Discussions

Obama proposes world welfare program at US tax payers expense

+
0 Votes
Locked

Obama proposes world welfare program at US tax payers expense

jdclyde
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.
  • +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes

    Wow

    The Scummy One

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    The great majority of government workers are now covered by Social Security. This includes the military (since 1957), all federal workers hired after 1984 including Congress, and 75% of state and local workers. http://tinyurl.com/4st64y
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dr_Zinj

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    let the UN/Nato do that.

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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    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?.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    RFink

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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 **** 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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    viztor

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    mgordon

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    but you can buy the next best thing.

    BEER!!!!

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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


    B-)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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


    B-)

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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

    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

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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!!! ]:)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    if I was doing them from memory?

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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 ]:)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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).

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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...

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    going from between $350 and $450.

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

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jessie

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    mgordon

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    law_n_disorder

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    "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

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

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

    +
    0 Votes
    markthshark

    The American people really need to start looking at what's happening around the world with a radically different perspective. Unfortunately, thinking often cuts into leisure time in front of the **** tube.

    You're right, terrorism is caused by poverty and hopelessness. Obama seems to get that.

    I remember the first time I really began thinking about voting for him. In a speech, he said he wanted to end the war in Iraq, which was good, exactly what I wanted to hear. But he went further than that. He said that he not only wanted to end the war but also change the mindset in this country that led us into Iraq.

    Think about that for a moment...

    "... changing the mindset that took us into this needless, illegal and immoral war."

    I was stunned. I just turned 50 last month and that was the very first time I've ever heard such a statement from a U.S. politician. It's the very antitheses of the way U.S. foreign policy has been run for decades.

    Obama thinks outside the box. He's intellectually curious. He's pragmatic and he's a constitutional scholar -- attributes we sorely need in a leader right now.

    Thanks again.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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).

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

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

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

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

    Mission Accomplished.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    it does not actually state how much it will be, that is an estimate, and it does not say daily, weekly, yearly, etc.. But even yearly, if this and other programs were cut, and government spending was being reduced, then we could actually start paying off our debt.

    As for this program and others, how exactly does it stop terrorism? Aid to many countries goes directly to the controlling parties of the borders, and not to the populace that it was intended for. Take a look at Africa, generals/warlords that control regions also control farming and water. If they decide to starve people, they do.
    Many reports of farmers getting tortured and murdered because they try growing crops to feed themselves and neighbors.
    The UN has had many a food programs go to waste to feed warlords troops. The troops take the food IN FRONT OF the distributors who cannot get involved. All the while watching starving people again, get no food/water.

    Until we are able and willing to commit a global war to remove all hostiles from power, we should not intervene, and definitely, not provide aid at our expense. For all of our efforts, the monies that we spend rarely get to the intended targets in a significant amount to do any good. Instead it gets pilfered off all over the place and helps to pay for more terrorists

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    and that is where we need to re-examine the process. However there are many humanitarian efforts that go directly to the people and not through the foreign war leaders. A good example is some of the missions conducted by the military. In certain cases they deliver the materials and stay to insure the proper distribution, often times directly as they also provide medical attention.
    And please no N in Wilmot ;-)
    edited to fix a typo and add;
    That was my point on there meter, it has no meaning because there is no correlation to a time frame.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    Why aren't you up in arms about something that's going to cost us real money, like this one? http://tinyurl.com/6ntugw

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    where is your problem with the bill, and what should be done instead?

    I am not against protectionism for our own citizens over any other countries citizens.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    How do you feel about protectionism for businesses at the expense of our own citizens? This is the farm bill, after all.

    Let's start with Title I - Producer Income Protection Programs. http://tinyurl.com/5pujh8
    Wouldn't you like to be paid by the government for doing your job?

    Then there's Title IX - Energy. http://tinyurl.com/6p6jks
    Can you say Ethanol subsidies? I knew that you could.

    There's even a section that creates subsidies for organic crops! http://tinyurl.com/5smph7 What are these people smoking?

    If anything drives food costs up, this bill does, simply by setting minimum price levels regardless of market forces. And you have to ask why I'm against this.

    edit: added links

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    for more details of the bill. Can't comment about it if I don't know what it is about.

    Is this the same bill that Bush has already promised to veto? no, that is the mortgage scandal payoffs.

    My stand would be not to pick and choose which abuses and wastes of our money to oppose and stand against them all?

    Stop wasting money on 3rd world countries that hate us, and has the aid stolen by politicians anyways. Send them crates of condoms instead.

    Stop wasting money paying farmers to NOT grow crops.

    all of your links were dead, so not sure what information you were sharing.

    I don't see this as Democrat / Republican, but as right and wrong. Don't take money away from the people who earn it and waste it on people that didn't earn it. the old grasshopper and the ant story, let the grasshopper die, cold and alone.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    I didn't even notice that the Library of Congress "Thomas" site doesn't believe in permanent links. You'll have go in through this link, http://tinyurl.com/6ntugw, then click on Read the Bill to get there, or search on H.R.2419, the Food and Energy Security Act. I'm using the "Food and Energy Security Act of 2007 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.2419.EAS]" as my reference.

    Yes, this is one of the bills that GWB has promised to veto and I surely hop it stands. Title I - Producer Income Protection Programs - is the continuation of all farm subsidy programs through 2012. Title IX - Energy - contains the following clause:

    [pre] (b) Biomass Crop Transition Assistance-

    `(1) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM-
    The Secretary shall establish a program to provide transitional
    assistance, including planning grants, for the establishment
    and production of eligible crops to be used in the production
    of advanced biofuels, other biobased products, heat,
    or power from a biomass conversion facility.
    [/pre]

    What an absolute crock of ****! According to WashingtonWatch, this bill will cost a family of four $7,214.86 every year. The bill ought to be titled "The Stabilizing Agribusiness Through Increased Consumer Costs Act."

    edit: formatting

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    from the scam of global warming and refusal to use our own oil.

    This has "green" all over it.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    but I will let you know my opinion in a few hundred thousand years when everything has had a chance to cycle through a time or so, thus revealing any trends...

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    It really isn't inconceavable that we could end up in a major world war here, with Osama trying to create the Islam Super State, the need for oil, the need for food, and the need for water.

    I am more concerned that my boys can have a decent life as that is really in question RIGHT NOW. If they can't, it won't MATTER what happens thousands of years from now.

    WWIII would show you the real meaning of global warming.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    would have the effect of either
    1) enough successive blasts that our atmosphere is burnt away
    2) enough blasts that dust and particulate block the sun from penetrating enough and we loose most life on dry land to starvation over 4-12 years (nuclear winter).
    3)Mad Max and ThunderDome become our new world... ick.. leather chafes.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    Only if it's not properly cured.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Need to talk to the expert on wearing leather to get an answer to that.


    As for the type of war, even if it isn't nukes going off, the next one will really mess things up badly.

    side note, the Islamic Extremists are the most likely to use a nuke because they don't care about collateral damage and they get an orgy in heaven. We couldn't use one because the enemy hides in the middle of cities. Well, maybe to turn Iran into a sheet of glass, but that would be it.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    jdclyde:
    <i>This has "green" all over it.</i>
    <br><br>
    "Press Room" of Gordon Smith, Republican US Senator from Oregon
    http://gsmith.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=18d23d65-3ee3-4d18-b088-01ef61b55400&Month=5&Year=2008
    <br><br>
    <i>Smith Lauds Farm Bill: "Best Ever For Oregon"
    <br>...<br>
    This bill, supported by <strike>agriculture and nutrition</strike> special interest groups across Oregon and the nation, will <strike>support</strike> subsidize farmers and ranchers [even those with annual incomes up to $1.5 Million], encourage innovation in agriculture, and <strike>boost food assistance funding for Americans in need</strike> increase Food Stamp payments, allowing members of both corporate parties to pretend to represent the <strike>people</strike> Diebold machines who elected them.</i>

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    NY Times, July 18, 2001:

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE5D91F3BF93BA25754C0A9679C8B63

    The first paragraph says it all:

    "President Bush called today for a major change in the way rich nations help poorer countries, proposing that up to 50 percent of aid to those countries from the World Bank and similar institutions be given as direct grants rather than loans for needs like education and health."

