Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

here's some (but not all) the facts on taxes...
[URL="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/06/mccain_vs_obama_on_taxes.html?hpid=topnews"]McCain vs Obama on taxes - Fact Checker[/URL]

mccain wants to keep the bush cuts, cut a few more taxes and give 2.5k-5k to individuals for health insurance. big on nuclear plants which lead to cheaper energy (and if someone finally decides to create sane nuclear fuel policy reduces the amount of radioactive waste to nothing and makes it even cheaper, probably not happening short term though).

obama wants to expire the bush cuts (would would be the largest tax increase by value since WWII, but only the 5th largest increase by Gross National Product, which is a better indicator), increase capital gains taxes from 15 to 20%, increase taxes quite a bit on those making over 250k a year, and also offer credits to those needing health insurance. he also wants to decrease costs of health insurance with more/stricter regulation (but i strongly doubt that that happens).


obama is thinking in a much shorter term about fixing income inequality, but in the long term its hard to say that increasing the penalty for investing is a good idea. mccain's increasing tax cuts beyond bush may not be the greatest idea either. both want emission credits for polluters, which definitely isn't perfect, but i guess it's better than nothing (florida already does something like that, at least with eglin afb, where they track all use of hazmats and report it, then pay a fee per year for the total pollution created by the base).

but if you really wanted to save money, you'd increase the military to where it was before BRAC and clinton hit it instead of wasting SOOO much more money on contractors. A contracted termite exterminator makes 120k a year in iraq, an army exterminator makes 25k (closer to 40-50k with all bonuses etc). with what we've spent on contractors over the price of the old bigger military, we could have kept the bigger military for 25 more years and still be ahead. terrible economic decision.

farm subsidies is another economic issue that could easily save money, since so many people with no business in agriculture use it as a tax shelter (celebs, bankers, etc). it's like rich person welfare, only it's a lot more money, and none of the non-farmers (and a lot of corporate farmers) don't actually need it. MUCH smaller scale though than the above.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

That Guy, start another thread on the tax debate and I'll throw up a poll there. Let's keep this thread about education

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=SmootSmack;452337]Just curious, has anyone's opinion changed or been affected on who they will vote for based on these Understanding The Issues threads I've started?[/quote]

I can only speak for myself, but I can't say my opinion of the candidates has changed [I]appreciably[/I]. This is partly because I think I already have a good understanding of where they're coming from on each issue. But these threads have served to educate me and the discussion has been very intelligent and thought provoking. These threads are a tremendous motivation to get up in the morning and check The Warpath first thing.

While my opinion of the candidates themselves hasn't been appreciably altered, I have learned [I]some[/I] details of their stances, and have been surprised at times to discover that there are some democratic things I like, and some republican things I dislike. As a result, these threads have helped me gain an understanding of just how moderate I am.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=onlydarksets;452336]I couldn't disagree more on single-parents - who deserves help more than a full-time working mother or father? [B]What does the reason why they are doing it alone matter?[/B] Now, if they aren't working full-time then, of course, I would agree. I think that criteria would weed out a lot of the bad apples. (one opinionated opinion deserves another, right?)

As for families with two parents, $200/kid (which is not the uniform cost, of course) can be prohibitive if you have a household income of $20k (which accounts for 20% of the US households). Now, I would agree it's a murky area if you have 8 kids. But for those with even 2 kids, there just isn't $4800/year for the care they need.[/quote]

To me, it matters a lot.

If you had unprotected sex before marriage and ended up as a single parent, even though you're probably receiving child support, you got yourself into that mess. I don't think it should be my responsibility as a taxpayer, who was careful to use protection during sex in my single years, to bail you out. I'm here taking care of myself and acting responsible, and now I have to pay taxes to bail these people out who didn't? I'm all for helping people who are down on their luck; ie husband was laid off from a manufacturing job and decided to run out on the family, spouse killed in an auto accident leaving a single mom raising 3 kids, etcetera. But that's only a small % of single parents, the majority are in that situation because of bad decision-making.

Now, the kids come first. So my distaste for the choices made by the parents shouldn't hold kids back. They can't help the situation they were born into. So in the end I relent; I have to say I agree with helping these kids with after-care programs.

But it doesn't taste good.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452350]Unless I am not privy to some information you are my understanding is that he is going to "jack up" the tax rate on the top 2% of income earners. These are the same people who hardly pay the same tax rate as middle class Americans.

As for his foreign policy statements, what exactly rubs you the wrong way? I mean, seriously, should we continue to plug a square peg in a round hole? Whatever we're currently doing isn't working so shouldn't we try something difference? Talking to people isn't naive, it's the most sensible thing to do. Even if you don't get anywhere by talking it doesn't mean you shouldn't try. [B]"Bomb bomb bomb"[/B] doesn't work.

I don't get all the experience talk either. I mean, no one in their right mind hires someone based on experience alone. You can have all the experience in the world and still be a worthless POS. It's policy, policy, policy!

p.s. Greg Brown has experience...I would throw that mother f*cker under the bus, over the bridge, and if possible, in the lion's den at the zoo.[/quote]

Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452366]To me, it matters a lot.

If you had unprotected sex before marriage and ended up as a single parent, even though you're probably receiving child support, you got yourself into that mess. I don't think it should be my responsibility as a taxpayer, who was careful to use protection during sex in my single years, to bail you out. I'm here taking care of myself and acting responsible, and now I have to pay taxes to bail these people out who didn't? I'm all for helping people who are down on their luck; ie husband was laid off from a manufacturing job and decided to run out on the family, spouse killed in an auto accident leaving a single mom raising 3 kids, etcetera. But that's only a small % of single parents, the majority are in that situation because of bad decision-making.

Now, the kids come first. So my distaste for the choices made by the parents shouldn't hold kids back. They can't help the situation they were born into. So in the end I relent; I have to say I agree with helping these kids with after-care programs.

