You may be wondering: Where does our tax money go? Well, this post will tell you. Read on to find out what is wasteful government spending and how much money it costs. You'll also learn how much money can be saved by eliminating wasteful spending and redundant programs. It's not difficult to find examples of wasteful spending and programs. It's just a matter of understanding them.
Examples of government waste
The annual Wastebook outlines government waste. The report identifies 100 examples of wasteful spending by government agencies. While there's no logical explanation for all of this spending, the authors point out that wasteful government spending has consequences. In one example, the U.S. government spent $518,00 on research involving Japanese quails. In some cases, the results of these studies are relevant to the lives of people.
Another example of government waste is in the area of subsidies. The Department of Transportation spends $150,000 on a single flight to Oklahoma each month. Another example is the HUD program in Beverly Hills, which provides $180,000 to a city that's supposed to attract businesses in lower-income neighborhoods. Meanwhile, the USDA and Department of Commerce spent $1 million on a yogurt factory in New York state. Clearly, there are plenty of examples of government waste.
In the United States, one such example involves the Recovery Audit Contractor program. This program helped the government recover about $10 billion in Medicare payments over eight years. But in the past year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) halted the program. Citizens Against Government Waste estimates that a restart of the program could save the government $24 billion over five years. Likewise, the U.S. government paid a construction firm nearly $500K to construct an Afghan police training center, but they found that the bricks used in the construction were made of sand.
There are countless other examples of government waste, including the Pentagon's massive defense budget. The Pentagon runs a fleet of 500 airplanes and 100 helicopters to provide "operational support airlift." The total cost for this fleet is $380 million per year. Commercial airlines serve many of these destinations. These examples demonstrate that government officials have no incentive to be accountable and spend taxpayers' money in the best way possible. In addition, political-connected special interests seem to reap the benefits.
Cost of government waste
Using taxpayer money wisely means reducing government waste. Government programs, such as social security, have been criticized for wasting taxpayer money. However, eliminating waste doesn't necessarily lead to a balanced budget. In fact, lawmakers must reform Social Security and Medicare and eliminate government activities that are no longer necessary or affordable. One of the easiest ways to eliminate waste is to cut government spending. There are many examples of waste in government operations, from spending on extravagant trips to exotic dance clubs to $13,500 steak dinners.
The federal government routinely wastes a great deal of money. Fortunately, each agency is staffed with an Inspector General, who can point out wasteful spending, identify structural problems, and suggest ways to save money. Inspector Generals report back to Congress twice a year to document their findings. The list includes examples of waste that have been documented by the Inspector General, but have yet to be fixed. Some of these examples include the use of taxpayer funds to pay for programs that don't serve the public's interest.
NASA's FY budget estimate was $230 billion over 20 years, or $11.5 billion a year. However, CAGW's assessment showed that government waste in the federal budget for FY 2004 is $217 billion, almost the full cost of the program. In other words, the federal government is spending far more than it should based on its own budget. Therefore, it's clear that government spending needs to be reined in order to achieve our economic objectives.
Another way in which government wastes money is by giving large grants to environmental lobbyists. Environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council received $246,622, while Defenders of Wildlife and the Environmental Defense Fund each received $1,285,658. In addition, the World Wildlife Fund received $26,584,335 in that time frame. These groups use these funds to push government regulations. This is a very costly waste of government money.
A key way to reduce wasteful government spending is to cut unnecessary programs. For example, the federal government operates more real estate than it needs. Getting rid of unnecessary spending will result in substantial savings. To do this, federal agencies need to reduce spending on programs and increase their efficiency. Fortunately, there are many ways to make these changes. Listed below are some ways to cut wasteful government spending. These measures will ultimately benefit the American taxpayer.
Cutting unnecessary government spending can result in hundreds of millions of dollars a year. The GAO releases annual reports that identify and recommend ways to fix duplication. If these recommendations are adopted, Congress can tie agency funding to more effective management of taxpayer resources. Savings from eliminating wasteful government spending are possible even with a simple arithmetic check. The report by the Government Accountability Office identified 14 key areas for improvement, with each area generating more than $1 billion in savings. Among these are overpayments for medical equipment and payments to dead people.
Some of the programs with the highest percentage of fund utilization are the Social Security and Medicare programs. Cutting these programs would not necessarily reduce the amount of benefits Americans receive in retirement, but would result in a small budgetary impact. The savings could be achieved through more effective management of programs that are similar in scope and objective. These savings would be realized through a number of methods, including combining programs. The savings would vary depending on the program, but the total amount of money saved would depend on the exact method of transfer.
Savings from eliminating redundant programs
The GAO recently released its 11th annual report detailing federal programs. The findings highlight opportunities to streamline programs and increase revenue. The report suggests that Congress and executive branch agencies take 112 new actions to save billions of dollars over the next five years. These measures include streamlining purchasing processes, addressing data management problems, and setting up performance metrics. By eliminating duplicative programs, government agencies can save billions of dollars over the next five years.
The report includes numerous examples of redundancy. For example, the Departments of Energy and Defense spent a combined $1.2 billion on improving internet capabilities. Other agencies spent an unknown amount on security assessments. The Department of Homeland Security alone charges $236 million for security assessments. The savings are significant. However, many agencies will remain in place because they aren't required to eliminate the programs. The GAO report has implications for all federal agencies.
There are other ways to cut costs. Congress may consider abolishing federal departments and programs, which would have an effect on the federal budget. The chapter includes an overview of the Cabinet department budgets and the cost of three popularly proposed departments: Energy, Commerce, and Education. It also provides a discussion of policy issues and other aspects of the proposed changes. When considering eliminating a department, consider all the pros and cons before making the final decision.
While this analysis looks at how much money could be saved, it's important to note that some government agencies may overstate their savings. Some government obligations, like those of the Transportation Department, are funded through specific excise taxes. Rather than saving $52 billion, lawmakers may instead eliminate these taxes along with the programs that they are eliminating. Further, they could use the money to fund social services. So, when evaluating the cost savings of eliminating government programs, consider these points.
Congratulations @belico! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s):
Your next target is to reach 100 posts.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
The biggest problem with government waste is that there is no incentive to use the money wisely.
If it was their own business then you can be sure that they would get a lot more value per dollar than they do at the moment.
Every department should have strict targets to meet and penalties or bonuses for hitting them.
Every cent should be accounted for and strict spending rules in place for every person and department.
It's crazy the stupid things that we see them waste money on.
A big one here was a specific printer that was bought for over a million to print booklets and posters. It couldn't fit into the building and ended up in storage for years costing another 2m just for storage on top of the price of the printer.
Just one of many examples.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta