The military is buying more and more high-tech equipment and that equipment needs maintenance. Sure, the initial front-line work is done by the military, but that's usually just a box-swap. The real work is done in the back shops, where they have the specialized test and repair centers to open up those boxes and repair them. That work is usually done by civilian employees of the equipment manufacturer. And, to ensure they comply with federal law, government contractors generally pay their employees better.
Let's be real, here. McDonnell Douglas, Grumman, Rockwell, AM General, and major divisions or subsidiaries of Motorola, GE, Westinghouse, Boeing, and even Trane, subsist primarily off of government (usually military) spending. Max is correct that there is a trade-off in cutting military spending because jobs go away. But if jobs go away because the government stops spending the money that kept those jobs in existence, how did the government, whether directly or indirectly, not create those jobs?
Discussion on:
Please Don't Feed the Wildlife
View:
Show:
They are still funded by the taxpayers. We need more good jobs being created by private enterprise. We can't all work for or because of the government.
AV
AV
Yes most certainly those jobs are still funded by Tax payers but would you really have it any other way?
Part of the Government Job is to provide Security to the Citizens and I have yet to see anyone in the US claim otherwise. If they where to it would simply mean that the Government isn't responsible for Security and there is no need for the Military and associated hardware used to defend the General Population.
What I do find more than a bit troubling is how the Military Outsources Jobs to the Private Sector who have the idea that Near Enough is Good Enough for the Military and We'll Fix it in the Field. Neither of those is what any serving Military person wants to experience because it means that they are dead and the Country has lost a lot of money with it's investment in that Serving Military Person.
For way too long the Military has been propping up a Substandard Private Sector who really doesn't deserve any support. While it is true that the Private Sector can do it cheaper it is also true that they simply don't. They charge as much as they can and provide as little as possible to meet the specification that was asked for, many times actually not even meeting the Minimum Specs.
Look at the history of any Major Private Sector Military Project and tell me it isn't so.
The Tea Party People on the other hand would have you believe that those Weapons should be funded by a User Pays System so they effectively want those who would attack the US to pay for the Weapons that the US stockpiles to defend itself. Imagine the scene well you are naughty and we are going to nuke you so please provide the $20,000,00.00 for the cost of the ICBM that we will have to use to kill you lot. If you dont pay well leave you alone to do what you like and well just ignore you as you are unwilling to pay for what we would use to destroy you.
Sounds nice in Theory but is completely ridicules to any sane person. Of course the last bit of that isnt spoken about its just User Pays which sounds great till its actually tested.
Col
Part of the Government Job is to provide Security to the Citizens and I have yet to see anyone in the US claim otherwise. If they where to it would simply mean that the Government isn't responsible for Security and there is no need for the Military and associated hardware used to defend the General Population.
What I do find more than a bit troubling is how the Military Outsources Jobs to the Private Sector who have the idea that Near Enough is Good Enough for the Military and We'll Fix it in the Field. Neither of those is what any serving Military person wants to experience because it means that they are dead and the Country has lost a lot of money with it's investment in that Serving Military Person.
For way too long the Military has been propping up a Substandard Private Sector who really doesn't deserve any support. While it is true that the Private Sector can do it cheaper it is also true that they simply don't. They charge as much as they can and provide as little as possible to meet the specification that was asked for, many times actually not even meeting the Minimum Specs.
Look at the history of any Major Private Sector Military Project and tell me it isn't so.
The Tea Party People on the other hand would have you believe that those Weapons should be funded by a User Pays System so they effectively want those who would attack the US to pay for the Weapons that the US stockpiles to defend itself. Imagine the scene well you are naughty and we are going to nuke you so please provide the $20,000,00.00 for the cost of the ICBM that we will have to use to kill you lot. If you dont pay well leave you alone to do what you like and well just ignore you as you are unwilling to pay for what we would use to destroy you.
Sounds nice in Theory but is completely ridicules to any sane person. Of course the last bit of that isnt spoken about its just User Pays which sounds great till its actually tested.
Col
And their appliances and devices?
If it all eventually comes down to more jobs, what the hell is the problem with it?
