Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 2:00:31 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
FR
I've seen a lot of nonsense about reducing the debt on this thread.

First some facts without which there is no point in trying to proceed
1) Cutting SS or Medicare is both unfair and pointless. Neither is on budget and both can be fixed by simply removing the cap on income subject to the FICA tax and actually instituting the cost control measure in the ACA.
2) Military and intelligence spending is by far the largest on budget areas. Both could be cut drastically and we'd still have the world's largest military and intelligence operations. We would have to do so slowly to not send the economy back into recession.
3) A significant part of the deficit is the W tax cuts. Repealing them entirely or replacing that revenue is needed to balance the budget and start shrinking the debt. We've already cut government spending in non military and intelligence fields to the bone and we still have a huge deficit.

So conservatives, do you really want to talk about reality or do you want to continue talking about letting people die and breaking the social contract with most Americans?

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 2:39:37 PM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So conservatives, do you really want to talk about reality or do you want to continue talking about letting people die and breaking the social contract with most Americans?


Lets talk some reality.

Today’s minimum wage employee works 12 percent longer to earn a gallon of milk compared to 1965, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Today’s senior engineer works almost twice as long to buy a gallon of gasoline, according to the Department of Energy.

So, in real terms, wages have fallen. The drop is larger than it appears. Look at costs to see why.

Dairy farm statistics show that a cow produces two and a half times the milk compared to yesteryear’s cow and the Department of Commerce reports that labor per cow has fallen by two thirds. These two improvements alone—there are others—eliminate about 87 percent of the effort to make milk.

Efficiency is not the only way for companies to reduce costs. Businesses also remove certain features that consumers don’t want to pay for. For example, milk used to be delivered to a home in a glass bottle. Today it comes in cheap plastic containers that consumers pick up at the store. A more recent example is wine, which is moving from expensive corks to cheaper screw tops.

Yet as fewer labor hours go into producing goods, workers work longer to buy the goods. Using the hour as a measure of costs, we can calculate how much more work a wage earner must produce to buy milk today. But it’s harder to measure the reduction of work that goes into production. We know that it’s less by empirical evidence, but we only get a sense of it.

By switching to gold, we can measure both wages and prices on an absolute scale—in ounces—and we can make precise comparisons. To convert the price of anything to gold, just divide the price by the current gold price. For example, in 2011 if a big-screen TV was $785, then divide that by the gold price of that year; the television set cost half an ounce of gold.

The bottom line is that, in terms of gold, wages have fallen by about 87 percent. To get a stronger sense of what that means, consider that back in 1965, the minimum wage was 71 ounces of gold per year. In 2011, the senior engineer earned the equivalent of 63 ounces in gold. So, measured in gold, we see that senior engineers now earn less than what unskilled laborers earned back in 1965.



So, DK, you want to take even more leaving them even less. You're so kind.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 3:18:06 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
No. I'd love to see wages rise. If I could I'd set the top marginal rate to over 90% on any employer that does not increase wages to levels appropriate for inflation and productivity gains since the 70's but that is a different discussion.

One that if you wish to have you will have to acknowledge that the minimum wage needs to go up dramatically and supply side economics must never be allowed to guide US economic policy again.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 3:53:42 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

So conservatives, do you really want to talk about reality or do you want to continue talking about letting people die and breaking the social contract with most Americans?


Lets talk some reality.

Today’s minimum wage employee works 12 percent longer to earn a gallon of milk compared to 1965, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Today’s senior engineer works almost twice as long to buy a gallon of gasoline, according to the Department of Energy.

I find it interesting that you choose two different sources for income and choose milk, a price controlled substance, to make this fatuous arguement.

So, in real terms, wages have fallen. The drop is larger than it appears. Look at costs to see why.

Dairy farm statistics show that a cow produces two and a half times the milk compared to yesteryear’s cow and the Department of Commerce reports that labor per cow has fallen by two thirds. These two improvements alone—there are others—eliminate about 87 percent of the effort to make milk.