But it doesn't taste good.[/quote]

Wow I hope you make it through life and never make a bad decision. If my tax money went to someone to help them through a bad decision I would be happy. The sad thing is our tax money is mainly wasted on missles being used to kill other people.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452333]As long as your school/teachers are striking the appropriate balance between teaching the core material and teaching how to analyze the questions, then I think the kids are in good shape. Remember, kids don't take these tests every year. They take them in like 1st grade, then 4th, then 7th, then 11th. Or something like that (I don't know the exact years). But my point is there are like 3 or 4 years between tests. In all that time, kids are not spending an inordinate amount of time on the test analysis. They're getting the building blocks over time, then when they come to the year for test time, then they get the analysis stuff.

I'll bet if you ask 4th grade teachers (or whatever year they administer the test), they're probably the ones most aggravated and affected. The other teachers probably don't care much, as they get to focus on core curriculum.[/quote]

In Virginia, the SOL's are taken every grade level except kindergarten. I'm fairly certain that any state that wants to keep receiving federal money for meeting the No Child Left Behind requirements has to have some form of yearly standardized testing for every grade level.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

I agree with what you said on several things except this.

but if you really wanted to save money, you'd increase the military to where it was before BRAC and clinton hit it instead of wasting SOOO much more money on contractors. A contracted termite exterminator makes 120k a year in iraq, an army exterminator makes 25k (closer to 40-50k with all bonuses etc). with what we've spent on contractors over the price of the old bigger military, we could have kept the bigger military for 25 more years and still be

While I agree a contractor makes more money up front than a person in the service the difference is in the benifits. So we pay a contractor 125 k for two years and we are done paying them but a person in the service will receive benifits for a life time making their cost much, much more. I'm not getting into which way is the best but it is much cheaper to use contractors for alot of jobs.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452366]To me, it matters a lot.

If you had unprotected sex before marriage and ended up as a single parent, even though you're probably receiving child support, you got yourself into that mess. I don't think it should be my responsibility as a taxpayer, who was careful to use protection during sex in my single years, to bail you out. I'm here taking care of myself and acting responsible, and now I have to pay taxes to bail these people out who didn't? I'm all for helping people who are down on their luck; ie husband was laid off from a manufacturing job and decided to run out on the family, spouse killed in an auto accident leaving a single mom raising 3 kids, etcetera. But that's only a small % of single parents, the majority are in that situation because of bad decision-making.

Now, the kids come first. So my distaste for the choices made by the parents shouldn't hold kids back. They can't help the situation they were born into. So in the end I relent; I have to say I agree with helping these kids with after-care programs.

But it doesn't taste good.[/quote]
To add on to what he said each time we offer a new benfit to unwed mothers or fathers it just makes it that much easier for them to keep doing what they are doing. Its not like allot of them make this mistake once, they have several children with different dads and just keep combounding the problem knowing that big goverment will do just enough to keep them going.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=SmootSmack;452337]Just curious, has anyone's opinion changed or been affected on who they will vote for based on these Understanding The Issues threads I've started?[/quote]
My opinion of the candidates hasn't been changed, but if I jump into any of these discussion it forces me to do some further research into each candidate's positions...which is a very good thing.

I think these threads are a good idea. They won't change the opinion of supporters on either side, but the posts in the thread that are thoughtful, show some level of research or critical thinking, and make an argument backed up by fact, not rhetoric will be helpful for folks out there who are truly undecided or uninformed.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;452365]I can only speak for myself, but I can't say my opinion of the candidates has changed [I]appreciably[/I]. This is partly because I think I already have a good understanding of where they're coming from on each issue. But these threads have served to educate me and the discussion has been very intelligent and thought provoking. These threads are a tremendous motivation to get up in the morning and check The Warpath first thing.

While my opinion of the candidates themselves hasn't been appreciably altered, I have learned [I]some[/I] details of their stances, and have been surprised at times to discover that there are some democratic things I like, and some republican things I dislike. As a result, these threads have helped me gain an understanding of just how moderate I am.[/QUOTE]

Well, the reason for starting them was to generate some discussion on actual issues and to go beyond inanities such as "a vote for McCain is a vote for death" (or whatever it was that said on this board recently.

Also, hopefully these are giving some of the younger chaps out there who may be voting for the first time some ammo with which to make a decision, beyond just "well my parents are voting for McCain so I guess I will too."

These are important times, and I think far too often voters simply don't know why they are making the decisions they make.

At the very least, these have been educational for me. And maybe, just maybe, I'm more of a Democrat than I ever imagined.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=firstdown;452386]To add on to what he said each time we offer a new benfit to unwed mothers or fathers it just makes it that much easier for them to keep doing what they are doing. Its not like allot of them make this mistake once, they have several children with different dads and just keep combounding the problem knowing that big goverment will do just enough to keep them going.[/quote]

I agree on principle what you're saying, but the hard-working, dual-income parents suffer now because we don't want the "bad decision makers" to receive the benefits of a well funded after school program. Not increasing the funding for the program will not decrease the amount of single parents and the amount of children they have. I don't think the benefit of keeping your kids enrolled in an after school program is a consideration for having more kids out of wedlock. Parents don't warn their teenage daughters that if they have unprotected sex then their kids will go to after school programs while they work. Bottom line is there are and always will be children that need some place to go after school that is safe while their parents are working.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=mredskins;452371]Wow I hope you make it through life and never make a bad decision. If my tax money went to someone to help them through a bad decision I would be happy. The sad thing is our tax money is mainly wasted on missles being used to kill other people.[/quote]

If I make my bed, I expect to lie in it. I don't want the government's help.

And those missiles are there to keep you safe, homey. It's not like the US government goes around killing innocent civilians all the damn time. Those missiles are designed to kill people who are TRYING TO KILL YOU. Yes YOU.

