Discussion on:

Obama proposes world welfare program at US tax payers expense

S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2433

Sponsored by Sen Obama.

"To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

Full text here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433

Originally called the "United Nations Millennium Development Goals ", because of the obvious bad record and name the UN has, their name has been removed. The money will STILL go to the UN (The US paying a tax to the UN) for world welfare.

Just as we should not be the world police, we should not be the world welfare office either.

Contact your Representatives and voice your opinion on this horrible proposed law.

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2433.html

After several google searches, the information seems very consistent.

If the "War on Poverty" has been such a miserable failure in the US, what makes Obama think world welfare will life people up any more than local welfare did?

if this is what Obama will be like when\if elected, I am all for a revolution!

We need to work on the American Infrastructure first and foremost. We need to stop spending and start paying down our debt. We need to stop printing excess money so that 'the books' look good, and actually make our economy stronger.

are basically the same. Same social class, same education levels, same number of martinis for lunch, same total lack of connection with the real world of the average American.
No matter what they do to health care, it will not effect them. No matter how they cut SS, it will not effect them. No matter how much they raise taxes, it will not effect them, they can always give themselves raises....
They have no incentive to actually do any good. So they tell us what they think we want to hear, and distance themselves from any accountability as best they can.
My cynical question is: What company/person/organization stands to make a mint in delivering "supplies" to third world countries to alleviate poverty? Because these are the people that purchased Obama's votes.

and here are some people that like Obamas ideas:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/al_jazeera_reports_palestinian.html

People in Palestine like the change Obama will make in the US? Scary thought.

Have heard this from a few different sources so far.

And yes, the ONLY way medical/SS will ever get "fixed" is if we remove all government workers from the cake walk and put them into the same boat as everyone else. Once it affect THEM, instead of just being another stump issue to pretend to care about, we would see some progress.

This bill is just a tool to further this stated policy.

Here's a civics lesson:

The officially stated goals of the foreign policy of the United States are:

"to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the American people and the international community".

The CIA State Failure Task Force, which has been in operation almost a decade, has shown in a number of studies that when economies don?t progress and when disease is rampant, you get the failure of states.

This becomes the breeding ground in which terrorism, criminality, drug trafficking, money laundering, weapons proliferation, mass migration movements, refugee movements, displacement of populations, can all take hold.

Look at Darfur, Nigeria, and those pirates from Somalia who attack every ship that goes near that country. Look at countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and similar states.

We cannot fight the war on terror without also fighting the war on global poverty that provides the breeding ground for the ills that globalization transmits throughout the world.

The Global Poverty Act is a tool to further the stated foreign policy goals of the US.

It's not some hair-brained scheme that Mr. Obama cooked up....the Millenium Development Goals were put together in 2002.

However,
One must ask ones self whether these stated goals are indeed in the best interests of our country. I tend to be an isolationist when we spend trillions of dollars trying to make the world a better place and are repaid with hatred, discrimination and attack.

The "New World Order" is not a new concept and has been slowly growing into a truism since George the first referred to it back in the late 80's.

Why is it that the left will constantly say that we are not the "world police" and have no right to intervene in the affairs of other countries but will then, out of the other side of their mouths, want to offer up the wealth of the American taxpayer to every indigent around the world?

Why is it that the left will constantly say that we are not the "world police" and have no right to intervene in the affairs of other countries but will then, out of the other side of their mouths, want to offer up the wealth of the American taxpayer to every indigent around the world?

And, because I'd prefer, as long as my money is part of a wealth redistribution scheme, that it is wasted on inefficient food programmes than on Bechtel, Raytheon, Halliburton, Kellogg/Brown/Root & Blackwater.

The problem with isolationism in the U.S. is that it ignores where our energy, foods, raw strategic materials, and manufactured come from. You can't be an isolationist if you keep buying stuff from foreign countries. And you can't buy stuff from foreign countries without creating and maintaining a world environment condusive to world trade.