    Obama must have learned from him lol

    I am amazed at what I learn by reading. I need to do more than read Ubuntu and WPF books lol

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

    This one will come about by itself.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    First question, what is the currency conversion?

    Second question, what is the local cost of living?

    A dollar means a lot more in Ohio than it does in California because of cost of living. The same is true in these countries. CLEARLY if people are living on less than a dollar a day, the cost of living is much less.

    So they haven't been corrupted by the consumerism that is destroying the world from the inside out. They don't buy $150 nike shoes, the better for them. They don't buy a latte for $3.50 a pop. So?

    It is funny how politicians care so much and are so generous, with OUR money, while they go back to THEIR mansions everynight.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    Translation: people starving to death and dying from disease and lack of medical care.

    Fighting poverty is in the best interest of the US.

    The CIA State Failure Task Force, 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 root.

    Look at Darfur, Nigeria, and those pesky pirates from Somalia who attack every ship that goes near that country.

    Look at countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and similar states.

    What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama? The Taliban emerged as Afghanistan failed as a state.

    Why is Afghanistan a failed state? It's mostly about poverty. Afghanistan is dirt poor, has little infrastucture, and little of anything resembling rule of law, jobs, etc.
    There are about 20 million unemployed people and little hope for the future.

    So along comes the Taliban. With their Opium profits, they can pay a salary and you get to carry a shiny new AK-47.

    Then along comes Osama, with his Arab oil money, and he's the Taliban's leader and paymaster....and we all know what happened next, no??

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

    Winning the hearts and minds of Afghanistan just means helping their farmers a bit. Maybe some wells, some medical care, and safety from the Taliban.

    Personally I'd pay for digging a couple of wells for farmers in Afghanistan over ground zero any day of the week.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Personally I'd pay for digging a couple of wells for farmers in Afghanistan over ground zero any day of the week.

    But I would not presume to make that choice for others.

    That's the difference between some of us and some of you... You want to FORCE us to spend our resources as YOU see fit. We want YOU to spend YOUR resources any way you like, and allow us to do the same.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    If the majority decides we get all lovey-dovey with Afghanistan, dig a bunch of wells, and set up medical clinics, then so be it.

    If we decide not to, that's fine too.

    I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. If the majority thinks it's a good idea, then we gotta do it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    was for people to have the abiltiy to vote away someone elses rights, as you are in favor of here.

    Because with welfare we have PAID low income people to over breed, now give them the abiltiy to vote away (steal) something that belongs to someone else.

    Maybe it will be your home taken from you for the next hotel? Seemed like a good idea at the time.....?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    deciding things which should be decided by the individual, whether I agree with the particular "thing" or not.

    If the majority thinks it's a good idea, then we gotta do it.

    The majority once thought it was a good idea to make black people drink from different water fountains... so forgive me if I don't have a lot of confidence in their ability to decide how I should use MY resources.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    so it HAD to have been a good idea...

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Is of a herd of stampeding cattle going over a cliff. I choose to stay away from herds for that reason.

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    better watch out for that horse head in the morning for that statement :^0 -- oops, wrong mob, sorry

    To re-do this -- So the sheeple following someone else is not always right?? Oh, the shock! :^0

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    What is the single category in which most of your tax money is wasted?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    You're obviously not qualified (according to them, of course) to try to answer it :)

    +
    0 Votes
    drowningnotwaving

    The US and many other large western govts have been doing this for centuries.

    The "why" usually comes down to money. Sometimes power and territory but those reasons usually find their way back to money.

    Why go against tradition???

    edit shpellink

    :)

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    I ask myself the same thing, every time I look at the amount deducted on a pay stub.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    > So along comes the Taliban. With their Opium profits, they can pay a salary and you get to carry a shiny new AK-47.

    The Taliban would execute you for growing opium because it violates muslim principles.

    > Why is Afghanistan a failed state? It's mostly about poverty. Afghanistan is dirt poor, has little infrastucture, and little of anything resembling rule of law, jobs, etc.
    There are about 20 million unemployed people and little hope for the future.

    Ever hear of the Soviet Afghanistan war.

    > What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama?

    See above comment.

    Rule of fallacy: if it contradicts itself, it is false. A rule about logic, it is not supported by facts.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    > What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama?

    See above comment.


    Not fair to say that the Soviet war was responsible instead of the US. It is much more important to blame us for "creating" osama than to take an honest look at actual facts. After all, it was the US policies that created terrorism, right? oh wait, facts don't support that either. damnitallanyways.....

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    The United States government trained and supplied Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban during the Soviet/Afghanistan war.

    So in this respect, yes, the US is at fault.

    How we forget fairly recent history.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Was it or was it NOT a valid reason for his training?

    Even the best of dogs can turn and bite the hand that feeds them, and needs to be put down.

    Osama is a dog that now needs to be put down. If only Clinton would have taken him out on the several chances he had.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    Good question. In light of the politics of the time - yes. In light of the fear driven presidential politics of now - no.

    Bin Ladin was trained as an insurgent gorilla to fight the soviet invasion force in Afghanistan by the United States government and worked closely with the CIA. This was after he earned his MBA from, I forget, either Harvard or Yale. He and his troops were supplied with American and other arms by the United States military and later refused to capitulate to the US politico's wishes(Hmmm, sounds like Castro, Noriega and Saddam Husein).

    While I have no proof that Bin Ladin ever engaged in what we term "terroristic" activities, I also have seen no direct proof that he was not. I personally believe that at some point, outside of the Soviet/Afghanistan war he has committed terroristic acts. The closest I have seen that he was involved with 9/11 was a video in which he was discussing how the towers collapsed compared with how he thought they would after that kind of impact and fire.

    If you corner and threaten a mouse, it will bite and defend itself. Humans are more aggressive than a mouse.

    I personally do think that the current presidentially instigated fad or fear of terrorism is a cover for detracting from the rights of Americans and cleaning up daddies black eye from Desert Storm.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/27/AR2007082701356.html

    "Seven years ago, the Taliban leader Mohammad Omar banned the cultivation of opium poppies -- but not their export -- on the grounds that growing them violated the principles of Islam. But the report says that Taliban leaders have reversed their position and are now using drug profits to buy weapons and logistical equipment and to pay the salaries of their militia."

    To clarify on the 'what bred the Taliban and Bin Ladin'

    You say the Soviet Afghanistan war bred the Taliban and Osama Bin Ladin....I disagree.

    Bin Ladin and the Taliban were our allies during the Soviet Afghan war.

    I mean what bred the Osama who is our mortal enemy -whose sole purpose in life is our doom...the Obama who did 9/11.

    His power, influence, and hatred for the US grew at the same time the power and influence of the Taliban grew (~1996).

    During the the Soviet Afghanistan war, Osama was, for all intents and purposes, an ally of the US through his ties with Maktab al-Khidamat. Osama was not an ememy of the US at that point.

    During the 1980s, the U.S. dumped over $3 billion into Afghanistan to fight a surrogate war with the Soviets.