This statement is another one of those half truths used to propagate a whole lie.
To show that cows produce more milk now as opposed to a time not specified...when are we talking about? One hundred years ago or ten years ago.
To say that 87 percent of the effort to make milk has been eliminated is not the same as saying that it is 87 percent cheaper to produce milk.
Thus the half truth to support a whole lie.
Milk is price controlled and subsidised so it is a poor choice to use as a medium of exchange of labor for goods.





Efficiency is not the only way for companies to reduce costs. Businesses also remove certain features that consumers don’t want to pay for. For example, milk used to be delivered to a home in a glass bottle. Today it comes in cheap plastic containers that consumers pick up at the store.

Since milk is a price controled substance the price delivered to your home in sanitary glass bottles was the same as it was in the store...I was alive then and remember asking my mom why we did not buy milk in the store. She said "it is the same price either place, it is delivered to my door cold and goes into the fridge cold. When you buy it at the store it gets warm on the way home.
I know of no consumer who asked to stop home delivery. By the same token I know of no consumer who asked the coffee companies to put 13 oz of coffee in a one pound can or 48 oz in a half gallon of ice cream.
A glass bottle gets reused many times while the plastic bottle congest our landfills...so the claim of cheapness of the container is bogus.



A more recent example is wine, which is moving from expensive corks to cheaper screw tops.

Typically screw tops are used on cheap homogenized wine while corks are used for non homogonized wine.

Yet as fewer labor hours go into producing goods, workers work longer to buy the goods. Using the hour as a measure of costs, we can calculate how much more work a wage earner must produce to buy milk today. But it’s harder to measure the reduction of work that goes into production. We know that it’s less by empirical evidence, but we only get a sense of it.

By switching to gold, we can measure both wages and prices on an absolute scale—in ounces—and we can make precise comparisons.

Since the price of gold is controlled by passion and not the market it is a poor choice to use as a standard.


To convert the price of anything to gold, just divide the price by the current gold price. For example, in 2011 if a big-screen TV was $785, then divide that by the gold price of that year;

Since the price of gold fluctutiates pretty radically that number is hardly accurate.


the television set cost half an ounce of gold.

The bottom line is that, in terms of gold, wages have fallen by about 87 percent. To get a stronger sense of what that means, consider that back in 1965, the minimum wage was 71 ounces of gold per year.

71 oz of gold in 1965 $35 per oz. = $2,485 =$1.25 an hour


In 2011, the senior engineer earned the equivalent of 63 ounces in gold.


63 oz of gold in 2011 at $2000 per oz= about $126,000= about $63 per hour

So, measured in gold, we see that senior engineers now earn less than what unskilled laborers earned back in 1965.


Not everyone feels that $126,000.00 is less than $2,485.00





< Message edited by thompsonx -- 10/12/2013 3:59:28 PM >

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: United States Debt - 10/12/2013 5:09:02 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I dare you to switch places with me and then we'll see if you so blithely condemn yourself to a painful death.




So you wish death on the man in order that he may prove his principals and courage???

I took this sentence to a third grade english teacher and was told it was a challange to trade places and not as you sugest.

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:11:19 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
I believe it is the Federal loan system that has spurred the outrageous increases in tuition.

If one compares the tuition in 1960 and 2013 and adjust for inflation how much increase has there been?

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:17:17 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
I also firmly believe that this venomous class warfare that is being promoted is just poisonous and will lead to nothing good.

When 2% of the population control 98% of the wealth how can one not expect class warfare?

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:18:26 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

I really wonder if it isn't already too late. I see all sides as intractable... clothed in self-righteousness, convinced that they alone have the best way to go forward... demonizing anyone who dares to believe differently.

As a child I would have never believed that I might actually live to witness the end of the great experiment known as the United States of America. I don't want to believe it now, but I find it harder each day to keep faith.

When, since 1789 has it been different?
G.w. summed it up in his farewell address.

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:20:11 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
I get a bad taste in my mouth when the assumption is made that the wealthy must have gained their riches through illegal means, or by treading on the backs of the unfortunate.