This hyperbole about the US government being evil and just out to kill people needs to stop. It's ridiculous and uneducated.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;452367]Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.[/QUOTE]

I think he's probably expounding on McCain's perhaps ill-timed joke of "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys' Barbara Ann

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452393]If I make my bed, I expect to lie in it. I don't want the government's help.

And those missiles are there to keep you safe, homey. It's not like the US government goes around killing innocent civilians all the damn time. Those missiles are designed to kill people who are TRYING TO KILL YOU. Yes YOU.

This hyperbole about the US government being evil and just out to kill people needs to stop. It's ridiculous and uneducated.[/quote]

Ok I nominate you the person who goes down and tells the single parent and their hungary child they can't have food becuse they made a poor decision.

As far as missilies go it takes two to fight. America sticks their noses in far too much shit that is none of our business.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=mredskins;452401]Ok I nominate you the person who goes down and tells the single parent and their hungary child they can't have food becuse they made a poor decision. [/quote]
Nobody says they can't have food, but it is not the governments responsibility to give it to them. Whatever happened to working hard and taking responsibility for your own actions.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452367]Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.[/quote]


Whose talking about the opposing party? "Bomb bomb bomb" is a direct McCain quote, a joke he made that was not funny. He's the one that say he won't sit down unless all our demands are met. It's not funny and it's not diplomacy. Same goes for Bush.

I will have you know I know fully well what the opposing party's platform is and I disagree pretty much with their oppressive platform. Hell, they don't even honor their platform. Dismiss all you want but hey man, you're entitled to your opinion and generalizations too (poor are poor because they want to be poor).

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=mredskins;452401]Ok I nominate you the person who goes down and tells the single parent and their hungary child they can't have food becuse they made a poor decision.

As far as missilies go it takes two to fight. America sticks their noses in far too much shit that is none of our business.[/quote]
I agree that I do not want to see children going hungry which when it occures here is usuall the fault of the parent not taking advantage of programs allready in place. Then you have the local churches and organizations which help low income parents. I just feel that local goverment is better set up to take care of their own people. With the federal goverment we pay them to collect the tax, pay them to process the funds to the states, then pay the sates to send the money to the cities, then pay the cities to distribute the money. I have heard that 1 out of 4 dollars make it back to the people for social programs.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;452393]And those missiles are there to keep you safe, homey. It's not like the US government goes around killing innocent civilians all the damn time. Those missiles are designed to kill people who are TRYING TO KILL YOU. Yes YOU.

This hyperbole about the US government being evil and just out to kill people needs to stop. It's ridiculous and uneducated.[/QUOTE]

Just to briefly expand on that.

It may be tempting to make the seemingly reasonable suggestion that "everyone" should disarm. But the deterrent effect of military power aside, the credibility of the disarmament depends directly on the transparency of the government. For that reason, I firmly believe that, yes, democratic governments have more of a "right" to possess nuclear weapons and even WMD than non-democratic ones. I didn't have a problem when, for example, India detonated nuclear weapons in 1998. On 12/13/01, there were armed gunmen about to storm into the capitol building in Delhi and open fire on a hall full of ministers leaving session. And although that attack was traced back across the border, India did not, and has not, taken military action. I don't know that history can truly show a war between two democratic nations (unless you count the Civil War I suppose). Totalitarian regimes, however, don't have any such mechanisms of restraint against the use of such weapons for aggressive purposes.

The problem with the projection of American power is that many believe it is always done only in economic self-interest, particularly now because we have the "Oil" President. And in the 1950's and '60s, it is true that the U.S. played a hand in toppling governments in order to install "our SOBs." That history, traditional imperialism, taints all discussions of U.S. use of force today. Another problem is that, unfortunately, many Americans believe foreign affairs began on 9/11/01 because few in the U.S. had cared
about anything international since 1991. So yes, we forget that the U.S. snubbed Kyoto and the ABM Agreement (and even reneged on its agreement with N. Korea, which has contributed to the crisis there today). There was this back of the hand disdain for any order imposed by anyone but ourselves. Sort of like the kid in the cafeteria that thinks he can butt in line anywhere he wants and even swipe a piece of bread off someone else's tray if he wants too. Then everything changed.

So we have this amnesia and in that amnesia we believe that the sun was shining, the birds were chirping, the kids were playing and then, all of a sudden, one fine day, "we were attacked." Unprovoked, unjustified, as if there had been no history before then. And because of that we operate under this philosophy of "good vs. evil." We brainwash ourelves with our own notion of "moral clarity," and in doing so don't actually think that there could be another way of looking at things. And that's all wrong. Because the U.S. can't behave irresponsibly like that. That's not the way a superpower behaves.

Like a dad, a superpower has to understand that what it does is just, if not more, important than what it says. If dad respects mom, then big brother will respect little brother and so forth. Dad doesn't need to prove he's dad; everyone knows that. But dad does need to set the tone for how everyone else in the family gets along. And the U.S. still has some growing up to do in that department.

But, like it or not, the U.S. IS the superpower of today's world. That is a fact. And because it can, it does project its power and its interest around the world. That being said, however, today's U.S. is a relatively benign superpower. It does not have traditional imperialistic territorial ambitions. It does certainly pursue its economic self-interest, but it's more profound than that. The U.S. has the lowest trade barriers (I believe) and is the dispenser of the most foreign aid, neither of which are in its immediate and direct economic self-interest. If all the U.S. wanted out of the Middle East was "oil," it could just as well have cozied up to a leader like Hussein. After all, wouldn't it have been simple certainty to invest in the one man at the switch of the spigot rather than to risk it to millions? And the U.S. is made up immigrants from all over the world, a diversity that slowly, but surely, is swaying its policies. It is the most representative country that there is.

