Former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer wants to "find out how the government spends your money"

[Jimbo101]

theverge.com

Slashdot.org

Former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer isn't satisfied with owning the Los Angeles Clippers and teaching at Stanford and USC. On Tuesday, the billionaire announced USAFacts, his new startup that aims to improve political discourse by making government financial data easier to access. A small "army" of economists, professors and other professionals will be looking into and publishing data structured similarly to the 10-K filings companies issue each year -- expenses, revenues and key metrics pulled from dozens of government data sources and compiled into a single massive collection of tables.

From a report on The Verge:

The nonpartisan site traces $5.4 trillion in government spending under four categories derived from language in the US Constitution. Defense spending, for example, is categorized under the header "provide for the common defense," while education spending is under "secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity." Spending allocation and revenue sources are each mapped out in blue and pink graphics, with detailed breakdowns along federal, state and local lines. Users can also search for specific datasets, such as airport revenue or crime rates, and the site includes a report of "risk factors" that could inhibit economic growth.

[ProfessorGAC]

1. The MIC Isn't Going To Like This

The R's always like to talk about waste, fraud and abuse, but somehow we never get around to looking for that in the area where the most actual cash out exists, and that's DoD and the like.

We start having someone tracking this, publishing it for all to see, and it's going to be harder to explain how $600 billion got us $450 billion of stuff.

[FakeNoose]

2. When the GOP talks about "waste"

... they're talking about welfare, WIC, Obamacare, Medicaid. You know, things that benefit elderly or poor people and brown people.

They don't ever want to talk about "waste" when it means money going into the pockets of government contractors because those are the guys who fund their campaigns.

I think we get the difference, don't we?

[ProfessorGAC]

4. Same Book, Same Page

Exactly on board with you, Noose. Of course, that's why i brought it up. There is only waste, fraud and abuse in "entitlements", which is another word they lie about. Quite frankly, as a 60 year who graduated from college at 19 and has been working for going on 42 years, you're damned right i'm ENTITLED to that social security and medicare i paid into, just like every single other person who has paid in, past and present.

We're entitled to the gov't keeping that bargain and (to the conservatives) THIS IS NOT DISCRETIONARY SPENDING. It's money owed. Just like everyone else, we have to pay the money we owe, and the US gov't owes this to the people who involuntarily pay into the system. Raise the cap if you have to. (Well, raise it anyway.)

Sorry. Got a little off track there.

[FakeNoose]

6. The guy Steve Ballmer

...he may be a good guy, I don't know.

He says he wants to keep politics out of it and he's careful to say that it's non-partisan.
Well that could be a problem because the GOP will surely shut it down if it doesn't fit their narrative.

Yes the issue you bring up about Social Security - that's scary and we can't let it happen.
However I feel Social Security is totally separate from the issue of "government waste".

Yes there's lot's of government waste, let's fix it.
No we don't need to "fix" Social Security - it's our money, leave it alone.

[ProfessorGAC]

8. Yeah, But That's Their Target

I'm saying also, to leave it alone and look for where the actual waste is. SS is, to me, untouchable, and rather than "It" playing semantics with "tax cuts for the middle class" by messing with SS, they should RAISE the cap.
(BTW, to lurking conservabots: I've been hitting and exceeding the cap since the early 90's, so yeah, it would directly affect me. This is a puny part of the taxable rate for people who aren't hurting. We're not raising the rate, which would be regressive. But, if i had to pay 7% on another 14 grand, somehow i think i would survive.)

You know FN, i saw you were on that other thread too, so i'm kind of using our mini-conversation here to comment on both threads at the same time. Thanks for your indulgence.

[Locrian]

3. might want to start here ...

NFL, NBA, MLB Stadium Funding: How The Federal Government Loses Billions Subsidizing Sports Venues

http://www.ibtimes.com/nfl-nba-mlb-stadium-funding-how-federal-government-loses-billions-subsidizing-sports-2413872

[Initech]

5. John Oliver had a segment on stadiums last year:

[FakeNoose]

7. Whenever a city builds a new stadium

... certain contractors (mostly Republicans) get rich.

Taxpayers (mostly Democrats) pay the taxes for the next 30 or 40 years.
The trade-off has to be carefully considered, but it usually never is.

[Initech]

9. Yeah that was a huge controversy with the new stadium that's going up in Inglewood.

It was originally supposed to be in the City Of Industry but that plan was squashed and moved to Inglewood, but there was a giant property tax debate here when it was being proposed.

[Qutzupalotl]

10. *posterity