A casual study of the members of the 2% would show the validity of that assumption.

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:21:27 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
I have no problem holding people accountable for their actions.

Since a corporation shields it's officers from personal responsibility does this mean that you would seek the rescending of all corporate charters?

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:22:58 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
We can attempt to mandate that fairness,


History has shown us that we can and did enfranchise slaves,indans,women because it was recognized that it was unfair to have them disenfranchised. Fair is not a dirty word



but in all honesty, the concept of "fair" is somewhat subjective. I suspect there would be just as many complaining if we did create legislation that outlawed being wealthy.

I think most would be happy if the govt stopped subsidising the wealthy...if one is rich why do they entitled any help from the govt.to get richer?



(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:24:15 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
Ideally, we could take a combination so that the pain is spread out more equitably.

Since we ,the not 2%, did not cause this problem what is equitable about us sharing the pain?

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 5:25:23 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
In another thread there is a deep discussion about rights. I can't help thinking that what we ought to be discussing is responsibilities and obligations. It just seems all anyone is ever concerned about is what is owed to them... not what they owe others.
When the punk ass motherfuckers of th 2% start stepping up to their responsibilities and obligations others will follow suit.

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 6:44:11 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

FR
I've seen a lot of nonsense about reducing the debt on this thread.

First some facts without which there is no point in trying to proceed
1) Cutting SS or Medicare is both unfair and pointless. Neither is on budget and both can be fixed by simply removing the cap on income subject to the FICA tax and actually instituting the cost control measure in the ACA.
2) Military and intelligence spending is by far the largest on budget areas. Both could be cut drastically and we'd still have the world's largest military and intelligence operations. We would have to do so slowly to not send the economy back into recession.
3) A significant part of the deficit is the W tax cuts. Repealing them entirely or replacing that revenue is needed to balance the budget and start shrinking the debt. We've already cut government spending in non military and intelligence fields to the bone and we still have a huge deficit.

So conservatives, do you really want to talk about reality or do you want to continue talking about letting people die and breaking the social contract with most Americans?


Ken... you have a vested interest in this and I do understand. Especially for someone in your position, I can see where it all seems very simple and straightforward. After all, making the rich pay higher taxes you lose nothing and have everything to gain. And it only hurts those people who already have more than they need.

In all honestly, I don't disagree with most of what you propose. The military and intelligence budgets are outrageous. Cuts would have to be implemented with care so as to have less of an impact on the economy.

I'm sure there are some very good aspects to the ACA that would reduce costs. We've already seen some dramatically good (for the general public anyway) measures taken with the issues of covering pre-existing conditions and the other restrictions on insurance companies.

I have no desire to see Medicare or Social Security cut, and feel that to do so would be a huge disservice to the American people. I really don't believe any politician, on either side of the isle, has any real desire to hurt people by cutting these programs. But I can see where it may be necessary to make some adjustments so that those programs will still be around for future generations.

Increasing taxes may indeed be what needs to be done. But I'm one who'd like to see that every other possible avenue be explored first. I have no special affinity for the rich, but I have a hard time swallowing the idea that some people have more responsibility for financing the government than others. To me, it seems that that idea just might be why it appears that the wealthy have more influence and appear to have more say-so in how things are run.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 7:29:25 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
The wealthy benefit more from government than the poor or middle class so they should pay for what they get.

The ACA has been scored by independent economists, the CBO amongst others, who say if fully implemented it will reduce the nation's health care costs, the deficit and Medicare costs. This is a case of conservatives don't get their own facts.

Like I said the numbers are clear SS and Medicare are just fine if the cap on upper income earners paying FICA is lifted and the Medicare savings in the ACA are implemented. We could even save more money by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices under part D rather than having to pay retail.

We've already done all the cutting the non defense and intelligence budgets can take and we still have a huge deficit. We have to have more revenue.

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 7:59:17 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

The wealthy benefit more from government than the poor or middle class so they should pay for what they get.

