I laughed my a$$ off when I read the figures

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
The figures put this story on government waste into perspective. I couldn't help but laugh when I read them because they reflect the extent of government waste so perfectly.

Two-hundred thousand dollars to build a house is merely the construction cost. The worth after construction is much higher. At $100/sq ft we are talking about 145,000 two-thousand square foot houses. HAR! most of us live comfortably in far less.

SOURCE

GAO Report Highlights Wasteful Spending on Ending Homelessness

By Doug McKelway

Published March 11, 2011 | FoxNews.com

The federal government's multi-agency approach to help the homeless is often confused, according to a recently released report that catalogues the hundreds of different ways the government squanders taxes through waste, overlap, fragmentation and bureaucracy.

The Government Accountability Office report found that in 2009, federal agencies spent about $2.9 billion on more than 20 programs that targeted homelessness. If that money were to be targeted toward the building of homes, at say, $200,000 per home, it could theoretically produce 145,000 houses.

"Take that money directly and give them sort of a voucher so they can go get housing on their own, or get some mental health benefits," Brian Darling, director of government studies at the Heritage Foundation suggested. "But the way it is now when you have all of these different government agencies administering the same program, you have government waste."

But some advocates for the homeless argue that suggestion ignores the complexity of the problem. They say that homelessness incorporates so many socio-pathologies, economic hardships, and other nuanced circumstances -- from mental illness to abuse, to discharged soldiers returning from war who can't find jobs -- that a variety of overlapping federal programs and services are precisely what's needed.

"The the fact that we have different federal agencies doing different programs is actually a decision the Congress made pretty intentionally with the idea that the program should stay within their area of expertise," insisted Steve Berg from the Alliance to End Homelessness.

To its credit, the federal government has taken some steps to improve coordination of homeless programs.

Last July, it created the U.S. Inter-Agency Council on Homelessness (USICH) that is comprised of 19 agencies, including the Departments of Education, Housing and Urban Development, and Health and Human Services. It is designed to better focus the services of homeless programs.

But still lacking, the GAO report found, is a single program to collect timely data on the full extent and nature of homelessness.

"The plan acknowledges that a common data standard... would facilitate greater understanding and simplify local data management," the report reads.

In a sign that the government is intent on reducing bureaucratic inefficiencies, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced last December that it would participate in the government's "Homeless Information Management Systems," a database designed to more effectively identify and deliver assistance to homeless people.

Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, believes these kinds of efficiencies outlined in the GAO report can reap huge rewards for taxpayers.

"We can save at least a hundred billion dollars without losing one service to or for the American people," the California Republican told Fox News.

But the next step is a more difficult one. While the GAO has identified the problems, it is now up to Congress to make the tough choices.

"The next phase is for Congress to actually do something," Darling said. "Stop talking about it, stop jaw-boning the issue, draft legislation, pass it in the House and make the Senate vote on it."
 
yeah seattle spends fifty-some thousand per year on each homeless person.

but unfortunately silly little money-wasters like this are a drop in the bucket. and as much lip as 'porkbarrel' gets, it's a meager sliver.

the program you cite is from 2009. now, golly, when would that machinery have to have been put in place? yep... which means that this kind of silliness is a long-established institution, with roots in both parties. well, just a guess. suppose i should do some reading before i mouth off, but...

at this point, with items like entitlements and military being as big as they are, why bother fighting a slow ground war on dozens of shitty little fronts, when you can go big? just like the republicans have been doing with public employee unions. regardless of whether you agree with what they are doing, you gotta admit, it's a pretty well-coordinated attack on what is quickly becoming an ideologically despicable group of folks to the mainstream. we need more of this kind of shit. hopefully the repooblicans won't nominate a dipshit candidate to run against obama, and this kind of thing could gain increasing long-term traction. but if we get some boob who sacrifices dignity for animated features that may as well have been scripted by perez hilton, it's just gonna a be another sputtering choad. so stay hard jim. give it a few whacks if you gotta. in other words, stop dumping minor factlets and attack a viable issue. how about military spending vis-a-vis our evolving world role... like what we will hopefully do in libya?
 
Hey!!! While we're at it, let's spend some more public schools. Ten grand a kid isn't enough. How do the Japanese do it with such large classes?
 
Back
Top