    After the Soviets left, so did the American support, even humanitarian aid of any sort. Direct aid to the Taliban furthered the goals of building the Unocal pipeline in the 1990s, until things started blowing up in 1998 or so.

    All while the Taliban was basically being the taliban, killing civilians, and destroying 1500 year old Buddha statues...

    The point is that US policy decisons towards Afghanistan, led to a 'humanitarian catastrophe', and led to so the rise of the Taliban and Osama.

    The lack of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan most certainly fueled the rise of the Taliban, and gave a nice safe haven for Bin Ladin, and that's part of the reason they hate us so much.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    From the article you assert as the source of your facts:
    "Tuesday, August 28, 2007; Page A07

    UNITED NATIONS, Aug. 27 -- Opium production in Afghanistan has increased by 34 percent over the past year, and the country is now the source of 93 percent of the heroin, morphine and other opiates on the world market,..."

    Notice the date at the top. Is this before or after the Taliban was destroyed?

    "The surge in opium production has frustrated U.S. and NATO military commanders, who believe that the trade plays a major role in funding a Taliban insurgency..."

    Insurgency:
    "insurgency, insurgence
    1. the state or condition of being in revolt or insurrection.
    2. an uprising. ? insurgent, n., adj."
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/insurgency

    Place emphasis on uprising in this case because of usage in the article. The words are saying that the Taliban is making a new come back.

    Please also note the heavy use and emphasis of:"who believe", and "Commanders also believe".

    Now look at the final paragraph:
    "The Afghan situation looks grim, but it is not yet hopeless," the drug agency's executive director, Antonio Maria Costa, said in a prepared statement. He cited evidence that several provinces in central and northern Afghanistan have eradicated their opium fields. The northern Afghan province of Balkh has seen a decline in opium cultivation from 17,000 acres to zero. The report attributes the drop to economic incentives and security guarantees that "have led farmers to turn their back on opium."

    They eradicated their opium fields.

    Now ask: how much is truth, how much is spin, how much is speculation, and what is/where is the evidence they cite?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    They think they know better than everybody else what's good for everybody else.

    +
    0 Votes
    DadsPad

    here is a site where he is going to propose how his administation will be like.

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080515/D90M2VDO0.html

    " A "League of Democracies" has supplanted a failed United Nations to apply sanctions to the Sudanese government and halt genocide in Darfur."

    Is this not similar to Obama's proposal?

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    applying sanctions against a country that is abusing the citizens it nothing like sanctions against the US citizens for doing well.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    when they wanted to tax their endowment?

    "You'd be taxing success here,"

    http://tinyurl.com/58qmqh

    It's different when the liberal ox is being gored :)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Taxes are a fine for doing good
    Fines are a tax for doing bad

    +
    0 Votes

    LOL

    The Scummy One

    I wish I could pay taxes by using checkmarks next to what I am willing to help pay for! Maybe some of the useless programs would get cut due to people not putting into it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    let the people that care so much be generous with their OWN money for a change.

    bleeding heart doesn't HAVE to equal stupid, does it?

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    If we got to choose where our tax dollars went, person by person, then those forced programs may just go away, or the govt. would need to explain and request money for them better.

    This would go a long way into reducing unwanted spending, and would help those programs that people want!

    Vote with your wallet!! this would be a good term for use

    I would say, the tax laws should be changed, maybe a 8-10% tax accross the board, this would cover some required items such as military, base govt ops, infrastructure, etc.. Everything else would fall under other spending, and each person would choose where their money went.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    The DNR already does that with fishing and hunting, as well as boating and other forms of recreation. Want to go to a park, pay for the pass.

    Want to send money for a well in Afganistan? pay for the pass.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    remember...

    golf and scots whisky...are optional

    of course, so are my 7 computers at the house and my internet and my televisions.

    ya better get to work on the loophole!

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    is that those examples are NOT provide by the government, in any way, shape, or form.

    Those are activities that an individual participates, based on their own ability to aquire the proper funds.

    And because of they way they are run, they are ALREADY "pay to play". The only difference is a governmental org would be a not-for-profit, so it doesn't require that it is competative, so they don't try as hard and they waste more money. The reason most government run orgs are so horrible.

    This proposed medical that obama and clinton both would force down on us, they would be as poorly managed as medicade/medicare. Both are clear examples of people that care more than they think.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    Maybe in Michigan, but down here it works pretty darn good for my parents.

    As for that...you think blue cross is any better? or Aetna? private coverage is just as sucky.

    That's why i took a job paying 50% more and has less stress but has no health/dental insurance, and why I am gonna drop COBRA in july...it's a racket...i can bank $10k+ a year, and i have only been in a hospital 2 times in my life. So, I don't think I'll have an issue with my cash reserve building and having more time and a life to workout and be healthy.

    i just hope one day they nationalize medical care, and bankrupt health insurance corporations who have been draining americans for decades now.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    They both have said that you will be FORCED to pay for their system.

    Cost less than your COBRA, but non-optional either way.

    my work recently moved to the medical savings accounts, where HALF of what I was paying before goes directly into that, pretax. I can use that for medical bills, optical, dental, or even asprin and bandaids, all with pre-tax dollars, using half of what I was paying out before anyways.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    As for that...you think blue cross is any better? or Aetna? private coverage is just as sucky.

    and they think like one, with similar results.

    One medication my wife is on, for example, would cost me $165 copay for a three month supply if I got it through my employer's plan. K-mart has it for $15.00 for a three month supply! No fuss, no muss, no paperwork except for a script from a licensed physician.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    so long as it was like Australia's or other country's with social medicine.

    God knows...i'm paying $650+ a month right now for medical and dental...and a not much worse plan from the same insurance carrier is shown to me on their website for...$214.

    I'm getting ripped...and ya know what? I wouldn't mind paying our government $2500 a year more for unlimited health coverage. I'd give up my tax refund every year for that...and save myself about $5500 every year.

    Beware the pre-tax flex account...you don't spend it, you might lose it...and, it's not always just provide a receipt...

    I lost $318 in one 2 jobs ago...because, the original store receipt was not enough for a refund on items like an ace bandage, etc. What the **** was I supposed to give them? an affidavit?

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    Im glad it works well for you all. For most people it does. But when it goes south, it goes fast and hard, leaving many people totally at a loss, unable to pay for NEEDED prescriptions, bills, rent, etc.
    And a note: the number one source of fraude in medicare/medicaide is the local providers, the agency that disperses the money to all other agencies in the county, look it, each incident involves multi millions per year.
    The trickle down, effect of medicaid means that the local "hub" [many times this is the county health services] has no accountability to medicaid, while everyone needing to receive any funding is 100% accountable, with yearly audits and paper work that changes at least quarterly.
    A needed system? Yes. Well run? No. Its like a train, as long as its on the tracks, momentum will plow it through most obstacles [including getting your benefits back if for any reason, valid or not, they decide to revoke them. Lawyers specialize in these cases, thats how common they are. $30,000 back pay on benefits is not uncommon], but de-rail and its a major mess.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    Continue onto Raytheon, Kellogg/Brown/Root, Bechtel, Boeing, Lockheed/whatchamacallit and Blackwater.

    After you've eliminated all military spending passed by Congress but not requested by the Pentagon -- all of which, by definition is, wasteful -- only then you'll have some ground to whine about assistance to the poor. Until then, it's the military corporations which are the worst thieves of the taxpayers' earned wealth.

    +
    0 Votes
    DadsPad

    With a League of Democracies, instead of a UN, which we pay a large part for now, other contries might pull out and make the US still pay most of the cost. In the countries where sanctions would have to be made, the people are starving. When you save people you become responsible to help them. We helped Japan and Germany after we fought them in a war. Do you not think we would not pour money in feedig the world under this policy?

