Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:23 PM
 
805 posts, read 1,509,991 times
Reputation: 734

Advertisements

(First off, my deep condolences to those who are injured and family who have loved ones killed by the gunman in Ft Hood. It is a tragic and sad day. My post is not to disparage anyone in the military, especially at this time.)

I'm curious as to why there are so many people against the public option due to their concern about the costs, and yet don't complain how much spending there is in the military and two wars?

I agree having a strong military is absolutely necessary. But wars are expensive, and there are plenty of wastes! That $ can easily fund the public option that would give working people with pre-existing conditions (who are not as lucky as corporate employees with full benefits) and others Affordable Health Care!

I also notice that every person that is vociferously against the public option happens to have excellent health care, and are usually very healthy themselves. I've suffered from ill health before and I know what it's like to not be able to work and need to seek medical attention. It isn't a fun place to be, and those are the people that need a little bit more compassion!

I think most civilians just are not aware of the amt of waste that goes on in the Dept of Defense.

Am I the only seeing this paradox?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:25 PM
 
Location: Here
11,578 posts, read 13,948,459 times
Reputation: 7009
How about a reduction in illegal immigration?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:28 PM
 
805 posts, read 1,509,991 times
Reputation: 734
I agree with that. But the US govt does not have the will and resolve to do anything about illegal immigration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:41 PM
 
1,747 posts, read 1,953,436 times
Reputation: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqua0 View Post
(First off, my deep condolences to those who are injured and family who have loved ones killed by the gunman in Ft Hood. It is a tragic and sad day. My post is not to disparage anyone in the military, especially at this time.)

I'm curious as to why there are so many people against the public option due to their concern about the costs, and yet don't complain how much spending there is in the military and two wars?

I agree having a strong military is absolutely necessary. But wars are expensive, and there are plenty of wastes! That $ can easily fund the public option that would give working people with pre-existing conditions (who are not as lucky as corporate employees with full benefits) and others Affordable Health Care!

I think most civilians just are not aware of the amt of waste that goes on in the Dept of Defense.

Am I the only seeing this paradox?
Yeah.....we NEED an all-volunteer, UNPAID military.
Suppose this could be arranged if we don't scrap the Second Amendment.

Maybe a military that will uphold the Constitution and defend US from ALL enemies.....BOTH, foreign AND domestic?

Nah.....I just think YOU are not aware of the amount of waste that goes on by the GOVT. and believe that Defense spending is no longer necessary since we are so close to achieving world peace.

Have you ever considered that perhaps......a BIGGER, more refined, yet generous..... military budget, could possibly CREATE a few jobs HERE since the stimulus package appears to be falling just a tad bit short of expectations?

I don't know, but it's just a thought.

Let me know, 'cause when world peace gets in the way of things......
we might not need such a big military anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:44 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,288 posts, read 87,420,711 times
Reputation: 55562
yes indeed and that my friend is why we got an avalanche of hate posts against the president on CDF. & why you got rep.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2009, 11:50 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,978,392 times
Reputation: 4555
Just an 8% reduction in the $680 Billion Dollar Defense Bill would pay for the additional revenue needed to be raised for the Health bill.

So who would oppose an 8% reduction?.........Well the GOPers in Congress would.

They would howl that we are leaving the USA defenseless and caving into the "terrorists".

The Conservative Blue Dog Dems would...they, like the GOP are owned by defense industy lobbyists.

The majority of Dems don't have the spine to stand up to this GOP/Blue Dog Dem coalition.

Yet another case of white middle class men (the GOP base) not having the sophistication to vote in their own self interest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2009, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
20,293 posts, read 37,183,750 times
Reputation: 16397
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqua0 View Post
(First off, my deep condolences to those who are injured and family who have loved ones killed by the gunman in Ft Hood. It is a tragic and sad day. My post is not to disparage anyone in the military, especially at this time.)

I'm curious as to why there are so many people against the public option due to their concern about the costs, and yet don't complain how much spending there is in the military and two wars?

I agree having a strong military is absolutely necessary. But wars are expensive, and there are plenty of wastes! That $ can easily fund the public option that would give working people with pre-existing conditions (who are not as lucky as corporate employees with full benefits) and others Affordable Health Care!

I also notice that every person that is vociferously against the public option happens to have excellent health care, and are usually very healthy themselves. I've suffered from ill health before and I know what it's like to not be able to work and need to seek medical attention. It isn't a fun place to be, and those are the people that need a little bit more compassion!

I think most civilians just are not aware of the amt of waste that goes on in the Dept of Defense.

