LordBrownTrout
Diamond Member
WE don't have to do away with SS. Just make it optional.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Fixed, in bold.You.
Want proof?
You pick how much you want to cut from defense spending, cut as you see fit
Whatever it is, I'll agree to it, so long as you agree to also cut $3.50 from entitlement spending for each $1.00 you cut from defense spending, cut as -I- see fit.
Deal?
$3.50? Um Sure! Deal.
Deal?
So... you look to government to impose your version of morality on those that do not share the same view.And if my taxes fund those programs, doesn't that make me support those people who benefit from those programs? I'm not the one calling for a reduction in my taxes, so I'm not against "acting upon it", now am I?
Actually, if you feel the only way to help your fellow man is through government programs, then yes, you are concerned you will fail to act on it on your own.
If you were sure you would act on it on your own, you would prefer taking the middle man out of the formula....and less money would go to the "cost of dcollecting and distributing" and more would go to the one who needs it.
Curious....do you feel the need to get a middle man to do your food shopping? Or do yopu feel that would be a complete waste of money?
If the governemnt wanted to run a program at the cost of the taxpayer to have all peoples food shopping done by a government employee....and the end result was the same food but at a price of 15% more than you would spend on your own.....would you lay back and say "works for me"?
Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
If you get to choose the defense cuts, then I get to choose the entitlement cuts.I'm fine with cutting and reforming, even at the rate you outlined, but what is cut within the programs would have to be discussed and agreed upon. Seems fair to me.Fixed, in bold.$3.50? Um Sure! Deal.
Deal?
An armed force that spends as much as the armies and navies and air forces of entire world combined is rather luxurious.Steak is a luxury.Why can't I eat steak if I have no money? The government does it.
Whem money is tight, luxuries are the first to go.
Public welfare spending is a luxury.
So... you look to government to impose your version of morality on those that do not share the same view.Actually, if you feel the only way to help your fellow man is through government programs, then yes, you are concerned you will fail to act on it on your own.
If you were sure you would act on it on your own, you would prefer taking the middle man out of the formula....and less money would go to the "cost of dcollecting and distributing" and more would go to the one who needs it.
Curious....do you feel the need to get a middle man to do your food shopping? Or do yopu feel that would be a complete waste of money?
If the governemnt wanted to run a program at the cost of the taxpayer to have all peoples food shopping done by a government employee....and the end result was the same food but at a price of 15% more than you would spend on your own.....would you lay back and say "works for me"?
Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
If you get to choose the defense cuts, then I get to choose the entitlement cuts.I'm fine with cutting and reforming, even at the rate you outlined, but what is cut within the programs would have to be discussed and agreed upon. Seems fair to me.Fixed, in bold.
Deal?
So, how much do you want to cut from defense spending?
Since you are happy to have government impose your version of morality on others that do not share your same view, what standing do you have to complain when those others use that same governent to impose their differing morality upon you?Show me someone who thinks that we shouldn't look after the sick, elderly and crippled and I'll show you someone who isn't an American.So... you look to government to impose your version of morality on those that do not share the same view.Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
And if my taxes fund those programs, doesn't that make me support those people who benefit from those programs? I'm not the one calling for a reduction in my taxes, so I'm not against "acting upon it", now am I?
Actually, if you feel the only way to help your fellow man is through government programs, then yes, you are concerned you will fail to act on it on your own.
If you were sure you would act on it on your own, you would prefer taking the middle man out of the formula....and less money would go to the "cost of dcollecting and distributing" and more would go to the one who needs it.
Curious....do you feel the need to get a middle man to do your food shopping? Or do yopu feel that would be a complete waste of money?
If the governemnt wanted to run a program at the cost of the taxpayer to have all peoples food shopping done by a government employee....and the end result was the same food but at a price of 15% more than you would spend on your own.....would you lay back and say "works for me"?
Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
Wait.... You complain about a 'bloated' defense budget, but cannot begin to begin to describe the degree to which it is bloated?If you get to choose the defense cuts, then I get to choose the entitlement cuts.I'm fine with cutting and reforming, even at the rate you outlined, but what is cut within the programs would have to be discussed and agreed upon. Seems fair to me.
So, how much do you want to cut from defense spending?
We can agree on the defense cuts too.
And I don't have a specific number for you. But I do know that removing all of our troops from the middle east and closing down a majority of our bases around the world, as well as discontinuing some of the more ridiculously expensive military equipment programs would be where I'd like to start the cutting.