The ACA has been scored by independent economists, the CBO amongst others, who say if fully implemented it will reduce the nation's health care costs, the deficit and Medicare costs. This is a case of conservatives don't get their own facts.

Like I said the numbers are clear SS and Medicare are just fine if the cap on upper income earners paying FICA is lifted and the Medicare savings in the ACA are implemented. We could even save more money by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices under part D rather than having to pay retail.

We've already done all the cutting the non defense and intelligence budgets can take and we still have a huge deficit. We have to have more revenue.



I'd be interested in knowing how you believe the wealthy benefit more from the government. Not a challenge to you... I just truly can't see where that works out. I may be missing something, though.

The problem I have with the ACA is the government forcing me to buy a healthcare plan from an insurance company. We've had this discussion in another thread... I don't need a healthcare plan; I can afford to handle my own general healthcare costs. I do believe in carrying medical insurance for unforeseen large expenses. REAL medical insurance. Just like insurance we buy for our cars and houses, where we pay out-of-pocket for upkeep and general maintenance and small repairs, and only use the insurance for major expenses. I think a good many of the insurance reforms in the ACA are great and long overdue.

I agree that Medicare not being allowed to negotiate drug prices is stupid. I understand the VA can and does negotiate and it saves a lot of money.

I'm not so certain we do need more revenue. The problem is that every time someone mentions some item that the Government is spending money on that appears to be outside the realm of reasonable, we're shouted down by proponents saying, "it's only a small amount or a tiny percentage of the budget!" I'm sorry, but pennies add up to dollars. I realize that some things would be argued with, but do we really need to spend money on researching half the crazy shit we do? Do we need to fund "art" that hardly anyone sees and even fewer like? Why are we paying farmers not to farm? What the heck are we doing sending so much money outside the country... particularly to finance other militaries? Each of these things may be a drop in the bucket, but enough drops can make a huge difference.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 8:26:24 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
I've not fact checked these, but here's a list of crazy things the US government supposedly pays for:

1. Since 2008 the Federal government has allocated almost $3m towards researching how gamers engage in "creative collaboration online... by paying people to play World of Warcraft.

2. Over the past several years the government, through the University of Puerto Rico, has spent almost half a million dollars annually to study and document the social habits and behaviors of male prostitutes in Vietnam.

3. 2011, nearly $800,000 of taxpayer money went towards subsidizing an IHOP restaurant in an allegedly under-served neighborhood of Washinton DC. Apparently Colombia Heights falls into that category, but hey, rich people need pancakes too.

4. Every year, the Department of energy of all places, manages to waste over $2 million simply by failing to turn off the lights. Thats enough to power 3200 homes for an entire year.

5. In 2011 roughly $2.6 million went towards “parliamentary strengthening” in Eastern Europe. In other words, we taught them to balance their checkbooks.

6. Every year the IRS spends nearly $1 million to store unused furniture, and the last time we checked they had over 20,000 items in their inventory.

7. In 2009 the Federal Aviation Administration spent $5 million to send 3600 employees to a 3 week long conference in Atlanta. Supposedly it was necessary in order to promote harmony in the workplace.

8. Last year the government spent just under $1 million posting snippets of poetry in zoos around the country.

9. Each year government agencies rack up close to a billion dollars in unnecessary printing expenses.

10. Last year the Philadelphia Housing Authority, an office funded almost completely by the federal government, used about $1 million of its budget to pay off four female plaintiffs who filed suits against its director for sexual harassment.

11. In 2010 taxpayers forked over $90,000 to help promote the Vidalia Onion Brand in conjunction with the new Shrek movie.

12. Last year year the National Science Foundation spent a quarter of a million dollars studying the reasons why political candidates make vague statements.

13. In 2010 almost $2 million were allocated towards building a neon sign graveyard just outside Las Vegas.

14. Last year almost $100,000 went towards purchasing iPads for kindergardeners in Maine.

15. In 2011 upwards of $700,000 was spent studying the greenhouse gas emissions of dairy farms.

16. Each year the government spends almost half a million dollars maintaining the office of the former speaker of the house in spite of the fact that he is almost never there.