Am I the only seeing this paradox?
What then would you do with military members? Should they receive unemployment compensation? And how about the industry (s) that build armaments, aircraft, ships, etc. for the military? Add all of these worker to the unemployment figures?

I still agree with you somewhat, not necessarily in reducing the number of military members, but reducing the size of government in general. Bush created the largest government ever, until Obama grew the already large government to enormous proportions.

Reducing the size of the military force (members) is not going to create jobs, but there is a lot of dead weight at the DOD, and a lot of very wealthy members of Congress, which in turn are spending like there won't be a tomorrow. They even gave themselves a pay raise recently, and pork is worst than ever. Not only that, but several of them are tax cheats, something the average American can't get away with. There are all kinds of departments that make no sense to have, some of which Reagan could not get rid of back then.
------
The reason why most Americans are against the "public option" is because several generations of Americans to come will have to pay for it, and because by implementing this plan those who already have employer sponsored healthcare coverage will lose theirs.

Take a look at other reasons:
House Committee on Ways & Means - Republican
House Committee on Ways & Means - Republican
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2009, 01:43 AM
 
Location: Florida
1,782 posts, read 3,941,826 times
Reputation: 964
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
Just an 8% reduction in the $680 Billion Dollar Defense Bill would pay for the additional revenue needed to be raised for the Health bill.

So who would oppose an 8% reduction?.........Well the GOPers in Congress would.

They would howl that we are leaving the USA defenseless and caving into the "terrorists".

The Conservative Blue Dog Dems would...they, like the GOP are owned by defense industy lobbyists.

The majority of Dems don't have the spine to stand up to this GOP/Blue Dog Dem coalition.

Yet another case of white middle class men (the GOP base) not having the sophistication to vote in their own self interest.
I don't see how a public option is more in my self interest than a strong well funded military is that provides millions of jobs.

An insurance marketplace with regulations is more than enough. I won't support a public option, and certainly not at the cost of military spending.

You may call it waste, but all the money DoD spends goes somewhere. It enters the economy and circulates around creating jobs. A public option would do nothing but cause havoc with the private insurance market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2009, 02:09 AM
 
1,374 posts, read 1,305,149 times
Reputation: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqua0 View Post
(First off, my deep condolences to those who are injured and family who have loved ones killed by the gunman in Ft Hood. It is a tragic and sad day. My post is not to disparage anyone in the military, especially at this time.)

I'm curious as to why there are so many people against the public option due to their concern about the costs, and yet don't complain how much spending there is in the military and two wars?

I agree having a strong military is absolutely necessary. But wars are expensive, and there are plenty of wastes! That $ can easily fund the public option that would give working people with pre-existing conditions (who are not as lucky as corporate employees with full benefits) and others Affordable Health Care!

I also notice that every person that is vociferously against the public option happens to have excellent health care, and are usually very healthy themselves. I've suffered from ill health before and I know what it's like to not be able to work and need to seek medical attention. It isn't a fun place to be, and those are the people that need a little bit more compassion!

I think most civilians just are not aware of the amt of waste that goes on in the Dept of Defense.

Am I the only seeing this paradox?
What happened was not tragic!
It was criminal! It was planned and was a terrorist attack!
What makes you thing the government can run healthcare,
when they can't even run anything else. Our current president
is very inexperienced and is in for a long haul!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-07-2009, 03:39 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,848 posts, read 8,208,835 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by th3vault View Post
I don't see how a public option is more in my self interest than a strong well funded military is that provides millions of jobs.

An insurance marketplace with regulations is more than enough. I won't support a public option, and certainly not at the cost of military spending.

You may call it waste, but all the money DoD spends goes somewhere. It enters the economy and circulates around creating jobs. A public option would do nothing but cause havoc with the private insurance market.
Your logic is ridiculously flawed. Government spending done IN THIS COUNTRY, is the SAME, be it government health care or military. You almost sound like you are advocating increasing the size of the military because it "provides millions of jobs?"

The problem with military spending is, it doesn't all happen in this country. Our military personnel that are stationed in other countries, spend money in those countries. The money doesn't make a loop and come back to us, its just spent and gone in every country we have a foreign base.

We only need as big a military as we need to defense ourselves, anything more is poor allocation of resources. Even if we spent half as much as we do today, we would spend FAR MORE than anyone else. We could take that 350 billion a year, and take those displaced soldiers and rebuild America. Bridges, schools, roads, the levy's, health care, free education through college, etc etc.

Anyone who thinks we need to keep our military at the level it is now to just "defend" ourselves is a fool. We have something like 800 foreign bases in 100 different foreign countries. And anyone who thinks that its good that the government "creates jobs" through the military but opposes socialism, obviously has severe mental problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:14 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top