But the U.S. does bother with these things. It bothers with defending free elections and open markets until tearing down the Iron Curtain. And it bothers with defending against genocide by a despot on trial in a docket in the Hague (the now deceased Milosevic). And it bothers now to run to the desert.

In 2000, the U.S. had a humorous and even embarrassing episode whereby it couldn't pick its own President. But for the month that that went on, the country functioned normally and not a drop of blood was shed.

In 2001, out of the clear blue sky, two airplanes took down two of our tallest buildings and 3,000 civilians with them. Not to mention an airplane that was taken down in Pennsylvania by passengers who plunged themselves to their own deaths when they realized the plane was trying to go to Washington. That same day, Congress assembled in the open air on the Capitol steps to sing a patriotic song.

As naive as this sounds, I really do believe all this "freedom" stuff. And I think the world has been and is better for it.

There’s some “Education” for you bitches!

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452393]If I make my bed, I expect to lie in it. I don't want the government's help.

And those missiles are there to keep you safe, homey. [B] It's not like the US government goes around killing innocent civilians all the damn time[/B]. Those missiles are designed to kill people who are TRYING TO KILL YOU. Yes YOU.

This hyperbole about the US government being evil and just out to kill people needs to stop. It's ridiculous and uneducated.[/quote]

How comforting to those who have been killed and their families. But hey, your family is safe thanks to those missiles.

Please feel free to dismiss this post too.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452414]How comforting to those who have been killed and their families. But hey, your family is safe thanks to those missiles.

Please feel free to dismiss this post too.[/quote]

I already have.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452407]Whose talking about the opposing party? "Bomb bomb bomb" is a direct McCain quote, a joke he made that was not funny. He's the one that say he won't sit down unless all our demands are met. It's not funny and it's not diplomacy. Same goes for Bush.

I will have you know I know fully well what the opposing party's platform is and I disagree pretty much with their oppressive platform. Hell, they don't even honor their platform. Dismiss all you want but hey man, you're entitled to your opinion and generalizations too [B](poor are poor because they want to be poor).[/B][/quote]

I never said those words. Go back and read my posts.

I've said I'm all for helping people out who are down on their luck, such as someone who has lost a job or a single mom who lost her husband to an auto accident. But I don't like the idea of helping people who simply make poor decisions.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=mredskins;452401]Ok I nominate you the person who goes down and tells the single parent and their hungary child they can't have food becuse they made a poor decision.

As far as missilies go it takes two to fight. America sticks their noses in far too much shit that is none of our business.[/quote]

Please show me in my post history where I've ever said that the poor shouldn't be provided with food by the government.

This discussion is about after-care, programs for keeping kids busy and safe after school.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=SmootSmack;452410]Just to briefly expand on that.

It may be tempting to make the seemingly reasonable suggestion that "everyone" should disarm. But the deterrent effect of military power aside, the credibility of the disarmament depends directly on the transparency of the government. For that reason, I firmly believe that, yes, democratic governments have more of a "right" to possess nuclear weapons and even WMD than non-democratic ones. I didn't have a problem when, for example, India detonated nuclear weapons in 1998. On 12/13/01, there were armed gunmen about to storm into the capitol building in Delhi and open fire on a hall full of ministers leaving session. And although that attack was traced back across the border, India did not, and has not, taken military action. I don't know that history can truly show a war between two democratic nations (unless you count the Civil War I suppose). Totalitarian regimes, however, don't have any such mechanisms of restraint against the use of such weapons for aggressive purposes.

The problem with the projection of American power is that many believe it is always done only in economic self-interest, particularly now because we have the "Oil" President. And in the 1950's and '60s, it is true that the U.S. played a hand in toppling governments in order to install "our SOBs." That history, traditional imperialism, taints all discussions of U.S. use of force today. Another problem is that, unfortunately, many Americans believe foreign affairs began on 9/11/01 because few in the U.S. had cared
about anything international since 1991. So yes, we forget that the U.S. snubbed Kyoto and the ABM Agreement (and even reneged on its agreement with N. Korea, which has contributed to the crisis there today). There was this back of the hand disdain for any order imposed by anyone but ourselves. Sort of like the kid in the cafeteria that thinks he can butt in line anywhere he wants and even swipe a piece of bread off someone else's tray if he wants too. Then everything changed.

So we have this amnesia and in that amnesia we believe that the sun was shining, the birds were chirping, the kids were playing and then, all of a sudden, one fine day, "we were attacked." Unprovoked, unjustified, as if there had been no history before then. And because of that we operate under this philosophy of "good vs. evil." We brainwash ourelves with our own notion of "moral clarity," and in doing so don't actually think that there could be another way of looking at things. And that's all wrong. Because the U.S. can't behave irresponsibly like that. That's not the way a superpower behaves.

Like a dad, a superpower has to understand that what it does is just, if not more, important than what it says. If dad respects mom, then big brother will respect little brother and so forth. Dad doesn't need to prove he's dad; everyone knows that. But dad does need to set the tone for how everyone else in the family gets along. And the U.S. still has some growing up to do in that department.

But, like it or not, the U.S. IS the superpower of today's world. That is a fact. And because it can, it does project its power and its interest around the world. That being said, however, today's U.S. is a relatively benign superpower. It does not have traditional imperialistic territorial ambitions. It does certainly pursue its economic self-interest, but it's more profound than that. The U.S. has the lowest trade barriers (I believe) and is the dispenser of the most foreign aid, neither of which are in its immediate and direct economic self-interest. If all the U.S. wanted out of the Middle East was "oil," it could just as well have cozied up to a leader like Hussein. After all, wouldn't it have been simple certainty to invest in the one man at the switch of the spigot rather than to risk it to millions? And the U.S. is made up immigrants from all over the world, a diversity that slowly, but surely, is swaying its policies. It is the most representative country that there is.