Your line of reasoning only makes sense if you think there's competition between public and private. There isn't.
If it all eventually comes down to more jobs, what the hell is the problem with it?
Your line of reasoning only makes sense if you think there's competition between public and private. There isn't.
How many civilian jobs create career paths? McDonalds gets thousands of people started, but few of them stick around long enough to rise through their commendable 'promote from within' system. Tell me about the career paths at Wal-Mart. Tell me about the career paths at most small 'mom and pop' businesses.
If we allocated the tax money necessary to fix the roads properly, it would take a couple of decades to repair them all. In this day of job turnover, that's pretty long tenure.
If we allocated the tax money necessary to fix the roads properly, it would take a couple of decades to repair them all. In this day of job turnover, that's pretty long tenure.
Sometimes career paths don't necessarily mean you stay at the same company and work your way up. You may start at McDonalds flipping burgers, but you leave and go to another company that offers you a better job and better pay.
In larger companies, say the Pharma industry, you would have more opportunities to move within the company.
We should rebuild our infrastructure without a doubt, but it should be done in partnership with private enterprise. Private enterprise will benefit from it. The government should try to foster that relationship between government and private enterprise so that projects are not totally funded by the government. We need to give private enterprise an incentive to invest in this country again and that isn't happening.
AV
In larger companies, say the Pharma industry, you would have more opportunities to move within the company.
We should rebuild our infrastructure without a doubt, but it should be done in partnership with private enterprise. Private enterprise will benefit from it. The government should try to foster that relationship between government and private enterprise so that projects are not totally funded by the government. We need to give private enterprise an incentive to invest in this country again and that isn't happening.
AV
Those better-paying jobs have been moving to other countries for decades because those better-paying jobs were in manufacturing plants owned by corporations that received government subsidies in the form of tax breaks when they moved their jobs overseas.
What's left behind is Walmart or McDonald's or jobs that require education or training people not only don't have, but can't afford to get because they work at Walmart or McDonald's, can't afford tuition costs on their own, and don't want to take a student loan because they're smart enough not to volunteer for indentured servitude.
What's left behind is Walmart or McDonald's or jobs that require education or training people not only don't have, but can't afford to get because they work at Walmart or McDonald's, can't afford tuition costs on their own, and don't want to take a student loan because they're smart enough not to volunteer for indentured servitude.
We never could compete with it because its cheaper and companies definitely still get tax breaks for doing it. There still are jobs here though, its just a more competitive environment.
Forget Walmart or McDonalds. Small business is the best way to get some good experience on which you can build a future. Obama's plan to tax people making $200k per year will likely kill small business growth though. Many small businesses are taxed on the personal level and not at a corporate tax rate.
AV
Forget Walmart or McDonalds. Small business is the best way to get some good experience on which you can build a future. Obama's plan to tax people making $200k per year will likely kill small business growth though. Many small businesses are taxed on the personal level and not at a corporate tax rate.
AV
But most of those small businesses are incorporated in some manner: LLC or S corp, usually. And the proprietor of every one of those businesses can deduct everything he or she puts back into the business. Payroll, equipment, supplies, franchise fees, real property costs, whatever, are all deductible from gross receipts.
I did it for years as a softball umpire. Everything I spent relative to officiating–travel costs, uniform costs, equipment costs, meals, etc.–was deducted from gross receipts, and usually reduced the net taxable to 10% or so of gross, sometimes to even less than that. Didn't usually even affect my tax bracket.
And regardless what many say, outside specialty businesses, the pay at most small businesses usually sucks, even for the owner.
I did it for years as a softball umpire. Everything I spent relative to officiating–travel costs, uniform costs, equipment costs, meals, etc.–was deducted from gross receipts, and usually reduced the net taxable to 10% or so of gross, sometimes to even less than that. Didn't usually even affect my tax bracket.
And regardless what many say, outside specialty businesses, the pay at most small businesses usually sucks, even for the owner.
If a person is making 200k they're not in any trouble, financially, right?
If they want to avoid a tax for going over that take, they can hire more people. Most small business owners are caught in the "why should I hire someone to do what I can do myself for free" thinking.
