|
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:15:26 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:21:48 -0500, John H wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:59:25 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:45:06 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:21:09 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:43:26 -0800, wrote: The problem with defense cuts is most if that budget is a jobs program, building hardware we don't need and the Pentagon doesn't want. I would bring the troops home tho. Why prop up the economy of other countries when we have as much trouble as we have. We do have the precedent of having the military working on infrastructure here with the Army Corps of Engineers. Maybe we should declare war on bad bridges and roads here with a CCC type service. The unions would never tolerate it. So, it should all be done without union workers? Doesn't sound like much of a jobs effort to me. I was thinking more about what you can do with a half million military people if we stop the wars and pull back all the people we have scattered around the world in places where we won the war a half century ago. So, you want to use the military to do the same jobs as regular citizens for 1/10th the pay? I'm sure that would do a lot for the economy. "1/10th"? Why do you think military people are so poorly paid? Your typical GI is making over $20k by the end of his first hitch and if he really moves up through the ranks it could be $27k or more. They also have most of their living expenses paid by Uncle Sam. It may not be as much as an attorney makes but once you factor in room and board, it is certainly competitive with a basic construction worker who may only be making $14 an hour ... when he can find work. $27K... wow, that's over the poverty line for sure. And, they get to get shot at from time to time. So, you'd prefer to throw the basic construction worker out of a job to save some money? Even that doesn't compute. As usual you totally miss the point. I am talking about creating enough new infrastructure construction to put all of them to work. I am also talking about bringing these guys home so they won't get shot at. I'm not missing the point at all. How do you intend to create the infrastructure without government funding? You say you didn't miss the point then you go off in the wrong direction Co back up to the top if this snip. the whole thing is about REDIRECTING the DoD budget I don't think many are shot at in Germany and Japan, but I think it's probably time to start moving them home. It can't all be done in a moment. This won't have much of an effect either way, since it needs to be a relatively slow process. Why? What are they protecting? The Soviets are gone. Besides, it doesn't have to be a relatively slow process. We damn sure moved out a corps and a half to Kuwait in very little time. I know, I was there. I think he's a liar, so why would I believe this? Perhaps he's got some pictures of himself standing next to a burning oil well... I doubt it. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 00:00:34 -0500, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:47:52 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:25:27 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:49:14 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:55:02 -0500, wrote: On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:18:40 -0800, wrote: On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:57:46 -0500, wrote: The fact still remains close to half of the households pay no income tax at all. You keep saying that as though it has some great weight in your argument. There's a significant portion of the population that doesn't pay income tax because they ARE POOR. Only in America can we call someone making $45,000 a year "poor". What do you think the tax burden is on someone making that kind of money in one of the socialist countries? Those "socialist" countries give a lot to people who pay those higher percentage taxes. Thus the income side of the equation isn't as important. Of course, you don't want social services for anyone who "can't afford it". You're contradicting yourself. I guarantee you, if you take one of those people who are not paying any income tax now and show them what their Canadian tax bill would be (the templates are on the web if you want to try it) those people would rather keep their extra $15-20,000 and buy insurance on the open market. Kids being who they are, they would probably buy a car and just hope they never have to go to the doctor tho. You'd be wrong. Canadians actually get something for their money.. sorry if you don't like that. I'm sure a kid probably would, and then when he gets in a wreck, he should just "pay" for the medical help out of his own pocket, of course he wouldn't have any money by then, but you don't care about that. If he "gets in a wreck" there is car insurance to cover medical expenses. Again you are drifting. How is he supposed to afford the insurance if he spends the money on the car? Keep trying to put me down by claiming a bunch of nonsense. It's not helping your cause. Which state lets you drive without insurance? It sure isn't the ones we live in. You believe you have to have car insurance in order to buy a car? Do you think some kid is going to rush right out and buy that expensive insurance? |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:03:36 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:31:08 -0500, Ziggy® wrote: wrote in message . .. On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:47:52 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:25:27 -0500, wrote: I'm sure a kid probably would, and then when he gets in a wreck, he should just "pay" for the medical help out of his own pocket, of course he wouldn't have any money by then, but you don't care about that. If he "gets in a wreck" there is car insurance to cover medical expenses. Again you are drifting. How is he supposed to afford the insurance if he spends the money on the car? Keep trying to put me down by claiming a bunch of nonsense. It's not helping your cause. Which state lets you drive without insurance? It sure isn't the ones we live in. I'll bet there are a lot of uninsured Mexicans driving their wrecks in Florida, Texas, Arizona, And The People's Republic of Kalifonia. Can't get rid of em either. Washington will come down hard on anyone who tries. That is really getting a lot harder to do here. The cops have lap tops in their cars, insurance coverage is available in real time and that is probable cause for a stop, a ticket and that immigration check everyone on the left is so ****ed about. Driving a junker without insurance is the express lane to Krome Avenue (the ICE detention center) I'm just wondering... if an illegal and perhaps illiterate (in English) Mexican can buy a car and not have insurance, why would it be difficult for a presumably English speaking/reading teen to do the same thing? Why do you presume that the police are going to be randomly stopping teens to get them to prove they have said insurance? So, basically the kid will spend the money and buy the car, and not get any insurance unless forced to by a parent, or he'll just get in a wreck at some point. If we're LUCKY he'll get stopped, but even not having insurance is just a fine/fix-it-like ticket, so they don't take away the car on the spot. |
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 00:11:45 -0500, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:50:17 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:33:35 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:10:55 -0600, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... I guarantee you, if you take one of those people who are not paying any income tax now and show them what their Canadian tax bill would be (the templates are on the web if you want to try it) those people would rather keep their extra $15-20,000 and buy insurance on the open market. Kids being who they are, they would probably buy a car and just hope they never have to go to the doctor tho. Your "guarantee" wouldn't be worth the paper it's written on. No logic there. Those not paying taxes now couldn't come up with $15-20k. That's why they call it "socialist" health care. Besides, all these so-called "socialist" countries with universal health care are democracies last I knew. They can vote in politicians who would pass law to mimic the U.S. atrocity health system. Ever wonder why that doesn't happen? Everyone likes voting themselves generous gifts from the government. It is when they have to actually pay the bill that they are in the street burning tires and carrying signs. Lets see how all of those socialist countries are doing when their boomers hit their system. They average age of Europeans is older and out-pacing our average age. Don't believe me? Look it up. I know it, that is why some of them are burning tires and carrying signs. Greece was first of the PIIGS to blow up but they are all in trouble. It has already started in UK. You just can't fight demographics. 2 or 3 kids can not support a retired person and maintain their own lifestyle, especially when that retired person expects the same lifestyle he had when he was working. Before you ask, I live on about a third of my working salary. Good for you, but as I've said, we aren't Greece. People want to come here, do business, protect their money. |
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says... On 2/27/11 11:56 AM, wrote: On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:42:29 -0500, wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:31:08 -0500, wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:47:52 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:25:27 -0500, wrote: I'm sure a kid probably would, and then when he gets in a wreck, he should just "pay" for the medical help out of his own pocket, of course he wouldn't have any money by then, but you don't care about that. If he "gets in a wreck" there is car insurance to cover medical expenses. Again you are drifting. How is he supposed to afford the insurance if he spends the money on the car? Keep trying to put me down by claiming a bunch of nonsense. It's not helping your cause. Which state lets you drive without insurance? It sure isn't the ones we live in. I'll bet there are a lot of uninsured Mexicans driving their wrecks in Florida, Texas, Arizona, And The People's Republic of Kalifonia. Can't get rid of em either. Washington will come down hard on anyone who tries. That is really getting a lot harder to do here. The cops have lap tops in their cars, insurance coverage is available in real time and that is probable cause for a stop, a ticket and that immigration check everyone on the left is so ****ed about. Driving a junker without insurance is the express lane to Krome Avenue (the ICE detention center) There is reason for hope then. Stop em in the border states and send em home. That will surely impact most all of our entitlement programs. Florida is not really a border state unless you are Cuban or Haitian. flajim is a retired navy boy...he gets an entitlement check every month. So somehow that's bad, but Don getting a govt check each month is good? |
