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 04-28-2015, 08:54 AM
 
12,265 posts, read 6,474,011 times
Reputation: 9435

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
Sorry they are busy looking at Ben gahzi for the 7'th time.
Wrong! They`ve already done 7 and they are heading for #8. I have 11 in my office pool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:37 AM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,206,841 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
It's a loose collection of conservative minded people who believe neither the Republicans nor Democrats are doing an effective job of running the government. Although they do not have a centralized "party" but a collection of groups that share a common identity, they tend to have the following ideas in common (just a quick list hitting the big ones):
1. The federal government should follow the Constitution and be limited to the powers it grants.
2. All government should be fiscally responsible.
3. The government should not pick winners and losers.
4. No business is too big to fail.
5. The US should not be the world's police.
6. Our borders should be secure.

Some people feel such ideas are nutty, but I believe the system has become crazy and too many people are afraid of what they could lose, in terms of goodies, if we saw reform.

I'm sorry, but when you have a 75,000 page tax code that even the Clinton foundation, with all its lawyers and accountants, can't even follow, there is a problem.

When we are just throwing billions upon billions of dollars at defense contractors for systems the military says we really don't need while our veterans are getting crappy medical assistance, there is a problem.

When we have bankers following government rules that cause a financial meltdown, there is a problem.

When the government secures billions of dollars for companies whose CEO's live high on the hog until the company folds, there is a problem.

Maybe you're good with the status quo, but many of us are not.
Like I said, who is the Tea Party?

The question was rhetorical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:41 AM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,587,085 times
Reputation: 2823
The military needs to cut wasteful spending just like those programs that we see so successfully "improve people's lives" across the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:56 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,867,563 times
Reputation: 18304
I say in a dangerous world as always. We need to get back to level on defense including going back to 180 fighter squadrons from 50 soon to be 40 like we had in dessert storm. Every time we have had major conflict we have been unprepared and its cost huge number of lives until we could buildup to needed level. It also encourages others to strike out as they see weakness. IMO; we see that in middle east now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Corona del Mar, CA - Coronado, CA
4,477 posts, read 3,302,333 times
Reputation: 5609
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
So let the states take care of the poor people in their states, and let the federal government worry about national defense.

You see, that's your problem, you've bought into the notion that the federal government is supposed to be your wet nurse. Taking care of their citizens who are down on their luck is a state function, not the federal government's.
Exactly..... actual duties of the federal government vs the modern liberal, welfare state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I'm kind of curious in the thought process of someone who believes things like food stamps, improves peoples lives.

I may agree with you on the argument about not needing F-35's, but to equate this to policies which increase poverty or cause people to lose insurance and boosting welfare, = they are now better, is ridiculous.
There is no rational explanation you can give to irrational people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
The F-35 is increasing poverty.
Single women having babies out of wedlock increases poverty, not fighter jets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
I believe food stamps can improve poor and disabled people's lives by allowing them to eat, instead of going hungry. Personally, I always feel better when I can eat more than one meal a day. But yes, I know that you think the unemployed and disabled people are all lazy moochers who could get a decent job if they really wanted to, even the severely brain-damaged ones or the folks who are dying from cancer. Who would Jesus bomb?
The left always conflates things that do not go together and make leaps of logical fallacies.

Believing the federal government has no proper role in health care delivery, housing and food assistance is not the same as people should starve or are lazy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aunt Maude View Post
The plan is probably as much about appeasing Air Force generals who want cool stuff, and keeping the military contractors in high cotton. It's working.
It is much more about Congressmen making sure their district gets their fair share. The plane is "built" in 45 states.

Flawed F-35 Too Big to Kill as Lockheed Hooks 45 States - Bloomberg Business
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:17 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
The F-35 is increasing poverty.
how so.. I cant wait to hear this..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:21 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
I believe food stamps can improve poor and disabled people's lives by allowing them to eat, instead of going hungry.
I believe jobs would allow the same thing.. Democrats disagree
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
Personally, I always feel better when I can eat more than one meal a day.
I believe that is true of all humans, which is why you usually get a break for lunch while at work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
But yes, I know that you think the unemployed and disabled people are all lazy moochers who could get a decent job if they really wanted to, even the severely brain-damaged ones or the folks who are dying from cancer.

Who would Jesus bomb?
nice job at just throwing **** against the wall hoping somethign sticks.

First are you really going to tell me that many of those unemployed have no choice? If thats true, that says an awful lot about the failure of Democratic policies
and second

I'm agnostic, dont give a **** about your "Jesus" baiting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:23 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
It's amusing to watch the Dems worry about military spending while at the same time claim that government spending is good and stimulates the economy.
Thats pretty much my point as well.

Its like them running around telling everyone that we need to increase welfare and food stamps in order to stimulate the economy, and then getting all upset when the people collecting welfare and food stamps get called into question and the economy doesnt "boom" like they claimed it would.

Their policies never make any sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:25 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,464,007 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
There's no need to help improve people's lives when we can with equal ease spend huge amounts of taxpayer money on military boondoggles! F-35 Engines From United Technologies Called Unreliable by GAO - Bloomberg Business

(singing)
Call me, unreliable...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:28 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
The military needs to cut wasteful spending just like those programs that we see so successfully "improve people's lives" across the country.
But there is no need to cut wasteful spending when the budgets for these programs continue to increase yearly. As much as I disliked Clinton, at least he acknowledged that the government was growing too fast, (after he fought Gingrich of course) and slowed down the growth thereby making departments do more with less. Until you make departments save, they arent going to cut down on wasteful spending.
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 11:00 AM.

© 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