They overlook the fact that it's not for free. It takes their effort, and the business owner's efforts should be worth quite a lot.
So, many people actually hurt their own businesses by trying to do everything themselves.
Time spent balancing the books or writing letters or mowing the lawn could be better spent looking after customers or drumming up new ones or straightening out sub-optimal business practices.
If they want to avoid a tax for going over that take, they can hire more people. Most small business owners are caught in the "why should I hire someone to do what I can do myself for free" thinking.
They overlook the fact that it's not for free. It takes their effort, and the business owner's efforts should be worth quite a lot.
So, many people actually hurt their own businesses by trying to do everything themselves.
Time spent balancing the books or writing letters or mowing the lawn could be better spent looking after customers or drumming up new ones or straightening out sub-optimal business practices.
Are places like Donald Trump not real Small Business with the computer shop down the road run by a guy who has no staff and lots of bills.
How any politician could say with a straight Face that people like Trump where Small Business is so far beyond belief that they are obviously treating their potential electors like the complete idiots that they actually are to believe stuff like that.
Col
How any politician could say with a straight Face that people like Trump where Small Business is so far beyond belief that they are obviously treating their potential electors like the complete idiots that they actually are to believe stuff like that.
Col
you mean the corporations that own the capitol, then I'm sorry to say that the profit margins on building up your country are far outstripped by the profit margins on tearing it down.
Business is business, I'm sure you understand.
If you mean something else, well, perhaps you need to look into what that would actually take.
Business is business, I'm sure you understand.
If you mean something else, well, perhaps you need to look into what that would actually take.
I find it amusing that people accuse me of being a Fox News Junkie, when, in fact, I absolutely never watch Fox News. Never! Absolutely NEVER!
I have a very low opinion of television media in general; hell, I dont even have cable TV; I still use rabbit ears, so I couldn't watch Fox News if I wanted to. Take the NFL out of the picture (no pun intended), and on average, I might have my TV on an hour or two a week (I do like to watch Jeopardy).
Sure, I see Fox News - as well as MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, et al - in the course of visiting people, going places where its on, seeing references on the Internet, etc., but watching TV News is not even on my Radar Screen. I really can't remember the last time I watched a TV News program.
Come to think of it, if anything, I make it a point to keep tabs on MSNBC more than any other News Network (even though I don't "watch" them either.)
P.S. You used to be interesting, Nick. Now, you just sound like a pompous elitist who comes across as though he's "above it all". Try coming off your high-horse.
I have a very low opinion of television media in general; hell, I dont even have cable TV; I still use rabbit ears, so I couldn't watch Fox News if I wanted to. Take the NFL out of the picture (no pun intended), and on average, I might have my TV on an hour or two a week (I do like to watch Jeopardy).
Sure, I see Fox News - as well as MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, et al - in the course of visiting people, going places where its on, seeing references on the Internet, etc., but watching TV News is not even on my Radar Screen. I really can't remember the last time I watched a TV News program.
Come to think of it, if anything, I make it a point to keep tabs on MSNBC more than any other News Network (even though I don't "watch" them either.)
P.S. You used to be interesting, Nick. Now, you just sound like a pompous elitist who comes across as though he's "above it all". Try coming off your high-horse.
I've lived it and was lucky enough to have the government there to help me get out of it.
You fed the animals, and now you're making surprised that you got bitten?
You fed the animals, and now you're making surprised that you got bitten?
I start a thread about the federal government's excessive Food Stamp Program; Nick advocated his enthusiastic support for the growth in the federal Food Stamp Program; I challenge the merits of his support and how it reconciles (or fails to reconcile) with other statements he's made; he's starting to sound silly in his support for the federal Food Stamp Program; so what does he do? He obsesses on "government created jobs".
Well, Nick, I've said very little, if anything, about "government created jobs", except to post that Obama quote and a couple of other articles about it. Argue with those other people - including Obama - about what they, themselves, said.
I'm talking about the federal Food Stamp Program, and your diversion tactics speak only to your inability to support your own arguments about the federal Food Stamp Program.
