$755B was forgiven. I know that there are many benefits for this program but I cannot resist comparing this with the NSF budget. This is equal to about 75.5 years of the current NSF budget (assuming constant budget but unlikely as there is planned deep cuts). If we assume that the budget will increase 5% to adjust for inflation (unlikely too) then that would about 32yrs. Not that I'm comparing in absolute usefulness. I just don't understand why this particular item in the budget making all this noise while comparing to the vast majority of programs is peanuts.
It's been discussed before but I'll go ahead and say it again. Any administration that was actually serious about cutting spending to benefit the American people would start with cutting unnecessary defense projects and large scale healthcare reform. Those categories take up the vast, vast majority of the budget. But instead, they cut the programs projecting benevolence to the world and protecting us from tuberculosis outbreaks because they were "full of marxists" and then proceeded to outline a horrifying plan for expansion that would certainly increase defense costs. There isn't actual logic here, it's based on subjective feelings and lies designed to appease voters and enrage them at the other side. God forbid there ever be any deep thought or nuance to anything.
One causes "the base" to dig in even deeper in their support. The other makes people happen under subsequent administrations. Americans' addictions to cheap sugar doesn't end at literal donuts.
I have almost $50k in that number. (1099 income.) It was a waste.
A friend was a senior staffer negotiating that bill. We were together, in 2020, when these bills were drafted and passed. My friend aimed to exempt people like me from forgiveness. I, of course, didn't mind the free money, but know that for my $50k there are the e.g. Ciprianis borrowing millions only to transfer it, immediately, to their personal accounts. Even selfishly, I was a net payer.
They never managed to exempt me. So I applied for the loans, got them, never paid a dime, applied for forgiveness, got it and then walked away. (I didn't fire myself, nor even cut my hours!) Granted, these sums are peanuts compared with the bonanza I'm about to reap with Trump's TCJA mark 2. But at least that's plainly a giveaway to the wealthy.
Don’t know about the OPs case, but forgiveness was based on meeting the requirements of the program: 60% of the loan to employees and 40% to approved employer expenses (business overhead such as rent and electricity).
I assisted with the submission of PPP forgiveness for 4 restaurants.
It’s hard to imagine that people really believe world leadership in science is just a meaningless line item to be culled to make political points, but here we are. It will definitely be worth it to someone in the long run, but undoubtedly not the American people.
Our budget, all of it, needs an audit, the people have complained about government waste and demanded an audit for ages. We are finally getting that long desired audit.
Spread the entire budget out, all expenses line by line for all to see, and may they survive or be culled based solely upon their merits in the eyes of the American people. If the NSF's expenses are justifiable, demonstrate it in witness of the American people like any other line item.
So to use some choice words from our Vice President: "I don't really care." I don't want my taxes wasted on bullshit and I think most Americans agree with me. And if you're against audits, I have to wonder what your motives actually are.
> Spread the entire budget out, all expenses line by line for all to see, and may they survive or be culled based solely upon their merits in the eyes of the American people.
"Contains detailed information on the various appropriations and funds that constitute the budget and is designed primarily for the use of the Appropriations Committees. The Appendix contains more detailed financial information on individual programs and appropriation accounts than any of the other budget documents. It includes for each agency: the proposed text of appropriations language; budget schedules for each account; legislative proposals; explanations of the work to be performed and the funds needed; and proposed general provisions applicable to the appropriations of entire agencies or group of agencies. Information is also provided on certain activities whose transactions are not part of the budget totals."
I feel like a lot of people clamor for this and it's right there for everyone to read. Not that I expect citizens to read >1,000 pages of budget information alone every year: I certainly don't. But let's not pretend the information isn't there for people who want it.
I think that kind of proves my point: These "budgets" are so damn convoluted that nobody actually understands them. Even the House Speaker is surprised at the shit DOGE is digging up, and he's the boss of the people who write and pass the budgets.
And even that aside, anyone who knows how the real world works can understand that what should happen and what does happen are not necessarily the same especially if corruption is involved.
It's not clear to me that administering an entity with as many people and as much land as the United States could be done in a simple enough way that would satisfy these objections (not necessarily yours specifically, but this broad class). Though I certainly don't object to the notion that there's fat to trim and ways to make things less complicated.
I would be interested in an existence proof of this: an entity of similar population and size with a budget that's simple in comparison.
My naive expectations are that more authoritarian countries will hide a lot of budgetary items and countries with coalition-style governments will have even messier budgets than the US. Looking into that would be interesting but it's not going to make it onto my Sunday morning short-list.
My opinion about this remains that if the governed are really interested, they need to put in the ground work to understand the material that's available. Some things just are complicated and require studying to understand.
So how about his tax plan that’ll increase debt by trillions per year over the next decade? Think that’s smart too?
Anyways, this isn’t an audit, and it’s certainly not open. A billionaire and several interns are behind closed doors picking things, NOT the American people. I don’t get why you’re ignoring that, everything Trump is doing points to capturing the government as a techno-oligarchy, not balancing the budget like you claim. I simply don’t understand why you’re ignoring the evidence of your own eyes and ears and actually believing the crap these traitors are saying.
As noted elsewhere here, if you are only "saving money" by cutting programs you don't like then it's not about saving money -- it's about gutting programs you don't like.
There are large chunks of government money that are effectively investments in the future, and it's important to recognize that as each budget is evaluated.