    I am if full agreement that you should clean up your own yard before helping the neigbors clean up theirs. But the US does not have a history of doing that. We would send money for disaster relief to 3rd world countries with New Orleans still a disaster needing help promised by the US government!

    Arrgh!!! edited so I could read it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    That whole region had been driven into the ground after more than 50 years of absolute Democrat rule, showing that when Democrats completely run a region, it will end up being the poorest in the nation.

    We ARE still supporting a lot of people from that. When does the free ride end? how about now?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    but use the currency that has tail fins and a warhead :)

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    And considering how long the Congress has been forcing higher budgets than it requests onto the Pentagon, and that the $50 Billion proposed aid to Africa in 2010 is a mere drop in the bucket next to annual United States military spending, I really have no problem with this. In fact, it is a much more efficient means of providing for the common defense and securing the general welfare, because it recognizes the pragmatic value of soft power in diplomacy.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    Why don't we take care of the poverty in our back yard first, then maybe worry about the rest of the world?

    We have some of the worst poverty in the world in our southern states - wait, this is the U.S. it can't happen here.

    Now seriously, why don't we take care of our own needs first, then, perhaps, think about the rest of the world?

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    If so, why?

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    We own no debt to any nation, but we have a large debt to "Our" people.

    If we fail to lift ourselves first, how can we lift others.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    Trade tariff symmetry would do more to solve both foreign and domestic poverty than any spending project, and that can be accomplished unilaterally: by sliding our tariffs to exactly equal whatever US-based companies are being charged, to do business ... wherever. I suppose that would inconvenience the ultra-wealthy, but there's fewer o' them than there is of us, so that's still much better than a zero-sum game. It's a major improvement, with only a minor cost, or a side benefit, depending whether you have any ultra-wealthy friends.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    We have some of the worst poverty in the world in our southern states - wait, this is the U.S. it can't happen here.

    The South may have some of the worst poverty in the United States, but it doesn't begin to come close to what I saw when I was in the military.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    the deep bayous in the south? Have you seen the swollen bellies from hunger? Have you seen infants dieing from hunger and disease?

    This happens right here in our own backyard. Because we are acclaimed to be the most prosperous nation in the world, it is overlooked. Everything you find in Ethiopia and Somalia you will find in our own south - and more.

    If you want to take it out of the south, have you ever heard of "Dogtown" in Los Angeles. If you have not, it was, when I lived in L.A. a small area just to the north and east of the University of Southern California. It is named so because the city dog pound is not far away. For the fortunate few a cardboard house was good luck. So that you know, skid row was about three miles away on Main street. Dogtown was so dangerous that the police refused to enter.

    Lets spread a little, have you ever been in the hobo camps? Ahh... railroad tramps who needs them?

    I stand by my statement, some of the worst poverty in the world. Take care of our own first!

    Who is taking care of us?

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    I'm not saying it's right that Americans live in poverty, but to try to compare pockets of poverty in America to the widespread abject poverty elsewhere strikes me as disingenuous.

    The statistics I'm finding indicate that about 13% of Americans live below the poverty line, with about 10 million people (only 3 in every 100,000 Americans) going hungry daily. Compare that to billions of people, about a billion of them children, in the rest of the world.

    Half these people are living on less than a dollar a day. Their children are dying before the age of 5, of malnutrition and disease, in annual numbers equal to the populations of larger US states. Their governments don't care about them and they don't have a local food kitchen or shelter. I don't see where it begins to compare.

    Links:
    http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty.html
    http://www.secondharvest.org/learn_about_hunger/fact_sheet/poverty_stats.html
    http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Facts.asp
    http://www.soundvision.com/Info/poor/statistics.asp

    Edit: to answer your emotional straw man:
    No I've not been in the bayous, but I've been in Kurdish and African refugee camps. Multiply your bayou child or two by dozens or hundreds to get an idea of the difference in scale.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    As you said, it is a matter of scale:
    "A little anecdotal nugget. In January 1996 the exchange rate was 3,000 Saddam dinars to US$1.00."
    http://old.krg.org/docs/articles/clarrysf-economic-problems-ik-june03.asp

    Wish I was poor because I could not live on $3000 per day.

    A few years ago, I did a research report on poverty in the U.S. for an English class. To be polite, it was difficult finding relevant research on U.S. poverty that was not politicized. One thing was certain in this though, that one thing is that the Web is the worlds biggest rumor mill. The information that you present from the census dept. is dated at best and downright wishful at worst (there are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics).

    I often use the Web to begin research, but I approach the data with cynicism and pessimism. After I have the basic data, I then begin looking in journals and other research papers. I always look for what the person is trying to spin and ask why.

    I think I answered your "Straw Man" argument. There is a huge difference between the refugee camp and the country.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    My father was in the USAF and was killed (car wreck) when I was six. My mother (and her four sons) moved back to upstate New York to be close to her family. Our only income was survivor's benefits; she never worked full time. Hand-me-down clothes was something everybody wore. TV? For 10 years, we had a 14" black & white that got 2-1/2 channels (ABC only came in good half the time). We ate casserole for dinner three or four nights a week, and a lot of leftovers. I only remember going out to eat once or twice. Don't remember eating steak at all until after my first summer helping with haying (everybody got paid with a half-cow, cut and wrapped.)

    We weren't rich by any stretch of the imagination, but I never thought we were poor. It wasn't until I was in my twenties that I realized I had grown up in "poverty."

    Poverty exists in the US. I know it does and those in deep rural areas usually have no way out without assistance. But it irritates the crap out of me to see a segment on poverty shot in an urban neighborhood, with a car (or two!) at the curb, and Dad holding a beer, puffing away on a cigarette. That's not poverty, that's poor spending.

    Aside: Most of the developing countries are primarily rural. The camps are the shining lights that obscure the background.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jaqui

    after all, once the US troops destroy everything, the US taxpayer pays to replace it all.

    so Bush implemented a world welfare program by declaring war on terrorism.
    [ an act of terrorism in and of itself ]

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    Oh and by the way - I saw Canadians there when I was there. So, your country is (or rather was before they ran away from their commitment) fighting the war on terror along side it's southern ally.

    +
    0 Votes
    JamesRL

    Canada was committed to Afghanistan since day one. In fact we even agreed to change our role from security in Kabul to leading the fight in the much less secure area around Khandahar.

    Canada, as a country, NEVER committed to support the US in Iraq. Before the invasion Canada did try to broker a deal that would see once last chance for Saddam to come clean (and a chance to have the whole UN come in) but both the US and France/Germany rejected it without any consideration. Canada at no time joined the coalition in Iraq.

    If you are trying to say Canada ran away, how about you PM me your address so I can give it to the buddies of some Canadian soldiers who have died in Afghanistan, I'm sure they'd love to convince you that they never ran away from anything. Of course you could apologise...

    If you saw Canadians in Iraq, you saw them there as people working for contractors or NGOs. There was some talk about asking Canadians to train the police (as they have done in Haiti and Afghanistan) but our government never accepted that role.


    James

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    I saw them, spoke with them, and interacted with them as part of the MULTI-NATIONAL FORCES in IRAQ. I wasn't hallucinating (while I was surprised to see them there) and their presence was slightly smaller than the contingency sent from MONGOLIA but they WERE there and DID participate in the "Coalition".

    Regardless of what you think you know or what you want to believe this is the truth. From what I remember the Canadians played a large role in training the newly hired civilian police officers who daily put their lives on the line (and often times lost them) in an effort to stabilize their own country.