But the U.S. does bother with these things. It bothers with defending free elections and open markets until tearing down the Iron Curtain. And it bothers with defending against genocide by a despot on trial in a docket in the Hague (the now deceased Milosevic). And it bothers now to run to the desert.

In 2000, the U.S. had a humorous and even embarrassing episode whereby it couldn't pick its own President. But for the month that that went on, the country functioned normally and not a drop of blood was shed.

In 2001, out of the clear blue sky, two airplanes took down two of our tallest buildings and 3,000 civilians with them. Not to mention an airplane that was taken down in Pennsylvania by passengers who plunged themselves to their own deaths when they realized the plane was trying to go to Washington. That same day, Congress assembled in the open air on the Capitol steps to sing a patriotic song.

As naive as this sounds, I really do believe all this "freedom" stuff. And I think the world has been and is better for it.

There’s some “Education” for you bitches![/quote]
I agree with most of what you said but most of all I which I could but words down on paper (or internet) the way you and some others here can do. When I read my post after one like yours I realize how I did not take advantage of school and my post read like I'm in 10th grade. I did make it out of high school but that was about it as I did not apply myself as I should have. I have over come that by becomming very good at what I do and do own a very good business with several employees. So for the ones still in school take advantage of what you have for other like me find what you want to do and just become the best you can at that job.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452416]I never said those words. Go back and read my posts.

I've said I'm all for helping people out who are down on their luck, such as someone who has lost a job or a single mom who lost her husband to an auto accident. But I don't like the idea of helping people who simply make poor decisions.[/quote]


Apologies. I hear that train of thought so often I assumed that's what you were implying.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Schneed10;452366]To me, it matters a lot.

If you had unprotected sex before marriage and ended up as a single parent, even though you're probably receiving child support, you got yourself into that mess. I don't think it should be my responsibility as a taxpayer, who was careful to use protection during sex in my single years, to bail you out. I'm here taking care of myself and acting responsible, and now I have to pay taxes to bail these people out who didn't? I'm all for helping people who are down on their luck; ie husband was laid off from a manufacturing job and decided to run out on the family, spouse killed in an auto accident leaving a single mom raising 3 kids, etcetera. But that's only a small % of single parents, the majority are in that situation because of bad decision-making.

Now, the kids come first. So my distaste for the choices made by the parents shouldn't hold kids back. They can't help the situation they were born into. So in the end I relent; I have to say I agree with helping these kids with after-care programs.

But it doesn't taste good.[/quote]

There are often reasons for those people that make poor life decisions... chances are they grew up in an environment with little to no guidance and no solid role models in place to help form their decision making process in to one of a responsible person.

I'm all for personal responsibility, but I think it's important to consider that some people didn't have the same guidance and solid support system in place during their formative years.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=That Guy;452357]talking to our enemies while bombing our allies ([B]iran[/B]/[B]pakistan[/B]) then later pulling back on talking to iran. his foreign policy outside of a massively oversped pull out (another bad idea) seems very haphazard, and he's had to re-state and change his opinion on an awful lot of ideas.

I only brought up his inexperience (and only in the context of foreign policy) because it's very obvious and it's made him look stupid a number of times.

as far as tax rates, it's not just the top 2% and it's not just a minor deal. he wants f'ing socialized medicine - do you have any idea what that costs? either its insanely expensive or it's worthlessly bad (ask the swedes or brits about it). the japanese have a sorta decent idea (you pay 100% upfront, the gov pays you 80% back - so if you try to defraud them, you can get yourself royally screwed and it limits exposure to the million dollar a day cases) but it'll never be cheap or paid for solely by minor tax hikes on the top 2%.

it seems like you like obama a whole lot, but he has flaws, and using strawman to try and cover them up is pretty weak.[/quote]

Iran isn't our allies and Pakistan is a dictatorship we're prepping-up.

Yes I like Obama but I have some misgivings as well. Him getting up there in front of AIPAC and pandering bothered me. One part of me thinks it's just politics, another see this as a sign of things to come. I'll admit that he is not perfect but when I look at McCain and Hillary he is certainly the "lesser of the three evils."

I'd also like to add that McCain has all the experience in the world but when you look at his overall policy I really wonder how he is any difference from Bush. If people are happy with Bush that's fine but don't tell me policy wise McCain is going to be better for America than Bush or has new ideas.

As for Japan's health care system, I couldn't find any information to support your claim. I did however find [URL="http://www.nchc.org/facts/Japan.pdf"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=748340/cl=14/nw=1/rpsv/cgi-bin/wppdf?file=5lgsjhvj7r9x.pdf"]this[/URL]. Sounds like a good universal health care system to me (control prices, allow flexibility and works for everyone).

[quote][B]Who provides health care in Japan?[/B]
Japan has a system of universal health coverage, although individuals may receive coverage quite differently. It can be divided into two broad categories: National Health Insurance and Employees’ Health Insurance. Membership in either program is compulsory. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, private health insurance is rarely utilized in Japan.

Employee Health Insurance covers people who are working for medium to large companies; national or local government; or private schools. There is also a government-managed program within this plan for employees of small businesses. Premiums are based on monthly salary (excluding bonuses) and half is paid by the employer, half by the employee. The average contribution is around 4% of the person’s salary. Those covered under Employee Health Insurance pay 20% of their medical costs when hospitalized and 30% of the costs for out-patient care. Co-payments may also be required for prescription drugs. Costs are shared by the patients up to a certain ceiling, after which they receive full coverage. In case of long-term illness, the patients or the patients’ spouse receive an allowance based on their salary; in case of death, an allowance for the funeral is also paid.