We should and we do.So... you look to government to impose your version of morality on those that do not share the same view.Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
Show me someone who thinks that we shouldn't look after the sick, elderly and crippled and I'll show you someone who isn't an American.
Since you are happy to have government impose your version of morality on others that do not share your same view, what standing do you have to complain when those others use that same governent to impose their differing morality upon you?Show me someone who thinks that we shouldn't look after the sick, elderly and crippled and I'll show you someone who isn't an American.So... you look to government to impose your version of morality on those that do not share the same view.
An armed force that spends as much as the armies and navies and air forces of entire world combined is rather luxurious.Steak is a luxury.Why can't I eat steak if I have no money? The government does it.
Whem money is tight, luxuries are the first to go.
Public welfare spending is a luxury.
Everyone knows that isn't true. Except for Republicans on taxes and limiting government.
And it makes us look like fools or uncompromising jerks.
It very much is your version of morailty, as it is very much your version of what it means to be an American.It's not "my version"....Since you are happy to have government impose your version of morality on others that do not share your same view, what standing do you have to complain when those others use that same governent to impose their differing morality upon you?Show me someone who thinks that we shouldn't look after the sick, elderly and crippled and I'll show you someone who isn't an American.
Since you are happy to have government impose your version of morality on others that do not share your same view, what standing do you have to complain when those others use that same governent to impose their differing morality upon you?Show me someone who thinks that we shouldn't look after the sick, elderly and crippled and I'll show you someone who isn't an American.
It's not "my version". It's what is known as being an American. Sorry if you don't agree with that Comrade.
Actually, if you feel the only way to help your fellow man is through government programs, then yes, you are concerned you will fail to act on it on your own.
If you were sure you would act on it on your own, you would prefer taking the middle man out of the formula....and less money would go to the "cost of dcollecting and distributing" and more would go to the one who needs it.
Curious....do you feel the need to get a middle man to do your food shopping? Or do yopu feel that would be a complete waste of money?
If the governemnt wanted to run a program at the cost of the taxpayer to have all peoples food shopping done by a government employee....and the end result was the same food but at a price of 15% more than you would spend on your own.....would you lay back and say "works for me"?
Hey, I'm all about cutting out the middle man to make things more efficient. Look at my views on health insurance.
But I'll be honest, I don't have enough faith in the American people to all contribute as much as would be needed to help the sick, elderly, poor and crippled in this country. That's just not realistic to expect donations at the scale. Is the government doing it efficiently? Hell no, we all know that. But if my choices are the government mandating everyone pitch in to help through taxation, or leaving it up to "the kindness of peoples hearts", I just don't have the faith that my fellow Americans will come through. Reading the opinions of people on this site are enough to tell me that.
I disagree.
In NYC, when I pass a homeless man, I give..and so does pretty much every single person who passes him when I am in sight distance.
I watched citizens risk their lives to help people in Va when the plane hit the complex last week.
truck flipped on its side on the NYS thruway....I stopped my car and with about 10 other people that stopped, we all helped the driver out while deisel was spilling...
We actually turn away volunteers on Thanksgiving at a local shelter...and NEVER short handed on non holidays.
Are you aware of how many foundations there are?
Are you aware that the American people as a collective...NOT INCLUDING WHATTHE US GOVERNMENT GAVE...but the people as a collective alone gave more to Haiti after the earthquake than all other countries combined.
Have more faith in the American People.
I do.
Wait.... You complain about a 'bloated' defense budget, but cannot begin to begin to describe the degree to which it is bloated?If you get to choose the defense cuts, then I get to choose the entitlement cuts.
So, how much do you want to cut from defense spending?
We can agree on the defense cuts too.
And I don't have a specific number for you. But I do know that removing all of our troops from the middle east and closing down a majority of our bases around the world, as well as discontinuing some of the more ridiculously expensive military equipment programs would be where I'd like to start the cutting.
Interesting.I described the degree, I didn't give you a specific figure off the top of my head. I don't know what each and every one of those things I listed costs, sorry. But like I said, I'd like to start the conversation with those and see where that gets us.Wait.... You complain about a 'bloated' defense budget, but cannot begin to begin to describe the degree to which it is bloated?We can agree on the defense cuts too.
And I don't have a specific number for you. But I do know that removing all of our troops from the middle east and closing down a majority of our bases around the world, as well as discontinuing some of the more ridiculously expensive military equipment programs would be where I'd like to start the cutting.