If the government does create jobs - and I'm not arguing whether they do or don't (it's all a matter of semantics, anyway) - then it's TOO DAMN MANY!!!!! America is about private sector jobs, not government sector jobs or government "created" jobs. And if you disagree with that simple ideology, we are indeed on opposite ends of that spectrum - with you being on the wrong end.
Well, Nick, I've said very little, if anything, about "government created jobs", except to post that Obama quote and a couple of other articles about it. Argue with those other people - including Obama - about what they, themselves, said.
I'm talking about the federal Food Stamp Program, and your diversion tactics speak only to your inability to support your own arguments about the federal Food Stamp Program.
If the government does create jobs - and I'm not arguing whether they do or don't (it's all a matter of semantics, anyway) - then it's TOO DAMN MANY!!!!! America is about private sector jobs, not government sector jobs or government "created" jobs. And if you disagree with that simple ideology, we are indeed on opposite ends of that spectrum - with you being on the wrong end.
that government can be too big or too small. Our government is doing some things well. It's not doing other things well at all. It's also doing some things it shouldn't be doing, and not doing some things it should be doing.
With regard to financial regulation, government has been shrinking since the 1980s. Compared to the relatively [financially] calm half-century before that, we have been subject to almost regular financial bubbles or frauds as the regulations have been pared back since that time. The almost-immediate S&L debacle, Enron, Worldcom, the dot.com bubble, Madoff, the housing bubble, a rising tide of bank failures, and the derivatives crash were all enabled by lax enforcement or reduced regulation.
The Department of Education is a bloated bureaucracy that has never seriously attempted to do the one thing it should have been trying to do from Day One: set national educational achievement standards by grade level and subject for all American schools. By that I mean "this is what students must know to progress to the next level". How to get students educated to that point would be up to the states, counties, or cities. Instead, the Ed Dept tries to enforce the idiotic concept, now enshrined in law, that all children can learn to the same level in the same amount of time. Here, government is too big for the wrong reason.
The recent spate of food contamination appears to indicate that theire aren't enough inspectors. Too small.
Trying to regulate individual medical choices? Too big.
Our public infrastructure is falling apart. Too small.
We're fighting a war for a now-questionable cause. Too big.
There are no easy answers, Max. And there are no absolutes beyond the first Ten.
With regard to financial regulation, government has been shrinking since the 1980s. Compared to the relatively [financially] calm half-century before that, we have been subject to almost regular financial bubbles or frauds as the regulations have been pared back since that time. The almost-immediate S&L debacle, Enron, Worldcom, the dot.com bubble, Madoff, the housing bubble, a rising tide of bank failures, and the derivatives crash were all enabled by lax enforcement or reduced regulation.
The Department of Education is a bloated bureaucracy that has never seriously attempted to do the one thing it should have been trying to do from Day One: set national educational achievement standards by grade level and subject for all American schools. By that I mean "this is what students must know to progress to the next level". How to get students educated to that point would be up to the states, counties, or cities. Instead, the Ed Dept tries to enforce the idiotic concept, now enshrined in law, that all children can learn to the same level in the same amount of time. Here, government is too big for the wrong reason.
The recent spate of food contamination appears to indicate that theire aren't enough inspectors. Too small.
Trying to regulate individual medical choices? Too big.
Our public infrastructure is falling apart. Too small.
We're fighting a war for a now-questionable cause. Too big.
There are no easy answers, Max. And there are no absolutes beyond the first Ten.
...... whether "government can be too big or too small."
Considering it's never gotten smaller, that doesn't make a lot of sense. Moreover, your assertion that government cannot be "too big" is absurd. Of course it can; and it is!
You're really stretching, Nick, to avoid having to defend your indefensible comments about wanting to grow the already burgeoning, 48 million strong, federal food stamp roles.
Considering it's never gotten smaller, that doesn't make a lot of sense. Moreover, your assertion that government cannot be "too big" is absurd. Of course it can; and it is!
You're really stretching, Nick, to avoid having to defend your indefensible comments about wanting to grow the already burgeoning, 48 million strong, federal food stamp roles.
Every suggestion I've offered here has been intended to help people become more financially independent, making them less dependent on government for support.