    Iraq is the way it is because of external Islamic terrorists from Iran, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Persian Shiites from Iran are delivering ordinance to the Shiite Militia inside Iraq (operated by that murdering sycophant Muqtada El Sadr). Sunni factions are getting weapons and money from their Al Qaeda backers in Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. There is no vested interest for these countries (who are ruled by oligarchies and fiefdoms) to support a stable Iraq. They pay lip service to the west indicating they want their Muslim brothers to prosper in Iraq but silently plot to destabilize Iraq. Democracy is inherently liberal to the ideologies that the Muslim leaders espouse. It is contrary to their own best interests and so they will not stand by and watch as Iraq prospers under a democratic government. They need to show the Muslim world (the vast majority of which is illiterate) that democracy is a bad idea and that the average Muslim is better served by adhering to the fatwa?s of his Mullah.

    +
    0 Votes
    JamesRL

    Canada has never been part of the "Coalition of the willing" and no Canadian units have gone to Iraq to participate in war.

    Canada naval units did provide escort to the US fleet during the active period of invasion, since they were already in the area for the Afghanistan efforts to ensure arms didn't arrive in the gulf that were destined for the Taliban.

    I also understand that some CAF C130s made training runs in Iraq.

    When the peacekeepers were kidnapped a few years back some of our special forces (JTF2) came in for the raid on the compound where the kidnappers were.

    The RCMP (not a military unit) trained Iraqi cadets in Jordan (not in Iraq proper).

    Some Canadian officers participated in training command in Bagdhad - under NATO command.

    Of course, since you were there, you would be aware that at any given time, there are hundreds of exchange forces personnel between the US and Canada. And if and when the unit that the exchange soldiers are in goes to Iraq, then of course the Canadians on exchange go along. There were Canadians in the invasion, but they were attached to US units.

    If you wanna back up the claims, come up with a unit name.

    We did also contribute by increasing our contributions in Afganistan which allowed the US to reallocate units from there to Iraq.

    James

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    Iraq is the way it is because of external Islamic terrorists from Iran, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

    I haven't had such a good laugh in weeks.

    Iraq is the way it is today because the US invaded. All other "causes" are insignificant in the face of that one.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    You're absolutely right about the rest of that, though.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Establishing a tax and handing it over to the bastaards in the UN is NEVER a good idea or good policy.

  • +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes

    Wow

    The Scummy One

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    The great majority of government workers are now covered by Social Security. This includes the military (since 1957), all federal workers hired after 1984 including Congress, and 75% of state and local workers. http://tinyurl.com/4st64y
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dr_Zinj

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    let the UN/Nato do that.

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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    ProtiusX

    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?.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    RFink

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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 **** 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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    viztor

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    mgordon

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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?

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    but you can buy the next best thing.

    BEER!!!!

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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


    B-)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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


    B-)

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

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

    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

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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!!! ]:)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    if I was doing them from memory?

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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 ]:)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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).

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    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...

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    going from between $350 and $450.

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

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    Jessie

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    mgordon

    "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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    law_n_disorder

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    "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

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

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

    +
    0 Votes
    markthshark

    The American people really need to start looking at what's happening around the world with a radically different perspective. Unfortunately, thinking often cuts into leisure time in front of the **** tube.

    You're right, terrorism is caused by poverty and hopelessness. Obama seems to get that.

    I remember the first time I really began thinking about voting for him. In a speech, he said he wanted to end the war in Iraq, which was good, exactly what I wanted to hear. But he went further than that. He said that he not only wanted to end the war but also change the mindset in this country that led us into Iraq.

    Think about that for a moment...

    "... changing the mindset that took us into this needless, illegal and immoral war."

    I was stunned. I just turned 50 last month and that was the very first time I've ever heard such a statement from a U.S. politician. It's the very antitheses of the way U.S. foreign policy has been run for decades.

    Obama thinks outside the box. He's intellectually curious. He's pragmatic and he's a constitutional scholar -- attributes we sorely need in a leader right now.

    Thanks again.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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).

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

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

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

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

    Mission Accomplished.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    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.

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    it does not actually state how much it will be, that is an estimate, and it does not say daily, weekly, yearly, etc.. But even yearly, if this and other programs were cut, and government spending was being reduced, then we could actually start paying off our debt.

    As for this program and others, how exactly does it stop terrorism? Aid to many countries goes directly to the controlling parties of the borders, and not to the populace that it was intended for. Take a look at Africa, generals/warlords that control regions also control farming and water. If they decide to starve people, they do.
    Many reports of farmers getting tortured and murdered because they try growing crops to feed themselves and neighbors.
    The UN has had many a food programs go to waste to feed warlords troops. The troops take the food IN FRONT OF the distributors who cannot get involved. All the while watching starving people again, get no food/water.

    Until we are able and willing to commit a global war to remove all hostiles from power, we should not intervene, and definitely, not provide aid at our expense. For all of our efforts, the monies that we spend rarely get to the intended targets in a significant amount to do any good. Instead it gets pilfered off all over the place and helps to pay for more terrorists

    +
    0 Votes
    IC-IT

    and that is where we need to re-examine the process. However there are many humanitarian efforts that go directly to the people and not through the foreign war leaders. A good example is some of the missions conducted by the military. In certain cases they deliver the materials and stay to insure the proper distribution, often times directly as they also provide medical attention.
    And please no N in Wilmot ;-)
    edited to fix a typo and add;
    That was my point on there meter, it has no meaning because there is no correlation to a time frame.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    Why aren't you up in arms about something that's going to cost us real money, like this one? http://tinyurl.com/6ntugw

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    where is your problem with the bill, and what should be done instead?

    I am not against protectionism for our own citizens over any other countries citizens.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    How do you feel about protectionism for businesses at the expense of our own citizens? This is the farm bill, after all.

    Let's start with Title I - Producer Income Protection Programs. http://tinyurl.com/5pujh8
    Wouldn't you like to be paid by the government for doing your job?

    Then there's Title IX - Energy. http://tinyurl.com/6p6jks
    Can you say Ethanol subsidies? I knew that you could.

    There's even a section that creates subsidies for organic crops! http://tinyurl.com/5smph7 What are these people smoking?

    If anything drives food costs up, this bill does, simply by setting minimum price levels regardless of market forces. And you have to ask why I'm against this.

    edit: added links

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    for more details of the bill. Can't comment about it if I don't know what it is about.

    Is this the same bill that Bush has already promised to veto? no, that is the mortgage scandal payoffs.

    My stand would be not to pick and choose which abuses and wastes of our money to oppose and stand against them all?

    Stop wasting money on 3rd world countries that hate us, and has the aid stolen by politicians anyways. Send them crates of condoms instead.

    Stop wasting money paying farmers to NOT grow crops.

    all of your links were dead, so not sure what information you were sharing.

    I don't see this as Democrat / Republican, but as right and wrong. Don't take money away from the people who earn it and waste it on people that didn't earn it. the old grasshopper and the ant story, let the grasshopper die, cold and alone.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    I didn't even notice that the Library of Congress "Thomas" site doesn't believe in permanent links. You'll have go in through this link, http://tinyurl.com/6ntugw, then click on Read the Bill to get there, or search on H.R.2419, the Food and Energy Security Act. I'm using the "Food and Energy Security Act of 2007 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.2419.EAS]" as my reference.