National Health Insurance covers workers in agriculture, forestry, or fisheries, those that are self-employed, and those not employed (including expectant mothers, students, retirees, etc). “A working mother, for example, would withdraw from her company’s insurance and join the National scheme in her local ward or city. The local office provides a lump sum towards childbirth costs (on average around 300,000 yen) and a small monthly allowance afterwards.” Under this plan the insured pay 30% of in- or out-patient costs, as well as co-payments for prescription drugs. Similarly to the Employee Health Insurance program, patients share costs up to a certain ceiling, after which point they receive full coverage. Premiums are based on salary, property, and dependents; on average, the premiums are about 4% of salary. Coverage includes sickness, injury, necessary dental work, childbirth, and death of the insured or their dependents. Conditions and treatments not covered by this insurance plan include orthodontic work, cosmetic surgery, vaccinations, abortions, injuries incurred while drunk or fighting, and treatment outside of Japan.

There is also a national health program for the Elderly. People over 70 qualify for this program, which is funded by contributions from the two main plans.[/quote]

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=firstdown;452385]
While I agree a contractor makes more money up front than a person in the service the difference is in the benifits. So we pay a contractor 125 k for two years and we are done paying them but a person in the service will receive benifits for a life time making their cost much, much more. I'm not getting into which way is the best but it is much cheaper to use contractors for alot of jobs.[/quote]

wha?? you mean the life time benefits after TWENTY+ YEARS of making craptacular pay? or are you forgetting the overhead paid to hal etc on top of that 120k salary (admin costs, his employer insurance and benefits, his food and housing over there, and 20% on top of that as the profit portion of the cost + contracts).

it's not cheaper, and it's not even close.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452429]Iran isn't our allies [/quote]

no shit sherlock. those are the enemies he rather talk to while bombing pakistan, and then later reneged on.

[quote]and Pakistan is a dictatorship we're prepping-up. [/quote]

that's not a gross over generalization at all. musharaf is giving up his power, it's actually not a dictatorship, but i guess that meshes better with your simple me right you wrong view of the world.

[quote]Yes I like Obama but I have some misgivings as well. Him getting up there in front of AIPAC and pandering bothered me. One part of me thinks it's just politics, another see this as a sign of things to come. I'll admit that he is not perfect but when I look at McCain and Hillary he is certainly the "lesser of the three evils."

I'd also like to add that McCain has all the experience in the world but when you look at his overall policy I really wonder how he is any difference from Bush. If people are happy with Bush that's fine but don't tell me policy wise McCain is going to be better for America than Bush or has new ideas.
[/quote]

are you even paying any attention at all to politics? stuff like that really has me wondering. emissions cap and trade and health insurance are both shared issues with obama and a break from bush. nuclear, anti-pork, anti-farm subsidies, finance reform - all different than bush. admission that global warming exists - different than bush. better luck next time.

[quote]
As for Japan's health care system, I couldn't find any information to support your claim. I did however find [URL="http://www.nchc.org/facts/Japan.pdf"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=748340/cl=14/nw=1/rpsv/cgi-bin/wppdf?file=5lgsjhvj7r9x.pdf"]this[/URL]. Sounds like a good universal health care system to me (control prices, allow flexibility and works for everyone).[/quote]

you couldn't find anything to support my claim, and then you post an article re-stating the same thing i just said. amazing. and yeah, i said as far as socialized health care, japan's is the best, i'm glad you agreed while trying so hard to disagree.

jeez.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Mattyk72;452428]There are often reasons for those people that make poor life decisions... chances are they grew up in an environment with little to no guidance and no solid role models in place to help form their decision making process in to one of a responsible person.

I'm all for personal responsibility, but I think it's important to consider that some people didn't have the same guidance and solid support system in place during their formative years.[/quote]
Most of those people grew up in a household where they learned how to work the system and get every penny they can from the goverment. So it gos both ways. here is a whole culture of people in the system having children that get in the system who have children in the system etc..... and until we break those cycles the system will remain broken so adding on to the system is really not helping at all. The federal goverment has spent how many billions of dollars fighting poverty and it has done nothing. So my conclusion is not to keep throwing money into a broken system.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=Mattyk72;452428]There are often reasons for those people that make poor life decisions... chances are they grew up in an environment with little to no guidance and no solid role models in place to help form their decision making process in to one of a responsible person.

I'm all for personal responsibility, but I think it's important to consider that some people didn't have the same guidance and solid support system in place during their formative years.[/quote]

That sounds an awful lot like saying:

Because kids grew up in a broken home, they should continue to be treated as children once they are 18 years old, because they never learned to be a responsible adult.

I don't buy it. By the time you hit 18, your free pass expires. You're expected to be responsible and make wise choices.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=That Guy;452432]no shit sherlock. those are the enemies he rather talk to while bombing pakistan, and then later reneged on.
[/quote]

Perhaps you should re-read your post Mrs Popping? I'm not the one that posted the following and I will have you know I really did try to understand WTF you're trying to say.

[quote]talking to our enemies while bombing our allies ([B]iran[/B]/[B]pakistan[/B]) then later pulling back on talking to iran[/quote][quote=That Guy;452432] that's not a gross over generalization at all. musharaf is giving up his power, it's actually not a dictatorship, but i guess that meshes better with your simple me right you wrong view of the world.[/quote]

He's going to do it any day now, you just wait and see and we'll do everything it's power to bring democracy to Pakistan. Fair and free elections in Pakistan is just around the corner and Benazir Bhutto's son will lead Pakistan to the promise land.

[quote=That Guy;452432] are you even paying any attention at all to politics? stuff like that really has me wondering. emissions cap and trade and health insurance are both shared issues with obama and a break from bush. nuclear, anti-pork, anti-farm subsidies, finance reform - all different than bush. admission that global warming exists - different than bush. better luck next time.[/quote]

Bush is [URL="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10569.html"]anti-farm bill[/URL] (only because we don't have the money to pay for it), for [URL="http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/"]nuclear energy[/URL] and McCain talks tough about the environment but policy wise it's without substance. His rhetoric certainly doesn't match his voting record or [URL="http://capwiz.com/lcv_stage/bio/keyvotes/?id=192&congress=1102&lvl=C"]lack thereof[/URL]. He did a pretty good job with respect to finance reform and he is different from Bush in that respect but lets not forget that this is the same guy that uses [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/us/politics/27plane.html?pagewanted=print"]his wife's corporate jet[/URL] to his advantage and exploits a legal loophole in the reform bill he co-sponsored.


[quote=That Guy;452432] you couldn't find anything to support my claim, and then you post an article re-stating the same thing i just said. amazing. and yeah, i said as far as socialized health care, japan's is the best, i'm glad you agreed while trying so hard to disagree.

jeez.[/quote]

Jeez indeed...WTF are you talking about? Didn't you state the following? How exactly is your out-of-thin-air claim supported but the facts? As they say, you're entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.

[quote]the japanese have a sorta decent idea ([B]you pay 100% upfront[/B], [B]the gov pays you 80% back[/B] - so if you try to defraud them, you can get yourself royally screwed and it limits exposure to the million dollar a day cases)[/quote]

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=That Guy;452431]wha?? you mean the life time benefits after TWENTY+ YEARS of making craptacular pay? or are you forgetting the overhead paid to hal etc on top of that 120k salary (admin costs, his employer insurance and benefits, his food and housing over there, and 20% on top of that as the profit portion of the cost + contracts).

it's not cheaper, and it's not even close.[/quote]
In no way do I have any problems with our servicemans benefits and agree they are way under paid. I was responding to what you where saying about cost and the use of contractors. About a year ago I read a report about the use of contractors and cost v/s having a larger service and its cost. The numbers I read showed in most cases it was cheaper to use contractors because after the contract is up the cost stops. Then it showed the cost to train, house , benefits, (which we agree are not that great) and other cost such as moving them from place to place etc... add up to allot of money. It was not nor am I sugesting doing away with any of our forces and agree we should keep a strong military I was just responding to the cost part.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452444]Perhaps you should re-read your post Mrs Popping? I'm not the one that posted the following and I will have you know I really did try to understand WTF you're trying to say.[/quote]

then you should learn to read, iran was the former, pakistan was the latter, it's really not that hard.

[quote]
He's going to do it any day now, you just wait and see and we'll do everything it's power to bring democracy to Pakistan. Fair and free elections in Pakistan is just around the corner and Benazir Bhutto's son will lead Pakistan to the promise land. [/quote]you can be as childish as you like, but your speculation isn't any better than mine, and in light of that it'd probably be better to stick with the facts, but you seem opposed to that.

[quote]
Bush is [URL="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10569.html"]anti-farm bill[/URL] (only because we don't have the money to pay for it), for [URL="http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/"]nuclear energy[/URL] and McCain talks tough about the environment but policy wise it's without substance. His rhetoric certainly doesn't match his voting record or [URL="http://capwiz.com/lcv_stage/bio/keyvotes/?id=192&congress=1102&lvl=C"]lack thereof[/URL]. He did a pretty good job with respect to finance reform and he is different from Bush in that respect but lets not forget that this is the same guy that uses [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/us/politics/27plane.html?pagewanted=print"]his wife's corporate jet[/URL] to his advantage and exploits a legal loophole in the reform bill he co-sponsored.
[/quote]again, any proof against your opinions is written off. bush may be for nuclear, but is he going to get 30 reactors under construction before leaving office? mccain admits to global warming is far more than bush as done, and there are plenty of other instances (his voting record is only 85% with the GOP, obama votes on party lines 97% of the time, so much for change right?) but it's worthless wasting my time since you seem content on the "i'm right and your stupid routine," or else you might do a little research before making such blanket statements like you don't see how he's different without even bothering to look. emissions caps are different, health insurance credits are different (And again, obama is happy with both of those), yet you decide not to mention them at all.


[quote]
Jeez indeed...WTF are you talking about? Didn't you state the following? How exactly is your out-of-thin-air claim supported but the facts? As they say, you're entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.[/quote]you posted a f'ing article saying only 20% is consumer cost after i just said if you want socialized medicine japan is probably the closest and they pay 80% back, CAUSE I HAVE FRIENDS IN JAPAN, and they told me how it works there. i mean, do actually read the posts you're responding to?

if you can't be reasonable... i mean, you can ask for clarification without being an a-hole, and you can try using facts instead of opinions. i don't know why i'm even bothering to respond honestly, cause its obvious you're looking for excuses to say mccain is evil and can't seem to follow what's actually been said anyways.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=firstdown;452453]In no way do I have any problems with our servicemans benefits and agree they are way under paid. I was responding to what you where saying about cost and the use of contractors. About a year ago I read a report about the use of contractors and cost v/s having a larger service and its cost. The numbers I read showed in most cases it was cheaper to use contractors because after the contract is up the cost stops. Then it showed the cost to train, house , benefits, (which we agree are not that great) and other cost such as moving them from place to place etc... add up to allot of money. It was not nor am I sugesting doing away with any of our forces and agree we should keep a strong military I was just responding to the cost part.[/quote]

but how long was the cost analysis, cause 1 year with contractors vs 10 years of a bigger service is different than the 6+ years of deployed contractors with huge overheads.

when i looked at the numbers, with the amount of time in and the length of time a full contracting force will be over there on our dollar, the numbers for contracting over that span really didn't look very good.


and you've also got a lot of air force members doing army jobs (in lieu of) like sentry, towers, gates, convoys, bomb squad, patrols (cop cars), etc, and the army's not taking them back any time soon, since the army doesn't have enough manpower of its own right now.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

i've gone back and tried to make this easier for you.
[quote=me]
[COLOR="Red"]talking to our enemies[/COLOR] [COLOR="Blue"]while bombing our allies[/COLOR] ([COLOR="Red"]iran[/COLOR][B][size=3]/[/size][/B][COLOR="Blue"]pakistan[/COLOR])[/quote]

that's colored coded, in a former[B][size=3]/[/size][/B]latter configuration that's actually pretty common in English. so you can put that one to bed.

[quote=me]
the japanese have a sorta decent idea (you pay 100% upfront, the gov pays you 80% back[/quote]
[quote=you]
Those covered under Employee Health Insurance pay 20% of their medical costs when hospitalized
[/quote]

[quote=math]
what's 100% - 80%?[/quote]

again, you call it out-of-thin-air, i call it "cause my friends in japan are covered by the system so they probably know how it actually works", but to each his own... way to assume though.

lemme know if there's anything else you're having trouble with...

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=That Guy;452488]then you should learn to read, iran was the former, pakistan was the latter, it's really not that hard.

you can be as childish as you like, but your speculation isn't any better than mine, and in light of that it'd probably be better to stick with the facts, but you seem opposed to that.

again, any proof against your opinions is written off. bush may be for nuclear, but is he going to get 30 reactors under construction before leaving office? mccain admits to global warming is far more than bush as done, and there are plenty of other instances (his voting record is only 85% with the GOP, obama votes on party lines 97% of the time, so much for change right?) but it's worthless wasting my time since you seem content on the "i'm right and your stupid routine," or else you might do a little research before making such blanket statements like you don't see how he's different without even bothering to look. emissions caps are different, health insurance credits are different (And again, obama is happy with both of those), yet you decide not to mention them at all.


you posted a f'ing article saying only 20% is consumer cost after i just said if you want socialized medicine japan is probably the closest and they pay 80% back, CAUSE I HAVE FRIENDS IN JAPAN, and they told me how it works there. i mean, do actually read the posts you're responding to?

if you can't be reasonable... i mean, you can ask for clarification without being an a-hole, and you can try using facts instead of opinions. i don't know why i'm even bothering to respond honestly, cause its obvious you're looking for excuses to say mccain is evil and can't seem to follow what's actually been said anyways.[/quote]

I don't really care what you think of me but clearly you can't respond without getting angry and personal. I hope felt good getting it out of your system.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=That Guy;452491]again, you call it out-of-thin-air, i call it "cause my friends in japan are covered by the system so they probably know how it actually works", but to each his own... way to assume though.

lemme know if there's anything else you're having trouble with...[/quote]


Your statement implied that everyone pays that 20% which is not true with respect to the elderly and very poor. You neglect the fact that there's is a monthly ceiling for co-payments which means you never pay more than the ceiling in any given month (the cost is capped monthly but if you can't afford the 20% the government will assist you). In 1999 this ceiling was roughly $600 ($330 for those with low income and $1140 for those with significant income). The effective co-payment for the elderly was 7.3%.

Also, contribution to the program is a percentage based on your income (~4%) sorta like social security with everyone getting the same deal. There's government control across the board (drugs prices, profit margins on drugs, procedures prices, private insurance prices, level of interaction between doctors and private insurers, etc, etc). It's a highly complex system to say the least.

This my friend is a full blown socialized health care system. Let's just say I like it and I'm glad you like it too.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452495]I don't really care what you think of me but clearly you can't respond without getting angry and personal. I hope felt good getting it out of your system.[/quote]

i assure you that i'm not the least bit angry, but you should probably follow your own advice.

Re: Understanding the Issues: Education
 

[quote=saden1;452497]Your statement implied that everyone pays that 20% which is not true with respect to the elderly and very poor. You neglect the fact that there's is a monthly ceiling for co-payments which means you never pay more than the ceiling in any given month (the cost is capped monthly but if you can't afford the 20% the government will assist you). In 1999 this ceiling was roughly $600 ($330 for those with low income and $1140 for those with significant income). The effective co-payment for the elderly was 7.3%.

Also, contribution to the program is a percentage based on your income (~4%) sorta like social security with everyone getting the same deal. There's government control across the board (drugs prices, profit margins on drugs, procedures prices, private insurance prices, level of interaction between doctors and private insurers, etc, etc). It's a highly complex system to say the least.

This my friend is a full blown socialized health care system. Let's just say I like it and I'm glad you like it too.[/quote]

that's probably because the point was obama wants full socialized health care eventually and how he'd pay for it without tax increases. the japanese system was a footnote example, not an essay, cause again, that really was tangential to the discussion at hand, so i didn't think it was necessary.

i mean, i could levy the same statement back at you about every rash generalization you've made in this thread, so it seems like a silly thing to say. I'm glad you learned something though, and hopefully some of the baseless mccain crap can be shown the door.

neither one is perfect and neither one is really what i want, but i'll always choose smaller government and less senseless taxing (libertarian).

i'm all for social programs, but only if they can prevent abuse and show a clear economic/social benefit and a sane payment system, which most don't.

i mean, if someone went ahead and said social security is going to be killed off completely, they'd have my vote (since i save and invest and would get an amazingly better return on that money than some crap annuity when i'm 70), but it'll never happen. even if they just gave people the option to opt out and lose whatever they've contributed thusfar, i'd be jumping at it.

tax and legalize prostitution, drill where you can safely drill without massive eco-damage, i mean, there's a lot of small issues that make sense and would be very easy to implement (and added together, you'd get a better economy, less wasteful spending, more tax revenue, cheaper energy, less dependence etc), but there's so much that's verbotten it's stupid.

there was an actual argument over building a 120mill$ bridge to nowhere for a tiny (<100 i think) village... relocation across the water body or private cessna's for every person would have been cheaper, and they actually had to waste time entertaining that kind of crap. honestly the amount of pork in our spending is almost nothing compared to the budget or other nations, but hearing about it just rankles at how wasteful some people can be.