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars.

    What Obama did today, delivering the news of a requested $100 million reduction with the outward appearance of having done something both legitimate and remarkable, is yet more proof of the complete lack of susbstantive leadership we have had in Washington DC for far too long...
     
  8. foggedinn
    Offline

    foggedinn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    604
    Thanks Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings:
    +107
    A $100 million reduction from current levels would actually be quite an achievement.

    I say this because I consider the alternative to be at least a $100 billion increase in current budgetary levels. This, of course, is much more likely.

    Let's face it. Budgets in Washington never go down.

    Even a one dollar decrease would be a minor miracle worthy of a minor Messiah.
     
  9. Vel
    Offline

    Vel Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    5,463
    Thanks Received:
    1,913
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +1,914


    Just to be sure that we're clear on the facts. Obama isn't asking for a $100 million reduction from current levels. He wants to add 1.1 trillion dollars or so in new spending and THEN reduce THAT amount by $100 million. The math looks something like this.. ( I'm working from memory here so this will not be exact )

    2,500,000,000,000
    + 1,100,000,000,000

    = 3,600,000,000,000

    - 100,000,000

    = 3,599,900,000,000
     
  10. oreo
    Offline

    oreo Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,499
    Thanks Received:
    1,964
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    rocky mountains
    Ratings:
    +4,176
    Same thing with "Chuckie Schummer"--who got caught on video tape regarding the pork/earmarks--that we were told by this adminstration didn't exist in the 787 BILLION dollar stimulus bill:

    "See Americans don't really care about a little "porky" in this bill." That's exactly what Chuck Schumer said.

    To him a few Billion here, a few Billion there is just chump change.
     

Share This Page