And because I defend the existence of the food stamp program and understand why it has grown to the size it has, you think I want it to grow further? You're making stupid assumptions and creating your own false dichotomies.
And because I defend the existence of the food stamp program and understand why it has grown to the size it has, you think I want it to grow further? You're making stupid assumptions and creating your own false dichotomies.
What about all those government contracts to build things like aircraft, ships, tanks, and other weapons systems? If you don't think those jobs aren't created by the government, listen to their elected representatives scream whenever someone tries to cut them from the budget.
Who do you think law enforcement and firemen work for? Restaurant and food preparation inspectors?
Government shouldn't be the PRIMARY source of jobs, but to say it doesn't create them is ignoring where those tax dollars get spent, especially those dollars spent in the name of 'defense'.
Who do you think law enforcement and firemen work for? Restaurant and food preparation inspectors?
Government shouldn't be the PRIMARY source of jobs, but to say it doesn't create them is ignoring where those tax dollars get spent, especially those dollars spent in the name of 'defense'.
"The Communists have won in America with Obama ...... Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them."
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-11-2012/122849-obama_soviet_mistake-0/
So say the Russians.
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-11-2012/122849-obama_soviet_mistake-0/
So say the Russians.
at any tea party rallies.
Oh, wait...you said illiterate...never mind...
Oh, wait...you said illiterate...never mind...
So how are the Canadian geese treating your lawn this year?
P.S. Bush sucks...sucked, well, guess that's old hat now.
P.S. Bush sucks...sucked, well, guess that's old hat now.
Honking away on the way to christen someone else's lawn.
PS: Now we have Obama and he shucks too.
AV
PS: Now we have Obama and he shucks too.
AV
I know he's not your answer, nobody is though, all politicians are a waste of time, effort and money. But Max doesn't like Obama, it wouldn't be normal to simply agree with him....I mean...nah, just wouldn't be right.
Gotta say, Obama's popular in Canada though, a little bit too far right wing for this nation though. Gawd, people in BC were taken straight from Woodstock and don't have a clue what's good for the country, besides saving whales and trees. I'm all for protecting natural resources but it's SO freakin left here it's not funny. If the corner store closes early, people chain themselves to trees in protest.
Gotta say, Obama's popular in Canada though, a little bit too far right wing for this nation though. Gawd, people in BC were taken straight from Woodstock and don't have a clue what's good for the country, besides saving whales and trees. I'm all for protecting natural resources but it's SO freakin left here it's not funny. If the corner store closes early, people chain themselves to trees in protest.
I never heard anyone call Obama too far right wing before. If you take him off our hands there are a lot of people in this country (including me) that would be eternally grateful. Alas, you are right, almost all politicians are a waste of time, except one; my wonderful Governor Chris Christie. Even the Dems love him in NJ.
I always wondered where all the people from Woodstock went after the concert. They couldn't go back home because they would have been drafted and sent to Nam. It all makes sense to me now.
AV
I always wondered where all the people from Woodstock went after the concert. They couldn't go back home because they would have been drafted and sent to Nam. It all makes sense to me now.
AV
That is because all things are relative. Obama is Right Wing but to the US People appears Left because he is more left that his current opponents which are so far Right Wing that any Real Right Wing would appear to be a Long Way left in compression.
But the reality with the recent Election in the US was that there where no Corporate Criminals who required a Presidential Pardon so there simply was not the funds to make the Republicans appear palatable to the General Public or at least the around 50% of the General Public who bother to actually vote.
The US is an Interesting place where the Individual States do everything possible to dissuade the Citizens from Voting and pass this off as Good. The end result is that less than half the population actually votes and the result is that under your Electoral System no single Candidate or Party gets a Mandate for anything that they do no matter what they claim as at best they are elected on about 25% of the actual Population.
Remember when GWB was elected and the presidential pardon that was issued making the criminals from places like Glencorp able to return to the states? Mr Rich was the Most Wanted White Collar Criminal in the US History and he and his mates who had been under threat of Court Action for their Tax Avoidance Crimes in the US where all given Presidential Pardons very quietly and hardly reported at the time. He was in the Ten Most Wanted FBI listings of the time and was placed there for his actions by the previous administration at the behest of the Public who had been outraged by his Alleged Crimes.
It is things like that, that have caused American Business and Politics to be so badly thought of in most places including the US.
Col
But the reality with the recent Election in the US was that there where no Corporate Criminals who required a Presidential Pardon so there simply was not the funds to make the Republicans appear palatable to the General Public or at least the around 50% of the General Public who bother to actually vote.
The US is an Interesting place where the Individual States do everything possible to dissuade the Citizens from Voting and pass this off as Good. The end result is that less than half the population actually votes and the result is that under your Electoral System no single Candidate or Party gets a Mandate for anything that they do no matter what they claim as at best they are elected on about 25% of the actual Population.
Remember when GWB was elected and the presidential pardon that was issued making the criminals from places like Glencorp able to return to the states? Mr Rich was the Most Wanted White Collar Criminal in the US History and he and his mates who had been under threat of Court Action for their Tax Avoidance Crimes in the US where all given Presidential Pardons very quietly and hardly reported at the time. He was in the Ten Most Wanted FBI listings of the time and was placed there for his actions by the previous administration at the behest of the Public who had been outraged by his Alleged Crimes.
It is things like that, that have caused American Business and Politics to be so badly thought of in most places including the US.
Col
It's Obama's policies that make him left wing. Tax and spend is his mantra. Big government. Wealth redistribution. Its not as if new tax revenue will go to pay down the debt, it will go for new spending and wealth redistribution.
The Republicans want to cut the size and scope of government, but the candidates that ran for President failed to convey that message as a positive path to prosperity. It sounded more like a path to austerity.
Half of the people in the US are apathetic about voting. They barely know who the candidates are and don't bother to find out. In the case of Romney, many of the conservatives in his own party did not back him because of his more moderate views. I think it harkens back to the "compassionate conservative", GWB. They elected GWB to be fiscally conservative and it turned out he wasn't.
Now that Obama has been reelected, we can look forward to four more years of the status-quo or worse.
AV
The Republicans want to cut the size and scope of government, but the candidates that ran for President failed to convey that message as a positive path to prosperity. It sounded more like a path to austerity.
Half of the people in the US are apathetic about voting. They barely know who the candidates are and don't bother to find out. In the case of Romney, many of the conservatives in his own party did not back him because of his more moderate views. I think it harkens back to the "compassionate conservative", GWB. They elected GWB to be fiscally conservative and it turned out he wasn't.
Now that Obama has been reelected, we can look forward to four more years of the status-quo or worse.
AV
Just that it was announced around the same time he was sworn in and it just may have been Clinton getting his own back on the incoming Administration.
I would however suggest you look at a BBC Series called Yes Minister and then Yes prime Minister. In that you'll see a perfect example of who runs the system and while the Politicians make the finial decisions their options are limited by those who tell them what it is that they can and can not do. And because the Population want the Process of Government to continue even during a change of Government it's most defiantly not going to change any time soon if ever.
As for the Population being aphetic that is one thing and the system that you have there for actually voting where there are no National Standards and hours of queuing to vote is more an indictment on just how poor the system or as I should say Different Systems actually are. It's neither normal or necessary in any part of the world except the USA. The Electoral Commissions are so grossly underfunded and underresourced that it's way beyond a joke and except for developing countries doesn't happen anywhere else in the world.
As an Aside I was with some friends a couple of nights ago who are part of Doctors Without Borders and because of the US's abysmal Child Birth and Infant Mortality Statistics they are considering setting up services for those areas of Obstetrics in the USA as the Governments both State and Federal and Statutory Authorities are incapable of offering the most basic service to the citizens. They actually suggested that the Food Stamp Program needs to be radically expanded to cut back the Infant Mortality Rates as well which is something I found difficult to actually believe but unfortunately the Statistics speak for themselves.
The USA has the worst Child Birth/Infant Mortality Rates in the Developed World and over the past 20 years those Rates have got worse which is a very sad indictment on your country.
Col
I would however suggest you look at a BBC Series called Yes Minister and then Yes prime Minister. In that you'll see a perfect example of who runs the system and while the Politicians make the finial decisions their options are limited by those who tell them what it is that they can and can not do. And because the Population want the Process of Government to continue even during a change of Government it's most defiantly not going to change any time soon if ever.
As for the Population being aphetic that is one thing and the system that you have there for actually voting where there are no National Standards and hours of queuing to vote is more an indictment on just how poor the system or as I should say Different Systems actually are. It's neither normal or necessary in any part of the world except the USA. The Electoral Commissions are so grossly underfunded and underresourced that it's way beyond a joke and except for developing countries doesn't happen anywhere else in the world.
As an Aside I was with some friends a couple of nights ago who are part of Doctors Without Borders and because of the US's abysmal Child Birth and Infant Mortality Statistics they are considering setting up services for those areas of Obstetrics in the USA as the Governments both State and Federal and Statutory Authorities are incapable of offering the most basic service to the citizens. They actually suggested that the Food Stamp Program needs to be radically expanded to cut back the Infant Mortality Rates as well which is something I found difficult to actually believe but unfortunately the Statistics speak for themselves.
The USA has the worst Child Birth/Infant Mortality Rates in the Developed World and over the past 20 years those Rates have got worse which is a very sad indictment on your country.
Col
It's a hell of a lot more fiscally responsible than the borrow and spend practices of the Bush administration.
I'm still trying to figure out how Republicans–the party of 'fiscal responsibility'–became the spendthift children they are today.
I'm still trying to figure out how Republicans–the party of 'fiscal responsibility'–became the spendthift children they are today.
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.
.....
The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom.... I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are?... I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."
- Barry Goldwater, (19091998), five-term US Senator, Republican Party nominee for President in 1964*, Maj. Gen., US Air Force Reserves, author of The Conscience of a Conservative.
Preachers know all about spending other people's money on pig-headed crusades... that is their purpose in life, after all.
Not being willing to compromise always means running up the expenses.
.....
The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom.... I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are?... I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."
- Barry Goldwater, (19091998), five-term US Senator, Republican Party nominee for President in 1964*, Maj. Gen., US Air Force Reserves, author of The Conscience of a Conservative.
Preachers know all about spending other people's money on pig-headed crusades... that is their purpose in life, after all.
Not being willing to compromise always means running up the expenses.
Nothing wrong with taxation as such.
Nothing wrong with spending as such.
It's only the tea party and other wingnuts that think any taxation is too much, or that any spending is too much.
Borrowing has its place, taxation has its place and spending, obviously, has its place. Only damned fools say otherwise.
Nothing wrong with spending as such.
It's only the tea party and other wingnuts that think any taxation is too much, or that any spending is too much.
Borrowing has its place, taxation has its place and spending, obviously, has its place. Only damned fools say otherwise.
I know he's a bleeding heart to Americans, but your centre is our right. Our left makes Obama look more right than Meri Kahane.
now we can get back to dissing Obama in peace, without a freaking Mormon bishop trying to take advantage 
At least in regards to Mormons, that's for sure. You're a real piece of work, Ansu.
If we did, the money-men would be tripping over beggars and starving children in the streets. Food stamps keep them out of sight, in the supermarkets.
...... should be eliminated.
And has nothing to do with the food stamps discussion. It's just another diversion; another straw-man.
And has nothing to do with the food stamps discussion. It's just another diversion; another straw-man.
Eligibility for food stamps is based on household income. If you're the sole wage-earner for a two-person household (think single parent) working full-time at the current minimum wage, you are eligible for food stamps.
Raise the minimum wage so that single parent can earn enough to buy sufficient food, and you've eliminated the need for the program.
Raise the minimum wage so that single parent can earn enough to buy sufficient food, and you've eliminated the need for the program.
exactly where the money will come from to raise the minimum wage, a 20 dollar happy meal?
Since those costs are distributed over hundreds of meals sold, I shouldn't think they would need to raise prices that drastically. Heck, over the past year or so, prices at most of the places I eat lunch have gone up a good bit. I used to be able to get out of Subway, Atlanta Bread, or Panera for about $6-7dollars; now, I'm lucky if I can do it for under $9, and that's usually getting the cheapest sandwiches.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
