Trump Budget proposes cutting funding for the Chesapeake Bay Clean up

PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Bird Dog said:
They have been "cleaning" up the Bay for 50 years and Billions of dollars for what?
It hasn't worked.

Our Bay is dying from a Thousand Cuts.....money is not the answer..
Click to expand...

That's what I was going to post. What have the tax payers gained with this funding?

And, it seems the purpose behind these federal cuts is to push the funding to the states. Get federal spending under control is going to painful for some. Just keep looking at this number to kep perspective on our government's insane spending:

$19,918,866,420,000

... amassing about $3,000 every second.
 
Last edited:
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Bird Dog said:
They have been "cleaning" up the Bay for 50 years and Billions of dollars for what?
It hasn't worked.

Our Bay is dying from a Thousand Cuts.....money is not the answer..
Click to expand...

This right here ^^^

People are crying and moaning about all these cuts, but let us note that we've been hemorrhaging money at these special interests for generations with diminishing return. Clearly throwing money at a problem isn't the answer.
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
NorthBeachPerso said:
I used to be a big supporter and advocate for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. both financially and politically. Now? Not so much. I have slowly come to the conclusion that the Foundation isn't really as interested in cleaning up the Bay as it is in strangling the commercial uses of it and the land surrounding it to turn everything into a recreational area only the wealthy can afford.

Having said that, my home state of PA needs to do more to get a handle on the pollution it sends down the Susquehanna.

Also, if the Bay is "saved" CBF will be out of business.
Click to expand...

And this right here ^^^
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
PsyOps said:
This is my thought about all these federally funded foundations, research groups, etc... If cancer is cured, all of those research people are out of a job.
Click to expand...

When women are "equal"...when black people are "equal"... Accomplishing their stated goal would put these orgs out of business and the folks who make money off it would have to look for other employment. Can't have that, so their "mission" will never be accomplished.
 
Bird Dog

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation is and will always be just an elite country club with the Bay as its golf course. The outings, the retreats in homes given to them in estates are all used by the elite class of donors. The little research they do and there annual assessments of the Bay are just advertising for more donations.
They haven't accomplished a thing, but like stated by other posters if they came out and said the Bay is doing great they would lose donations

I stopped donating to them 20 years ago.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Like that local group of rich waterfront owners who pulled the bait and switch with Myrtle Point "Hey, county, buy this, would make a great resource, playing fields, water access, yeah, that would be great!!!!"

"What? Ball fields for the poor kids? Water access for a lot of the rednecks? Cant have that in our neck of the woods, we mean it should be kept in it's natural form"
 
C

CalvertNewb

New Member
At the end of the day we all know no matter what cuts are proposed no one except the top 1% are going to see any reduction in taxes so I for one think $72 million is reasonable for the Bay. I'd like to see funding increased.

That's less then what Trump is projected to spend flying to Florida to golf every weekend so if we can stop him from doing that there is the savings right there
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
CalvertNewb said:
At the end of the day we all know no matter what cuts are proposed no one except the top 1% are going to see any reduction in taxes so I for one think $72 million is reasonable for the Bay. I'd like to see funding increased.

That's less then what Trump is projected to spend flying to Florida to golf every weekend so if we can stop him from doing that there is the savings right there
Click to expand...
why are you in favor of the Feds confiscating money and then "giving it back "? You don't see how crazy that is?.??
 
C

CalvertNewb

New Member
Unless you consider money for schools, roads, hospitals , bridges, tunnels confiscated and insane I don't really see much difference in using the funds to improve something that directly effects and is effected by of a large percentage of the east coast population
 
Bird Dog

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
How would you spend the $72,000,000.00 and what results should the tax payers see from those efforts?
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
CalvertNewb said:
Unless you consider money for schools, roads, hospitals , bridges, tunnels confiscated and insane I don't really see much difference in using the funds to improve something that directly effects and is effected by of a large percentage of the east coast population
Click to expand...

You missed the point. Completely. Again, why should we want the Federal government to confiscate our money and then dole it back out to the states again, after wasting a bunch of it on overhead in the process. If the bay needs money spent on something specific, affected states can fund those things directly.

And the bay does not affect a large percent of MDs population, but I agree it is a treasure.
 
C

CalvertNewb

New Member
Gilligan said:
You missed the point. Completely. Again, why should we want the Federal government to confiscate our money and then dole it back out to the states again, after wasting a bunch of it on overhead in the process. If the bay needs money spent on something specific, affected states can fund those things directly.

And the bay does not affect a large percent of MDs population, but I agree it is a treasure.
Click to expand...

Almost the entire state of Md is in the watershed. Therefore the state does contribute negatively and positively to the health of the bay. Hence why I said a large portion of Md's population. Only Garrett county is excluded


State government can be just as inefficient. Especially when you have six states and D.C. running similar programs to reach one goal. That is redundant. When the fed could have one program. A lot of federal dollars are also given directly to NGO's and don't go back to the states as you claim
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
CalvertNewb said:
Almost the entire state of Md is in the watershed. Therefore the state does contribute negatively and positively to the health of the bay. Hence why I said a large portion of Md's population. Only Garrett county is excluded


State government can be just as inefficient. Especially when you have six states and D.C. running similar programs to reach one goal. That is redundant. When the fed could have one program. A lot of federal dollars are also given directly to NGO's and don't go back to the states as you claim
Click to expand...

That's even worse. Having the Federal government acting as middle man is grossly inefficient. Period. The bloated mess desparately needs to be cut down in size and scope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top