    Yes, this is one of the bills that GWB has promised to veto and I surely hop it stands. Title I - Producer Income Protection Programs - is the continuation of all farm subsidy programs through 2012. Title IX - Energy - contains the following clause:

    [pre] (b) Biomass Crop Transition Assistance-

    `(1) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM-
    The Secretary shall establish a program to provide transitional
    assistance, including planning grants, for the establishment
    and production of eligible crops to be used in the production
    of advanced biofuels, other biobased products, heat,
    or power from a biomass conversion facility.
    [/pre]

    What an absolute crock of ****! According to WashingtonWatch, this bill will cost a family of four $7,214.86 every year. The bill ought to be titled "The Stabilizing Agribusiness Through Increased Consumer Costs Act."

    edit: formatting

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    from the scam of global warming and refusal to use our own oil.

    This has "green" all over it.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    but I will let you know my opinion in a few hundred thousand years when everything has had a chance to cycle through a time or so, thus revealing any trends...

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    It really isn't inconceavable that we could end up in a major world war here, with Osama trying to create the Islam Super State, the need for oil, the need for food, and the need for water.

    I am more concerned that my boys can have a decent life as that is really in question RIGHT NOW. If they can't, it won't MATTER what happens thousands of years from now.

    WWIII would show you the real meaning of global warming.

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    would have the effect of either
    1) enough successive blasts that our atmosphere is burnt away
    2) enough blasts that dust and particulate block the sun from penetrating enough and we loose most life on dry land to starvation over 4-12 years (nuclear winter).
    3)Mad Max and ThunderDome become our new world... ick.. leather chafes.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    Only if it's not properly cured.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Need to talk to the expert on wearing leather to get an answer to that.


    As for the type of war, even if it isn't nukes going off, the next one will really mess things up badly.

    side note, the Islamic Extremists are the most likely to use a nuke because they don't care about collateral damage and they get an orgy in heaven. We couldn't use one because the enemy hides in the middle of cities. Well, maybe to turn Iran into a sheet of glass, but that would be it.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    jdclyde:
    <i>This has "green" all over it.</i>
    <br><br>
    "Press Room" of Gordon Smith, Republican US Senator from Oregon
    http://gsmith.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=18d23d65-3ee3-4d18-b088-01ef61b55400&Month=5&Year=2008
    <br><br>
    <i>Smith Lauds Farm Bill: "Best Ever For Oregon"
    <br>...<br>
    This bill, supported by <strike>agriculture and nutrition</strike> special interest groups across Oregon and the nation, will <strike>support</strike> subsidize farmers and ranchers [even those with annual incomes up to $1.5 Million], encourage innovation in agriculture, and <strike>boost food assistance funding for Americans in need</strike> increase Food Stamp payments, allowing members of both corporate parties to pretend to represent the <strike>people</strike> Diebold machines who elected them.</i>

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    NY Times, July 18, 2001:

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE5D91F3BF93BA25754C0A9679C8B63

    The first paragraph says it all:

    "President Bush called today for a major change in the way rich nations help poorer countries, proposing that up to 50 percent of aid to those countries from the World Bank and similar institutions be given as direct grants rather than loans for needs like education and health."

    Obama must have learned from him lol

    I am amazed at what I learn by reading. I need to do more than read Ubuntu and WPF books lol

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

    This one will come about by itself.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    First question, what is the currency conversion?

    Second question, what is the local cost of living?

    A dollar means a lot more in Ohio than it does in California because of cost of living. The same is true in these countries. CLEARLY if people are living on less than a dollar a day, the cost of living is much less.

    So they haven't been corrupted by the consumerism that is destroying the world from the inside out. They don't buy $150 nike shoes, the better for them. They don't buy a latte for $3.50 a pop. So?

    It is funny how politicians care so much and are so generous, with OUR money, while they go back to THEIR mansions everynight.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    Translation: people starving to death and dying from disease and lack of medical care.

    Fighting poverty is in the best interest of the US.

    The CIA State Failure Task Force, 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 root.

    Look at Darfur, Nigeria, and those pesky pirates from Somalia who attack every ship that goes near that country.

    Look at countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and similar states.

    What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama? The Taliban emerged as Afghanistan failed as a state.

    Why is Afghanistan a failed state? It's mostly about poverty. Afghanistan is dirt poor, has little infrastucture, and little of anything resembling rule of law, jobs, etc.
    There are about 20 million unemployed people and little hope for the future.

    So along comes the Taliban. With their Opium profits, they can pay a salary and you get to carry a shiny new AK-47.

    Then along comes Osama, with his Arab oil money, and he's the Taliban's leader and paymaster....and we all know what happened next, no??

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

    Winning the hearts and minds of Afghanistan just means helping their farmers a bit. Maybe some wells, some medical care, and safety from the Taliban.

    Personally I'd pay for digging a couple of wells for farmers in Afghanistan over ground zero any day of the week.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Personally I'd pay for digging a couple of wells for farmers in Afghanistan over ground zero any day of the week.

    But I would not presume to make that choice for others.

    That's the difference between some of us and some of you... You want to FORCE us to spend our resources as YOU see fit. We want YOU to spend YOUR resources any way you like, and allow us to do the same.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    If the majority decides we get all lovey-dovey with Afghanistan, dig a bunch of wells, and set up medical clinics, then so be it.

    If we decide not to, that's fine too.

    I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. If the majority thinks it's a good idea, then we gotta do it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    was for people to have the abiltiy to vote away someone elses rights, as you are in favor of here.

    Because with welfare we have PAID low income people to over breed, now give them the abiltiy to vote away (steal) something that belongs to someone else.

    Maybe it will be your home taken from you for the next hotel? Seemed like a good idea at the time.....?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    deciding things which should be decided by the individual, whether I agree with the particular "thing" or not.

    If the majority thinks it's a good idea, then we gotta do it.

    The majority once thought it was a good idea to make black people drink from different water fountains... so forgive me if I don't have a lot of confidence in their ability to decide how I should use MY resources.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    so it HAD to have been a good idea...

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    Is of a herd of stampeding cattle going over a cliff. I choose to stay away from herds for that reason.

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    better watch out for that horse head in the morning for that statement :^0 -- oops, wrong mob, sorry

    To re-do this -- So the sheeple following someone else is not always right?? Oh, the shock! :^0

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    What is the single category in which most of your tax money is wasted?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    You're obviously not qualified (according to them, of course) to try to answer it :)

    +
    0 Votes
    drowningnotwaving

    The US and many other large western govts have been doing this for centuries.

    The "why" usually comes down to money. Sometimes power and territory but those reasons usually find their way back to money.

    Why go against tradition???

    edit shpellink

    :)

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    I ask myself the same thing, every time I look at the amount deducted on a pay stub.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    > So along comes the Taliban. With their Opium profits, they can pay a salary and you get to carry a shiny new AK-47.

    The Taliban would execute you for growing opium because it violates muslim principles.

    > Why is Afghanistan a failed state? It's mostly about poverty. Afghanistan is dirt poor, has little infrastucture, and little of anything resembling rule of law, jobs, etc.
    There are about 20 million unemployed people and little hope for the future.

    Ever hear of the Soviet Afghanistan war.

    > What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama?

    See above comment.

    Rule of fallacy: if it contradicts itself, it is false. A rule about logic, it is not supported by facts.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    > What bred the Taliban and our good friend Osama?

    See above comment.


    Not fair to say that the Soviet war was responsible instead of the US. It is much more important to blame us for "creating" osama than to take an honest look at actual facts. After all, it was the US policies that created terrorism, right? oh wait, facts don't support that either. damnitallanyways.....

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    The United States government trained and supplied Osama Bin Ladin and the Taliban during the Soviet/Afghanistan war.

    So in this respect, yes, the US is at fault.

    How we forget fairly recent history.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Was it or was it NOT a valid reason for his training?