Winning elections is not good enough
"HarryisPaul" wrote in message
... In article , payer3389 @mypacks.net says... On 2/27/11 11:56 AM, wrote: On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:42:29 -0500, wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 08:31:08 -0500, wrote: wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:47:52 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:25:27 -0500, wrote: I'm sure a kid probably would, and then when he gets in a wreck, he should just "pay" for the medical help out of his own pocket, of course he wouldn't have any money by then, but you don't care about that. If he "gets in a wreck" there is car insurance to cover medical expenses. Again you are drifting. How is he supposed to afford the insurance if he spends the money on the car? Keep trying to put me down by claiming a bunch of nonsense. It's not helping your cause. Which state lets you drive without insurance? It sure isn't the ones we live in. I'll bet there are a lot of uninsured Mexicans driving their wrecks in Florida, Texas, Arizona, And The People's Republic of Kalifonia. Can't get rid of em either. Washington will come down hard on anyone who tries. That is really getting a lot harder to do here. The cops have lap tops in their cars, insurance coverage is available in real time and that is probable cause for a stop, a ticket and that immigration check everyone on the left is so ****ed about. Driving a junker without insurance is the express lane to Krome Avenue (the ICE detention center) There is reason for hope then. Stop em in the border states and send em home. That will surely impact most all of our entitlement programs. Florida is not really a border state unless you are Cuban or Haitian. flajim is a retired navy boy...he gets an entitlement check every month. So somehow that's bad, but Don getting a govt check each month is good? Krause is just a tool. He's working hard for the Republican party to insure there is no one left on the planet who would vote Democrat this next election. I'm sure he is also partly responsible for the weak showing the unions are making in recent years. If Flajim is retired military, he deserves all the pension money he can get his hands on, It's not entitlement, it's earned. Same for Social Security. Call that return on investment. Entitlements are what illegals, certain minorities, slackers and liberals think they are owed just because they are standing on American soil. |
Winning elections is not good enough
|
Winning elections is not good enough
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:45:32 -0500, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 09:56:31 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 23:55:08 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:42:31 -0800, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 20:18:20 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 12:33:55 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 10:30:00 -0500, BAR wrote: Drilling in all of Alaska, off the coast of Calif., the Gulf of Mexico and the Eastern Seaboard will solve the price problem. At best you might be able to kick the can down the road another 10 years or so. Long term we need policies that encourage the switch to other forms of energy. CNG is a pretty attractive option that is not getting any traction at all. As previously described CNG has problems also... fracking. I'd much rather see nuclear plants that are standardized (e.g., regulated design specs) and carefully monitored. Spent fuel is an issue, but it's possible to do it. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf69.html There are tens of thousands of "fracked" wells operating with absolutely zero problems. This is a made for TV problem. How many more wells do you think we should drill? http://www.vanityfair.com/business/f...ylvania-201006 http://dmaview.newsvine.com/_news/20...ing-denouement You don't want the EPA to even exist, so of course you don't want to wait for their determination. Maybe there is something on Pennsylvania that makes fracking a problem there or it could just be the particular operator but compared to a nuke accident or an oil spill this is trivial. Or, maybe it's an industry-wide problem about to happen elsewhere. Do you object to some research to find out or should we just drill baby drill? You can find problems with every form of energy production. You are the one who gave me the list of nuclear accidents. Compare the number of accidents to the number of reactors, the danger posed by those accidents and get back to me about a few fracked wells that cause a problem. So, read again where I said standardization and regulation. Then we can start comparing that to Exxon Valdez and BP or the never ending wars in the middl;e east. I thought 9/11 only cost $500M? It cost Bin Laden less than a half million to do $2 trillion (your number, probably low) in damage. That is a pretty good return on investment. Imagine what they could do with a couple million (a small ransom these days) Imagine if you were a poor, illiterate fisherman, and suddenly came into $10000... I bet the first thing you would do would be to plan a sophisticated attack on the US. NOT |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com