State Budget - spinoff from the SC case

Konrad Neumann wrote:You really can't be serious? You are here to tell me that eBE is financially stronger and makes more money than eGer etc? You really think that eBE is in a better fiscal situation than eGer etc?

I don't know what numbers you're looking at... eGermany is running on a 200k deficit (400k+ if you take out the Swedish money) while they have 1.4m in treasury. eBe is running on a 200k deficit with 2.5m in treasury. The income isn't what's most important in this case, what is important is defining what decent reserves are and having a mid-term strategy in spending so that when income is low you can continue on that spending and when income is higher you can increase reserves. Future generations have to live with the income they have, the past leaders have given them a bonus already.

You can clearly see that eGermany is not setting the right example. They're spending twice their income and haven't take ANY cuts at all for several months. You're here to say that despite eBe having cut back it's expenses by 1.5m in less then two months it's not fast enough. I say you need some political realism. Several countries seem to be making between 150k and 200k from MM transactions with their national orgs. That is what the cost of BNA is and what income eBe isn't getting. After taking so much time reducing spending to what's wishable, it might be time to find an option to increase income to attempt to achieve it.

The fact is, it is irresponsible to spend spend spend when you really cannot pay with it. Taking some money from the treasure for a short time is acceptable but not 4 times the eBE income just on the BNA alone. I really do not care what you say for there is no justification for such a reckless policy. Not only are you pushing the problem for the future generation and future leaders, you will hasten the default a lot sooner.

So first: short time is more then 6 months when it concerns mid term policy, now a short time is less then 2 months when it concerns the exact same mid term policy. You can't be serious there, you really have to decide. The fact of the matter is you're here to say don't use the reserves you've built up for this specific case. Then my question to you is, what are reasonable reserves for a country of 100 active citizens, a question you have refused to answer on multiple occasions.

I really do not understand why this government wants to continue spending insane amount of moneys when income is so meager. You cannot spend yourself out of your political problems and for sure to worsen future problems as well. I think it is shocking that this government believes in this flawed idea that spending money will fix their problems. It will not. Instead of caution and respecting congress, the government pressures the congress and the SC to continue their failed policy of reckless spending and unaffordable entitlements.

I'm not the government, don't lay blame on the NLSP administration who has in fact decided to continue to diminue spending in spite of apparent apathy in congress and in spite of an SC ruling which deadlocks the country into silly bureaucratic regulations where every letter and every minute need to be counted.