    Even the best of dogs can turn and bite the hand that feeds them, and needs to be put down.

    Osama is a dog that now needs to be put down. If only Clinton would have taken him out on the several chances he had.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    Good question. In light of the politics of the time - yes. In light of the fear driven presidential politics of now - no.

    Bin Ladin was trained as an insurgent gorilla to fight the soviet invasion force in Afghanistan by the United States government and worked closely with the CIA. This was after he earned his MBA from, I forget, either Harvard or Yale. He and his troops were supplied with American and other arms by the United States military and later refused to capitulate to the US politico's wishes(Hmmm, sounds like Castro, Noriega and Saddam Husein).

    While I have no proof that Bin Ladin ever engaged in what we term "terroristic" activities, I also have seen no direct proof that he was not. I personally believe that at some point, outside of the Soviet/Afghanistan war he has committed terroristic acts. The closest I have seen that he was involved with 9/11 was a video in which he was discussing how the towers collapsed compared with how he thought they would after that kind of impact and fire.

    If you corner and threaten a mouse, it will bite and defend itself. Humans are more aggressive than a mouse.

    I personally do think that the current presidentially instigated fad or fear of terrorism is a cover for detracting from the rights of Americans and cleaning up daddies black eye from Desert Storm.

    +
    0 Votes
    robo_dev

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/27/AR2007082701356.html

    "Seven years ago, the Taliban leader Mohammad Omar banned the cultivation of opium poppies -- but not their export -- on the grounds that growing them violated the principles of Islam. But the report says that Taliban leaders have reversed their position and are now using drug profits to buy weapons and logistical equipment and to pay the salaries of their militia."

    To clarify on the 'what bred the Taliban and Bin Ladin'

    You say the Soviet Afghanistan war bred the Taliban and Osama Bin Ladin....I disagree.

    Bin Ladin and the Taliban were our allies during the Soviet Afghan war.

    I mean what bred the Osama who is our mortal enemy -whose sole purpose in life is our doom...the Obama who did 9/11.

    His power, influence, and hatred for the US grew at the same time the power and influence of the Taliban grew (~1996).

    During the the Soviet Afghanistan war, Osama was, for all intents and purposes, an ally of the US through his ties with Maktab al-Khidamat. Osama was not an ememy of the US at that point.

    During the 1980s, the U.S. dumped over $3 billion into Afghanistan to fight a surrogate war with the Soviets.

    After the Soviets left, so did the American support, even humanitarian aid of any sort. Direct aid to the Taliban furthered the goals of building the Unocal pipeline in the 1990s, until things started blowing up in 1998 or so.

    All while the Taliban was basically being the taliban, killing civilians, and destroying 1500 year old Buddha statues...

    The point is that US policy decisons towards Afghanistan, led to a 'humanitarian catastrophe', and led to so the rise of the Taliban and Osama.

    The lack of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan most certainly fueled the rise of the Taliban, and gave a nice safe haven for Bin Ladin, and that's part of the reason they hate us so much.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    From the article you assert as the source of your facts:
    "Tuesday, August 28, 2007; Page A07

    UNITED NATIONS, Aug. 27 -- Opium production in Afghanistan has increased by 34 percent over the past year, and the country is now the source of 93 percent of the heroin, morphine and other opiates on the world market,..."

    Notice the date at the top. Is this before or after the Taliban was destroyed?

    "The surge in opium production has frustrated U.S. and NATO military commanders, who believe that the trade plays a major role in funding a Taliban insurgency..."

    Insurgency:
    "insurgency, insurgence
    1. the state or condition of being in revolt or insurrection.
    2. an uprising. ? insurgent, n., adj."
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/insurgency

    Place emphasis on uprising in this case because of usage in the article. The words are saying that the Taliban is making a new come back.

    Please also note the heavy use and emphasis of:"who believe", and "Commanders also believe".

    Now look at the final paragraph:
    "The Afghan situation looks grim, but it is not yet hopeless," the drug agency's executive director, Antonio Maria Costa, said in a prepared statement. He cited evidence that several provinces in central and northern Afghanistan have eradicated their opium fields. The northern Afghan province of Balkh has seen a decline in opium cultivation from 17,000 acres to zero. The report attributes the drop to economic incentives and security guarantees that "have led farmers to turn their back on opium."

    They eradicated their opium fields.

    Now ask: how much is truth, how much is spin, how much is speculation, and what is/where is the evidence they cite?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    They think they know better than everybody else what's good for everybody else.

    +
    0 Votes
    DadsPad

    here is a site where he is going to propose how his administation will be like.

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080515/D90M2VDO0.html

    " A "League of Democracies" has supplanted a failed United Nations to apply sanctions to the Sudanese government and halt genocide in Darfur."

    Is this not similar to Obama's proposal?

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    applying sanctions against a country that is abusing the citizens it nothing like sanctions against the US citizens for doing well.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    when they wanted to tax their endowment?

    "You'd be taxing success here,"

    http://tinyurl.com/58qmqh

    It's different when the liberal ox is being gored :)

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    Taxes are a fine for doing good
    Fines are a tax for doing bad

    +
    0 Votes

    LOL

    The Scummy One

    I wish I could pay taxes by using checkmarks next to what I am willing to help pay for! Maybe some of the useless programs would get cut due to people not putting into it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    let the people that care so much be generous with their OWN money for a change.

    bleeding heart doesn't HAVE to equal stupid, does it?

    +
    0 Votes
    The Scummy One

    If we got to choose where our tax dollars went, person by person, then those forced programs may just go away, or the govt. would need to explain and request money for them better.

    This would go a long way into reducing unwanted spending, and would help those programs that people want!

    Vote with your wallet!! this would be a good term for use

    I would say, the tax laws should be changed, maybe a 8-10% tax accross the board, this would cover some required items such as military, base govt ops, infrastructure, etc.. Everything else would fall under other spending, and each person would choose where their money went.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    The DNR already does that with fishing and hunting, as well as boating and other forms of recreation. Want to go to a park, pay for the pass.

    Want to send money for a well in Afganistan? pay for the pass.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    remember...

    golf and scots whisky...are optional

    of course, so are my 7 computers at the house and my internet and my televisions.

    ya better get to work on the loophole!

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    is that those examples are NOT provide by the government, in any way, shape, or form.

    Those are activities that an individual participates, based on their own ability to aquire the proper funds.

    And because of they way they are run, they are ALREADY "pay to play". The only difference is a governmental org would be a not-for-profit, so it doesn't require that it is competative, so they don't try as hard and they waste more money. The reason most government run orgs are so horrible.

    This proposed medical that obama and clinton both would force down on us, they would be as poorly managed as medicade/medicare. Both are clear examples of people that care more than they think.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    Maybe in Michigan, but down here it works pretty darn good for my parents.

    As for that...you think blue cross is any better? or Aetna? private coverage is just as sucky.

    That's why i took a job paying 50% more and has less stress but has no health/dental insurance, and why I am gonna drop COBRA in july...it's a racket...i can bank $10k+ a year, and i have only been in a hospital 2 times in my life. So, I don't think I'll have an issue with my cash reserve building and having more time and a life to workout and be healthy.

    i just hope one day they nationalize medical care, and bankrupt health insurance corporations who have been draining americans for decades now.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    They both have said that you will be FORCED to pay for their system.

    Cost less than your COBRA, but non-optional either way.

    my work recently moved to the medical savings accounts, where HALF of what I was paying before goes directly into that, pretax. I can use that for medical bills, optical, dental, or even asprin and bandaids, all with pre-tax dollars, using half of what I was paying out before anyways.

