|
Debating with the enemy Discuss politics, current events, and other hot button issues here. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
03-05-2013, 11:17 AM | #91 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
|
Advertisements |
03-05-2013, 11:34 AM | #92 | |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,480
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
If you end the Blue Angels, fly overs, you have to end this as well. A terrorist can do the exact same damage at any college, NBA, NHL game my friend. Our tax payer money doesn't need to be spent on the NFL, the NFL needs to spend that money. If you are in favor of spending the money for this, then by default, you have to agree to spend it at EVERY single event that has a large assembly. (concerts, NBA games, college games, NHL) It's a HUGE waste of spending.
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty |
|
03-05-2013, 12:05 PM | #93 |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Holland, Michigan
Posts: 5,741
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
__________________
REDSKINS FAN SINCE 1968 |
03-05-2013, 12:09 PM | #94 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,451
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
I don't agree that the SB is equivalent to a college football game or other large event. But I will compromise, any event that draws over 100Million viewers and over 5000 world journalists, on US soil, the government will help address security issues, anything less and they are on their own.
On the other hand, if it was announced that the NFL was required to fund security, or even reimburse govt expenditures, I would be ok with that as well. Last edited by CRedskinsRule; 03-05-2013 at 12:16 PM. |
03-05-2013, 12:15 PM | #95 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,451
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
|
|
03-05-2013, 12:28 PM | #96 | |
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Holland, Michigan
Posts: 5,741
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
Thats because I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.
__________________
REDSKINS FAN SINCE 1968 |
|
03-05-2013, 01:19 PM | #97 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 60
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
|
|
03-05-2013, 01:20 PM | #98 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 42
Posts: 17,553
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
how much could we save by canning the F-22 and half of the military software contracts that are outdated before they even get completed?
|
03-05-2013, 01:22 PM | #99 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: VA
Age: 42
Posts: 17,553
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
and can we stop talking about cuts to future spending as if their the same thing as budget cuts?
our country is "making cuts" yet the debt and spending are still going up. that's stupid. |
03-05-2013, 01:32 PM | #100 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 60
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Sr. the reduction in an increase is a cut if you listen to Washington. I used this same thinking when telling my wife I cut back on drinking.
|
03-05-2013, 01:37 PM | #101 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: chesapeake, va
Age: 60
Posts: 15,817
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
This why is why the federal goverment helps provide protection for the SB. From what I get they don't pay the entire bill and would guess that the city picks up a big chunk of the protection.
While the FBI Special Agent in Charge responsible for Super Bowl security, Michael Anderson, notes that “no specific or credible reporting of any threats” has been made regarding the Super Bowl, serious efforts are still being expended. This is demonstrated by the fact that the Super Bowl has been designated as a “Level I” national security event by the Department of Homeland Security. This designation is notable, as it signifies that the Department of Homeland Security has determined that the Super Bowl is a type of event most likely to be targeted by terrorists. The designation as a Level I national security event is also notable for budgetary reasons. Once an event is assigned this designation, the federal government in a sense overtakes security plans for the event. This in turn means that federal dollars are spent providing security for the Super Bowl. While the NFL would not provide an exact number for what has been spent on Super Bowl security, what is known is that a portion of the Department of Homeland Security’s $43.2 billion 2012 budget was spent on the event. |
03-05-2013, 02:29 PM | #102 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,451
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
Question (i don't know the answer) has anyone ever thought of allowing tax dollars to be earmarked? ie you can designate %'s for major categories, defense, welfare, maybe 3 or 4 others top level line items? I imagine it would be book keeping hell but it would be interesting to see where people want their money to go, and then have a percentage off the top that is designated for SS, and Debt repayment. Even if we can't do it on the real taxes, it would be an interesting study if conducted properly. (I am pretty sure there is an internet equivalent, but I would want a solid firm conducting it if I were to trust the results) |
|
03-05-2013, 02:45 PM | #103 | |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,480
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
Stop buying into this whole "Al Qaeda" boogeyman. These Guantánamo files undo the al-Qaida myth machine | Jason Burke | Comment is free | The Guardian The media and our government love using fear as a tool to continue their stupid spending in the military. Answer this, when has a terrorist ever attacked a highly viewed event? The Super Bowl doesn't need to be covered. Period. End of story. Why? Because it's the highest rated show in the world? Who cares? Why is this deemed a "level 1"? Because a bunch of rich assholes and celebrities are attending? Meanwhile, the same attack can be done at any other venue I suggested. Spending this type of money is beyond foolish, it's reckless. These people are just playing on the fears and ignorance of its people.
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty |
|
03-05-2013, 03:04 PM | #104 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 57
Posts: 21,451
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I understand that politicians and media drive law and legislation by fear mongering. We are truly living in the Orwellian state right now, where once our enemy was our friend, and that whether there is a war to left or a war to the right, just don't look to closely at the political machine that continually shuffles the target. |
|
03-05-2013, 03:08 PM | #105 | |
Puppy Kicker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 41
Posts: 8,341
|
Re: Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?
Quote:
Overall, I do agree with you. However, I also understand how it is a difficult decision to make. If you leave these events wide open, and something happens, what do you do then?
__________________
Best. Player. Available. |
|
|
|