17. In 2010 the government spent nearly 1.5 million dollars renovating 36 toilets in Denali National Park, Alaska.

18. The Federal government set aside $100,000 for a “celebrity chef fruit promotion road show in Indonesia”.

19. Nearly $592,000 has been spent on research that included observing monkeys throwing poop.

20. Every year government agencies spend over $4 million shuttling federal employees on near-empty busses running along overlapping routes through the streets of Washington DC. A recent report found that half of the existing routes could be eliminated with no change in service but unfortunately none of the agencies are willing to share.

21. The government spent almost half a million dollars trying to determine the trustworthiness of tweets.

22. In 2011 the United States spent nearly $18 million on foreign aid programs to its biggest sovereign lender, China. This included $2.5 million for social services and $4.4 million to help improve its environment.

23. Every year the government delivers over $120 million worth of benefit checks to deceased federal employees... over $601 million in the last five years.

24. The U.S. Agency for International Development provided $10 million to a Pakistani arts organization to adapt "Sesame Street" for Pakistani toddlers. The money will also help pay for the creation of 130 episodes of the show.

25. The National Science Foundation spent $131,000 on robot dragons designed to mimic human responses to help teach preschoolers language skills. Apparently interaction with real humans was deemed inadequate.

26. The US Government donated $50,000 to the annual Cowboy Poetry celebration this year.

27. The National Institute of Health gave the University of Kentucky $176,000 to determine if Japanese quail are more likely to have sex when high on cocaine. The study is scheduled to last through 2015.

28. Another National Science Foundation grant for $198,000 paid for a University of California-Riverside study of "motivations, expectations and goal pursuit in social media." Among the questions the study seeks to answer: "Do unhappy people spend more time on Twitter or Facebook?"

29. The federal government gave the Hawaii Department of Agriculture $50,000 to help pay for the 2nd Annual Hawaiian Chocolate Festival.

30. The U.S. government spent $74,000 last year to help the state of Michigan "increase awareness about the role Michigan plays in the production of trees and poinsettias."

31. A private company was given $484,000 by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to build a Mellow Mushroom pizzeria in Arlington, TX.

32. The National Science Foundation wants to help politicians in India do a better job. So it is awarded a $426,000 grant for research to determine the effectiveness of communications to citizens from officeholders. The U.S. sent $126 million in aid to India last year, even though it is one of the fastest growing economies in the world.

33. The State Department contributed $350,000 for the United States to be part of the 54th International Art Exhibition in Venice, Italy.

34. The U.S. Agency for International Development spent $1.35 million on an "entrepreneurship initiative" for the Caribbean island nation of Barbados.

35. A video game promotional organization in Massachusetts landed $100,000 to help developers create intellectual property and help businesses get access to capital.

36. The Virginia Commonwealth University received $55,000 in 2011 (part of a larger $170,000 grant) to study changes in the hookah smoking habits of students in the nation of Jordan.

37. Did you know there is an American Museum of Magic in Marshall, MI? Well, the magic museum made $147,000 of your tax dollars disappear last year. The purpose of the federal largesse was to help the museum "better understand its various audiences and their potential interest in the history of magic entertainment."

38. Thanks to a $25,000 federal grant, visitors to the Milwaukee Public Museum will now be able to experience a "3-D high-definition, full-color true holographic or holographic-like exhibit of a virtual mummy unwrapping."

Yes, yes... I know. All totaled, it's hardly a dent in the Federal debt. But how many rounds of dialysis would this pay for?

< Message edited by TreasureKY -- 10/12/2013 8:27:26 PM >

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 8:53:56 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

The wealthy benefit more from government than the poor or middle class so they should pay for what they get.

The ACA has been scored by independent economists, the CBO amongst others, who say if fully implemented it will reduce the nation's health care costs, the deficit and Medicare costs. This is a case of conservatives don't get their own facts.

Like I said the numbers are clear SS and Medicare are just fine if the cap on upper income earners paying FICA is lifted and the Medicare savings in the ACA are implemented. We could even save more money by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices under part D rather than having to pay retail.