If you're an isolationist, I double dog dare you to go through your house and remove EVERYTHING that was made in a foreign country. Every appliance, every thing written by a non-american, everything that contains parts made or written by foreigners. Everything that exists because it was invented by a foreigner. By the time you're through, you're house will be damn near empty, and probably structurally unsound too.

You want to go pure American, you're going to have to create an environment that will make it cost effective for americans to produce all those things we currently take for granted that come from other countries. And the first thing that you're going to have to replace is fossil fuels.

We should stay out of the world affairs of other nations. No more being the worlds police, let the UN/Nato do that.

No more the worlds welfare office, again, give them the number for the UN/Nato/red cross.

only allow trade with countries that are willing to have an even trade agreement. if they overly tax our goods being brought in, then you penalize them in return.

let the UN/Nato do that.

What are we going to do when "they" want to police "us"?

the ONLY real threat to us is the liberals within our borders that have such a self-hate for doing better than so much of the world has.

Drill our own oil, grow our own food, make our own products. We don't have to be as dependent upon other countries as "we" have allowed ourselves to become.

Besides, I don't believe that either Canada or the UK would allow themselves to be regulated by the corrupt UN. Just look at the savage nations on the "human rights" boards and it is crystal clear what that whole organization is about, top to bottom. Hint, NOT the betterment of humans in general.

That sir is a weak argument. When did I say ?close the borders and cancel international trade?? I have never advocated that and you can not put those words in my mouth. To focus on ones country does not equate to closing the borders and totally isolating ones self or ones nation from the rest of the world.

Here is a good analogy:

Let us say you live in your home comfortably with your family. You work hard and provide a good home for you and your family. One day you come home and find another family has walked through your open back door and is now sitting at your table eating your food and watching your tv. What do you do? Do you ask them to leave? Do you call the police? Or do you ask them to stay, give them rooms, cloth them, feed them, learn to speak their language, and do this all by your self. Do you ask them to do work around your house and then pay them less than you?d pay your own children? It?s one thing to hire your neighbor or his son to mow your lawn but another thing entirely if he or his son moves into your house. I think you understand where I am going here.

Our nation isn?t perfect. We (collectively) have a great deal of soul searching to do to figure out what it is to be an American in the 21st century. My point is that we need to focus on America and be American. Not Mexican or French (God forbid) or Spanish or German or anything else. Change begins with each of us in our own homes and in our own communities. Our nation needs to focus on what it is to be an American. Notice I didn?t say we need to isolate ourselves from the world. I advocate making our country a better place for our children and their children. My hope is that my children will get along with their neighbors and offer value to their community which is another way of saying that I wish the America of my children?s time will be a place where American?s will say with pride ?Made in America?.

I will have to think about this some.

On one hand I see and agree with what you say about fighting the source of terrorism, but on the other hand, I have seen how "successful" we have been at fighting poverty at home. Also I see no way we can afford to pay for this with the current cost of fuel and the war without raising taxes on the already over-taxed middle class.

Write your representatives NOW to demand they NOT override the President's veto of this despicable pile of largesse, which allows federal handouts to "poor" farmers earning no more income than $1.5 Million/year -- that's profit, in business terms!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=ajmjDfhlIY1o&refer=australia

Luckily, somebody misplaced 34 pages of the bill, so maybe we'll save $289 Billion on this when the matter is settled.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24759576/

"We are trying to understand the ramifications of this congressional farm bill foul-up. We haven't found a precedent for a congressional blunder of this magnitude," said Scott Stanzel, a White House spokesman. "It looks like it may be back to square one for them."

A couple years ago the Pentagon was unable to account for more than $1 Trillion dollars, which was allocated by foul-ups both congressional and presidential. Star Wars/SDI was a stupid idea when it was first proposed, and was no less stupid when Rumsfeld lobbied for it in early 2001. Bravo to the President for this veto, but this hardly makes up for his abject failure to keep his campaign promises of a non-interventionist foreign policy, a moral objection to "nation-building," and his occasional promises of responsible energy policies. Corn is not a sensible source of ethanol, Mister President.

