About Us

John H[_2_]

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:52:08 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:02:27 -0800, wrote:

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.

Why is that so hard to believe. It only took 180 days to move them all
over there and when we left, we destroyed a lot of stuff in place or
just left it.

WADF! (Not you...her.)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Winning elections is not good enough	Frogwatch[_2_]	General	3	February 21st 11 04:04 AM
We're going to see a lot more of this after the Elections	HK	General	27	July 29th 08 05:31 PM
OT Wonder how GOP will rig elections....	basskisser	General	15	July 22nd 04 09:57 PM
US elections can't be far away.	Jonathan Ganz	ASA	2	May 18th 04 02:17 PM
APBA Elections	Jeff	Power Boat Racing	0	December 4th 03 03:45 PM

Menu

About Us