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    As for that...you think blue cross is any better? or Aetna? private coverage is just as sucky.

    and they think like one, with similar results.

    One medication my wife is on, for example, would cost me $165 copay for a three month supply if I got it through my employer's plan. K-mart has it for $15.00 for a three month supply! No fuss, no muss, no paperwork except for a script from a licensed physician.

    +
    0 Votes
    jck

    so long as it was like Australia's or other country's with social medicine.

    God knows...i'm paying $650+ a month right now for medical and dental...and a not much worse plan from the same insurance carrier is shown to me on their website for...$214.

    I'm getting ripped...and ya know what? I wouldn't mind paying our government $2500 a year more for unlimited health coverage. I'd give up my tax refund every year for that...and save myself about $5500 every year.

    Beware the pre-tax flex account...you don't spend it, you might lose it...and, it's not always just provide a receipt...

    I lost $318 in one 2 jobs ago...because, the original store receipt was not enough for a refund on items like an ace bandage, etc. What the **** was I supposed to give them? an affidavit?

    +
    0 Votes
    Dumphrey

    Im glad it works well for you all. For most people it does. But when it goes south, it goes fast and hard, leaving many people totally at a loss, unable to pay for NEEDED prescriptions, bills, rent, etc.
    And a note: the number one source of fraude in medicare/medicaide is the local providers, the agency that disperses the money to all other agencies in the county, look it, each incident involves multi millions per year.
    The trickle down, effect of medicaid means that the local "hub" [many times this is the county health services] has no accountability to medicaid, while everyone needing to receive any funding is 100% accountable, with yearly audits and paper work that changes at least quarterly.
    A needed system? Yes. Well run? No. Its like a train, as long as its on the tracks, momentum will plow it through most obstacles [including getting your benefits back if for any reason, valid or not, they decide to revoke them. Lawyers specialize in these cases, thats how common they are. $30,000 back pay on benefits is not uncommon], but de-rail and its a major mess.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    Continue onto Raytheon, Kellogg/Brown/Root, Bechtel, Boeing, Lockheed/whatchamacallit and Blackwater.

    After you've eliminated all military spending passed by Congress but not requested by the Pentagon -- all of which, by definition is, wasteful -- only then you'll have some ground to whine about assistance to the poor. Until then, it's the military corporations which are the worst thieves of the taxpayers' earned wealth.

    +
    0 Votes
    DadsPad

    With a League of Democracies, instead of a UN, which we pay a large part for now, other contries might pull out and make the US still pay most of the cost. In the countries where sanctions would have to be made, the people are starving. When you save people you become responsible to help them. We helped Japan and Germany after we fought them in a war. Do you not think we would not pour money in feedig the world under this policy?

    I am if full agreement that you should clean up your own yard before helping the neigbors clean up theirs. But the US does not have a history of doing that. We would send money for disaster relief to 3rd world countries with New Orleans still a disaster needing help promised by the US government!

    Arrgh!!! edited so I could read it.

    +
    0 Votes
    jdclyde

    That whole region had been driven into the ground after more than 50 years of absolute Democrat rule, showing that when Democrats completely run a region, it will end up being the poorest in the nation.

    We ARE still supporting a lot of people from that. When does the free ride end? how about now?

    +
    0 Votes
    TonytheTiger

    but use the currency that has tail fins and a warhead :)

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    And considering how long the Congress has been forcing higher budgets than it requests onto the Pentagon, and that the $50 Billion proposed aid to Africa in 2010 is a mere drop in the bucket next to annual United States military spending, I really have no problem with this. In fact, it is a much more efficient means of providing for the common defense and securing the general welfare, because it recognizes the pragmatic value of soft power in diplomacy.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    Why don't we take care of the poverty in our back yard first, then maybe worry about the rest of the world?

    We have some of the worst poverty in the world in our southern states - wait, this is the U.S. it can't happen here.

    Now seriously, why don't we take care of our own needs first, then, perhaps, think about the rest of the world?

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    If so, why?

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    We own no debt to any nation, but we have a large debt to "Our" people.

    If we fail to lift ourselves first, how can we lift others.

    +
    0 Votes
    $$$$$$$$$$

    Trade tariff symmetry would do more to solve both foreign and domestic poverty than any spending project, and that can be accomplished unilaterally: by sliding our tariffs to exactly equal whatever US-based companies are being charged, to do business ... wherever. I suppose that would inconvenience the ultra-wealthy, but there's fewer o' them than there is of us, so that's still much better than a zero-sum game. It's a major improvement, with only a minor cost, or a side benefit, depending whether you have any ultra-wealthy friends.

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    We have some of the worst poverty in the world in our southern states - wait, this is the U.S. it can't happen here.

    The South may have some of the worst poverty in the United States, but it doesn't begin to come close to what I saw when I was in the military.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    the deep bayous in the south? Have you seen the swollen bellies from hunger? Have you seen infants dieing from hunger and disease?

    This happens right here in our own backyard. Because we are acclaimed to be the most prosperous nation in the world, it is overlooked. Everything you find in Ethiopia and Somalia you will find in our own south - and more.

    If you want to take it out of the south, have you ever heard of "Dogtown" in Los Angeles. If you have not, it was, when I lived in L.A. a small area just to the north and east of the University of Southern California. It is named so because the city dog pound is not far away. For the fortunate few a cardboard house was good luck. So that you know, skid row was about three miles away on Main street. Dogtown was so dangerous that the police refused to enter.

    Lets spread a little, have you ever been in the hobo camps? Ahh... railroad tramps who needs them?

    I stand by my statement, some of the worst poverty in the world. Take care of our own first!

    Who is taking care of us?

    +
    0 Votes
    NickNielsen Moderator

    I'm not saying it's right that Americans live in poverty, but to try to compare pockets of poverty in America to the widespread abject poverty elsewhere strikes me as disingenuous.

    The statistics I'm finding indicate that about 13% of Americans live below the poverty line, with about 10 million people (only 3 in every 100,000 Americans) going hungry daily. Compare that to billions of people, about a billion of them children, in the rest of the world.

    Half these people are living on less than a dollar a day. Their children are dying before the age of 5, of malnutrition and disease, in annual numbers equal to the populations of larger US states. Their governments don't care about them and they don't have a local food kitchen or shelter. I don't see where it begins to compare.

    Links:
    http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty.html
    http://www.secondharvest.org/learn_about_hunger/fact_sheet/poverty_stats.html
    http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Facts.asp
    http://www.soundvision.com/Info/poor/statistics.asp

    Edit: to answer your emotional straw man:
    No I've not been in the bayous, but I've been in Kurdish and African refugee camps. Multiply your bayou child or two by dozens or hundreds to get an idea of the difference in scale.

    +
    0 Votes
    normhaga

    As you said, it is a matter of scale:
    "A little anecdotal nugget. In January 1996 the exchange rate was 3,000 Saddam dinars to US$1.00."
    http://old.krg.org/docs/articles/clarrysf-economic-problems-ik-june03.asp

    Wish I was poor because I could not live on $3000 per day.

    A few years ago, I did a research report on poverty in the U.S. for an English class. To be polite, it was difficult finding relevant research on U.S. poverty that was not politicized. One thing was certain in this though, that one thing is that the Web is the worlds biggest rumor mill. The information that you present from the census dept. is dated at best and downright wishful at worst (there are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics).

    I often use the Web to begin research, but I approach the data with cynicism and pessimism. After I have the basic data, I then begin looking in journals and other research papers. I always look for what the person is trying to spin and ask why.

    I think I answered your "Straw Man" argument. There is a huge difference between the refugee camp and the country.