Let's look at the bottom line.

Goal of terrorists:

1. Kill innocent people
2. Destroy infrastructure, buildings, etc.
3. Create fear
4. Disrupt normal life.

Bush's war on terrorists:

1. Killed 4000+ soliders (they're innocent, their only mistake was enlisting). Killed unknown number of innocent Iraqi cilivians.

2. Bombs away! Fortunately it's Iraqi infrastucture that's being destroyed. We will most likely have to rebuild it.

3. The fear has died down. We're still at "yellow alert."

4. Where do I begin? Once upon a time there was this document called the Constitution....,

Hope to God that Bush doesn't label you an "emeny combatant".

I used to enjoy flying, but now with TSA and the governemt's knee jerk reaction to everything and the security theatre. Searching laptops at the border, etc.

The bottom line is: The cure is worse than the disease.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

The irony is that the war against terror, the war to preserve our American Way, has removed more of our civil liberties then they [terrorists] ever could. And we did it to our selves. Oh how they must be laughing at us.

Is it a lost liberty to provide ID to board a plane?

Is it a lost liberty to have your bags inspected to board a plane?

Is it a lost liberty to have your call listened to if you are talking to someone outside of the country that is on a terrorist watch list? (remember, it is ONLY calls to and from outside the country that were effected at all, and I don't EVER call outside the country, except of course to talk to GG and I am sure THAT conversation melted the recording equipment....)

How have YOU, directly, ever lost ANY civil liberties? I would really love to hear a thoughtful reply, because I hear people say such things, but have never heard an example of how they were effected. Thanks in advance.

jd

Oh yeah, proud of you for not leaving out the "ESSENTIAL" part that most people do when they throw that quote around.

There have been many instances of grey or flat out illegal monitoring since at least the 50's. Interesting to see some of the supporters in the first article.

Those companies are never required to reveal the extent of their involvement with Shamrock; on the recommendations of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and presidential chief of staff Dick Cheney, in 1975 President Ford extends executive privilege to those companies, precluding them from testifying before Congress.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=civilliberties&civilliberties_privacy=civilliberties_violations_of_rights_and_freedoms

here I thought since you were refering to recent terrorists and the effect that they have had, that you were talking about effect that they have had.

It seems to me that anything that happened in '75 still has NOTHING to do with 911.

"US citizens and international senders and recipients. "

"“NSA systematically intercepts international communications, both voice and cable.”"

Ah, as I get way down, I see reference to groups on a watch list being watched. Is it your intention to imply that MIGHT be going on, so based on what MIGHT be going on, your essential civil liberites have been taken away?

You are on a watch list?

I wasn't talking about anything. That link could both assist and hinder your arguements.

I was just attempting to show you that not only has monitoring been going on, and that there have been admissions that domestic monitoring has happened recently, but that it has for quite some time.
If you really insist I will paste the many instances from that link and others, not just the couple that point out the partially legal monitoring. Note the FISA requires there be an international terrorist or foreign power and that there be a warrant.

Long ago, I heard someone describe the way it works. Calls are routed overseas so the Brits can listen to American calls, and vice versa. Many listening stations are located near downlink sites for telecommunications.

http://fly.hiwaay.net/~pspoole/echelon.html

An ex-army person spoke about installing equipment in New York to store information from intercepted calls.

"The terrorists are attacking! Here, put on these chains!"

v.

"Is it a lost liberty to provide ID to board a plane?"

Yes. Until recently it was not necessary to carry "papers" of any kind especially if you are using public transportation.

If you lose your I.D. while traveling, you could have a serious problem getting home, even if you only went to Indiana.

"Is it a lost liberty to have your bags inspected to board a plane?"

Yes; it seems to violate some concept of search and seizure, some concept of privacy. I don't really care much, but I've had quite a few things stolen during those searches and I don't like my neatly folded clothing to come out all rumpled at the end of the flight.

