Sensationalist perhaps…but in the presentation there is a lot of talk (in the first forty pages, I couldn’t read further) about reducing spending on entitlement programs and how that’s a major issue in the government now. Then on a slide (this one) you see the gem that 40% of all Federal expenses are related to the DoD – and yes, they were the only federal department to get a budget increase in the latest Washington news…other expenses were being reduced or kept flat.
What’s the motivation of a Venture Capitalist in attacking the poor?
Instead of considering ways to create jobs…eliminate defense spending or talk through the $273 billion in Medical related expenses that are all called out in the presentation the emphasis is placed on the programs that are for 42% of the population and that have exploded in use since 1970. Funny story: in the same period, CEO pay has risen from 2x the COO at publicly traded companies then…to more than 4x the amount of money today. We wouldn’t want to call out the societal trends of the rich in this presentation now would we?
This presentation disgusts me on so many levels. If you can increase jobs, you increase tax revenue…if you redirect inefficient government spending on military to education and jobs, you create a larger, more robust economy. If you redirect the inefficient health spending into a more efficient program, the share of expenses for both major costs at the federal level go down. If you consider the president makes more than 8 times the national average in salary (never mind benefits) and that the average, junior congressman makes 3.5 times the national average in salary their first year nevermind perks…well, it’s interesting to see what areas these guys want to focus on – and what they choose to ignore.
If you want to chime in the comments, go ahead, or visit this techcrunch post where I got the link in the first place. Worth noting: Sarah Lacy doesn’t get into any of this, either.