We've already done all the cutting the non defense and intelligence budgets can take and we still have a huge deficit. We have to have more revenue.



I'd be interested in knowing how you believe the wealthy benefit more from the government. Not a challenge to you... I just truly can't see where that works out. I may be missing something, though.

The wealthy tend to have money invested, which involves the SEC and the Fed Reserve. They travel more which involves highways and airports paid for with tax money. The wealthy benefit far more from police protection and the justice system.

quote:

I'm not so certain we do need more revenue. The problem is that every time someone mentions some item that the Government is spending money on that appears to be outside the realm of reasonable, we're shouted down by proponents saying, "it's only a small amount or a tiny percentage of the budget!" I'm sorry, but pennies add up to dollars. I realize that some things would be argued with, but do we really need to spend money on researching half the crazy shit we do? Do we need to fund "art" that hardly anyone sees and even fewer like? Why are we paying farmers not to farm? What the heck are we doing sending so much money outside the country... particularly to finance other militaries? Each of these things may be a drop in the bucket, but enough drops can make a huge difference.

I'll deal with this and your list of research, you got it off some right wing site right?, in one go.

Those research grants are important enough to get the limited funds available.

For example the study about male prostitutes in Vietnam was a study of the spread of HIV amongst male sex workers and how that affected the spread of the disease into the general population. Kind of useful to know don't you think?

The World of Warcraft study, which my search says didn't get anywhere near 3 million and does not appear to actually pay anyone to play WoW, is actually an interesting study and could have benefits for distributed projects of all kinds.
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/15398.html

In short the right wing outrage machine tends to exaggerate and trim out the parts that make these sorts of projects important.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 10/12/2013 8:54:28 PM >

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 9:28:20 PM   
TreasureKY


Posts: 3032
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

The wealthy tend to have money invested, which involves the SEC and the Fed Reserve. They travel more which involves highways and airports paid for with tax money. The wealthy benefit far more from police protection and the justice system.


I can't say that I agree with your assessments... particularly with regard to police protection and the justice system. The wealthy might travel more by air, but I doubt they travel by car as much... especially in proportion to the general population. With regard to the SEC and Federal Reserve, I'll just say that I don't know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I'll deal with this and your list of research, you got it off some right wing site right?, in one go.


No. They came from a couple of different sources... Most from just a run-of-the-mill list site (best places to live, funniest memes, most dangerous dog breeds, etc.) and the other a financial and investing site. I've no idea if the financial site itself is "right-wing", but the article pulled some items from a book written by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), "Wastebook 2011".

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Those research grants are important enough to get the limited funds available.

For example the study about male prostitutes in Vietnam was a study of the spread of HIV amongst male sex workers and how that affected the spread of the disease into the general population. Kind of useful to know don't you think?

The World of Warcraft study, which my search says didn't get anywhere near 3 million and does not appear to actually pay anyone to play WoW, is actually an interesting study and could have benefits for distributed projects of all kinds.
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/15398.html

In short the right wing outrage machine tends to exaggerate and trim out the parts that make these sorts of projects important.


I'm sorry, but no... they aren't important enough. That's not to say they have no validity or are worthless; just that they are frivolous compared to some of the life-saving or life-sustaining programs where the money could go.

So... if you're coming to me saying you need more money because children are starving and ill people are dying, I'm going to say cut out the frivolous crap first and then we'll talk.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room - 10/12/2013 9:37:28 PM   
denimmesh


Posts: 1
Joined: 8/27/2013
Status: offline
if the republicans fold on this shutdown...the dems will win back the house in 14.......and you will the largest tax increase in American history, attack on citizen in the history of the good OLD USA....THEY will force unionization on the country, they will come after the net, television, churches..AND THEY WILL give total control of your health care to the potus vis single payer......MARK MY WORD.

< Message edited by denimmesh -- 10/12/2013 9:46:04 PM >

(in reply to TreasureKY)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: United States Debt... or the Elephant in the Room Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109