"Is it a lost liberty to have your call listened to if you are talking to someone outside of the country that is on a terrorist watch list? (remember, it is ONLY calls to and from outside the country that were effected at all..."

The word is "affected" and yes, it is a violation of your privacy.

"How have YOU, directly, ever lost ANY civil liberties?"

See the above. When I joined the Navy, I flew regularly with no identification whatsoever, no inspection. They needed one thing only -- money, coin of the realm.

When inspections and metal detectors first began to be used, one day I left my Botswains knife (pronounced "Bosuns"; big marlinspike on its back edge) in my pocket. The inspector says, "What is this?" Obviously a knife. I said, "It's a Botswains knife and I'm a sailor" (I was in uniform). He said, "Okay" and that was that. If I were to try it today, I would lose the knife and possibly be detained.

More recently I carried my networking tools with me. They are expensive. Some are sharp. I can no longer carry my networking tools onboard aircraft, and I dare not check them into baggage and they don't like the high power X-ray.

"I would really love to hear a thoughtful reply, because I hear people say such things, but have never heard an example of how they were effected."

I was "effected" several decades ago by my parents and as for being affected, I've describe a few of the effects above.

The best people to answer you cannot answer, for they have been detained without civil rights whatsoever.

throw someone else's money at the problem and hope it goes away?

There is not a current track record of the money we waste on other countries actually getting to the people in need.

For all the Anti-Bush ranting and raving, it is still a fact that the 911 terrorists were in this country planning this attack YEARS before, and have NOTHING to do with Bush or any of this policies. People like to blame Bush for "the world hating us", but this is nothing new and the basstards have been attacking us for decades.

Can't buy love, didn't the Beatles teach you anything?

but you can buy the next best thing.

BEER!!!!

is better than "FREE" beer.....

is better than "FREE" beer.....

Beer is better than love for the following reasons:

1) Beer never turns into resentment
2) Beer doesn't have the risk of leaving you broken hearted
3) Beer doesn't mean you have to buy someone gifts
4) No one makes fun of you for being full of beer at a cookout
5) You can make beer in front of your neighbor's kids
6) You can always find beer at the 7-11
7) You don't have to work hard to get a little beer.

TKOS has spoken lol

not "spoken", "ordained" is a much more fitting word.

8) beer doesn't get jealous if you grab another beer.
9) a cold beer is better than a cold woman (unless you're Alice Cooper)
10) a beer doesn't want to talk afterwards.
11) you only have to pay for a beer once
12) a young beer is legal

you're using the 52 reasons a beer is better than a woman...

i was making up originals comparing it to love...

how dare you correct the King of Swill!!!! repent sinner!!!

if I was doing them from memory?

i know those...and...the ones why a guitar is better than a woman...

you can put your hands on another guitar and yours won't get jealous

guitars don't whine

when you play a guitar, it stays with you

a guitar gets better with age

guitars are free to take on vacation with you


I am gonna get some hate mail....i just know it

GASP! What is this world coming to?

Your assignment is to get over to todays yuk and post the complete list of why guitars are better.

ThingOne is looking at a new ESP guitar. Requirements, he wants a flying V, and it has to have 24 frets. Found one for about $500, with the reviews favorable, just saying that the pickups suck, and we can change that later. He has saved almost $300 of it so far.

I should post my Washburn 7 string on ebay. I NEVER play it, and the local shops will only give me $50 for it, even though it is origianally about $1100. (accourding to on-line).

but the drummers will probably join in too

Ebaying is the smart idea. I've had to sell guitars before worth $500 for $150. Ebay will possibly get you a better return...maybe $400-700 if it's in good shape and a desireable model.

assignment? professor jdclyde? lol. I might get to it...i'm working on something now that i'm back from lunch.

If I post a yuk, I'll think of something funny to everyone...that way...guys will laugh...and the women keep adoring me

bbiab...time for work to get done...

going from between $350 and $450.

Not a bad return, considering I got it in exchange for an old server.

