A Quote by Betsy DeVos

If taxpayer money were limitless, we wouldn't need a budget at all. — © Betsy DeVos
If taxpayer money were limitless, we wouldn't need a budget at all.
Every penny we spend comes from the taxpayer. We thus owe it to the taxpayer to work as hard managing that money wisely as the taxpayer must do to earn it in the first place.
When I said that something was going to cost a certain amount of money, I actually knew what I was talking about. The biggest problem that we were having on the financing front was people with lots of money saying "you need more money to make this film [Moon]," and us saying "no this is the first feature film we want to do it at a budget where we sort of prove ourselves at the starting end of making feature films; we can do this for $5 million." That is where the convincing part between me and Stuart came, we had to convince people with money that we could do it for that budget.
I think the wall is stupid; it's a waste of the taxpayer's money. We need the money for job growth, infrastructure, 100 other things... it sends a bad message.
It was a real business. And actually from a taxpayer's perspective, every taxpayer should want more Drakens. We were able to do so much more for the government for like one-tenth the price. We need more of that, and that's exactly what Elon is doing at SpaceX by the way.
You don't need to waste money on a fancy program or app to do a basic budget. I've been using a simple Excel spreadsheet since 2005 to track my monthly budget.
When you raise the budget, you make creative compromises. The higher the budget goes, the more cuts in your movie happen. When people talk about how movies are watered down, that's a direct reflection of money and budget. The less money you spend; the more risks you can take. That doesn't mean it will be successful, but at least you can try different stuff. The higher your budget is, the less you can do that.
Sometimes big budget means explosions! CGI! CGI, the possibilities are so limitless that it begins to be impractical. I'm more interested in the kinds of movies where the science fiction world has a set series of rules and you operate in it because of, maybe, constraints in the budget.
And there are a lot of groups or mayors that might say, hey, I need the money. I have budget deficit, so I have to do it and they do it. It doesn't matter what the community wants or where the money comes from?
The GAO just released a report that said 22 percent of federal programs fail to meet their objectives. The truth is we don't know how taxpayer money is spent in Washington, D.C., which is why I think we ought to put every agency budget up on the Internet for everyone to see.
I prefer the smaller budget versus the bigger budget because the mentality that goes along with big budget filmmaking doesn't really suit me; the mind-set that money is the answer.
Where the federal government and the taxpayer has had funds misused, we need to use the full extent of the law to get those funds back for the taxpayer.
We need to upgrade and modernize America`s infrastructure.Our budget is going to have to figure out how to balance those priorities and pay for it and our big goal is to leverage the private sector dollars as much as possible so that the public taxpayer isn`t paying for all of this.
We've not had one Republican president in 34 years balance the budget. You can't trust right-wing Republicans with your money. You ought to hire somebody who has balanced a budget. I'm much more conservative with money than George Bush is.
In vulgar usage, progress has come to mean limitless movement in space and time, accompanied, necessarily, by an equally limitless command of energy: culminating in limitless destruction.
What naturally stops you making the film is there is no more money in the budget. That's really what it is. If you had an unlimited budget, if you were a billionaire and you financed your own movies, then you can either date, because you can sit in an editing room for six years, like Howard Hughes, and never finish anything.
One of Trump's reforms is to limit the time that workers can use on the job at taxpayer expense working on union activities. What does this have to do with public service? So taxpayers have to pay overcompensated federal employees while they work on union activities so they can get even more taxpayer money.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!