Got that, a Dean V, and a Crate Combo for two old PII400 servers. We use the Dean, but have no intention of relearning to use that 7 string and there is NO demand for them in the area.

I never once said that Bush is the reason the world hates us... Bush is the reason the world PITIES and LAUGHS AT us. The combination of our MONEY and HEDONISM is the reason the world HATES us.

people in sh1thole countries can't stand that we would believe " the doctrine that pleasure or happiness is the sole or chief good in life"

Screw them.

"We cannot fight the war on terror without also fighting the war on global poverty..."

Wars are fought between opponents. Poverty is not an opponent, it is a word that describes a "lack". You cannot "fight" a lack, therefore there can be no war against a lack.

A fellow by the name of Malthus assures us that we can never win this "war" of which you speak, we can never fill every cup.

Two thoughts:

1. If you feed squirrels, what do you get? More squirrels. You might fill every cup today and you'll be filling ten cups in 20 years for each cup today.

2. Mark Skousen, economist and professor has much to say on this topic.(Google "skousen socialism"). An anecdote attributed to one of the Skousens (might be Cleon Skousen) is a classroom situation. After a test, the class voted to distribute the surplus test scores (those over 80 percent, let's say) to those scoring under 80, and in this manner all can pass. On the next test, most failed; for what happened was that the hardworking students realized they needed only 80 and there was absolutely no reason to push beyond 80. The lazy students were still lazy, and the overall class average dropped substantially. This is the failure of socialism, a misplaced belief that there is "enough to go around" and the only problem is distribution. The failure of every large socialist economy in the world is proof that it does not work. On small scales it will work for a while (Iceland, Sweden) where you have strong social conditioning so that people do not immediately become lazy.

"It's not some hair-brained scheme that Mr. Obama cooked up....the Millenium Development Goals were put together in 2002."

Regardless of who cooked it up, Mr. Obama put this hairbrained scheme before Congress, it has his name on it.

I think a policy of symmetrical tariffs and ending all corporate welfare would have many of the desired effects, and very likely to a greater extent.

Those countries will always have corruption. They have had more time to industrialize then we have and have only sat around and reproduced. If you want to help them, teach them birth control and how to feed themselves. Pouring my tax dollars in these breeding grounds helps no one.

"They have had more time to industrialize then we have and have only sat around and reproduced."



... and not a single reference to the content of the statute, either

why we haven't modernized our electric grid. Apply to any infrastructure you'd care to.

You could get a job for Rush or Hannity.
Our paying a portion does not mean that WE will pay for the program.
Bushes comments included in the bill actually makes sense.
Most of the spending proposals, we already spend money on.
The entire program cost is not stated but will undoubtably be less than 6 months in Iraq.
Your second link shows a cost of a penny a person (but it doesn't show over what period).

to reduce our debt, while the govt. ends programs that waste money?

"...while the govt. ends programs that waste money?"

Mission Accomplished.

We are currently WASTING our money trying to buy influence and friends in other nations, and as our Canadian and UK friends remind us, we are still hated world wide and have been long before Bush was elected.

Wasting money in Iraq does not justify wasting money anywhere else.

A nation that is having problems at home should look within her own borders first and foremost.

If you think this is such a good idea, you can write out a check to the UN for the both of us.

Reading the bill, here is Bushes take on the spending of money on foreign aid programs.

On March 22, 2002, President George W. [Struck out->]Bush stated

←→[-Struck out] Bush participated in the International Conference on Finance for Development and endorsed the Monterey Consensus, stating
: `We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. We fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.'.

So if it could help to reduce terrorism is it still a waste of money? That was the purpose of my reference to Iraq (I know sometimes this work thing gets in the way of my making a fully coherant post ).
Most (if not all) experts agree that poverty is a fertile breeding ground for terrorist recruits.

I agree that we should do more at home, but things could happen concurrently.

How much do I write the check for, 2 cents?

To Scummy, how much reduction would that be 360mil x 1 cent = 3 million hmm they fart that away every minute or so.