Federal government waste of money

[RoBoTeq]

This thread is for listing things that the Federal government does to waste tax payer money. Please list things that government spends money on that government should not be spending money on, giving your reasons for why government should not be spending money on such things. Please only post government spending that you can post a link to support of.

I'll start with one I just came across;
A recent Freedom of Information Act request by the free-market oriented Americans for Limited Government revealed that the Labor Department contracts for the development of the “Heat Safety Tool” and related Web 2.0 technologies cost the taxpayer $643,997.60. The contracts (http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/#) were awarded under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus package.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/06/osha-spends-taxpayer-money-to-develop-an-app-that-tells-workers-its-hot-outside/#ixzz1lc6aHo6o

Is there something better that $643,997.60 plus the cost of OSHA to administer this program could be used for? :anyone:

Exactly how is this justified as "stimulus"?

[motoguy128]

overaggressive enforcement of the clean water act. Spending millions in taxpayer moeny to go after municiplities, forcing them to spend million defending themselves as well as spending billions to tear out perfectly functional sewer systems, in order to in some cases, make giant muddy rivers full of poop, have a tiny fraction of a fraction less poop during heavy rains. Our town for example. a 6" rain, might amount to 650k GPM of combined sewage flowing into the river over a 4 square mile area. At least 99% of that water is stormwater run-off. SOunds like a lot right? Not really when you consider the river during that same rain event, is flowing at nearly 20MM GPM. So at most, we're talking 1-2% of the water is this combined sewer and msot all of that is still stormwater.

Complete waste. Nearly bankrupting cities to do something that will have minimal environmental impact.

[newoldtech]

Earmarks or pork thats added to many bills. Thats just screwing us right to our face.

[coolwhip]

The liberals need an app of this nature because they lack common sense in not knowing to seek shelter when its raining outside.

Pretty soon there will be an app to tell them when to take a dump so they don't sheit their pants.

[RoBoTeq]

overaggressive enforcement of the clean water act. Spending millions in taxpayer moeny to go after municiplities, forcing them to spend million defending themselves as well as spending billions to tear out perfectly functional sewer systems, in order to in some cases, make giant muddy rivers full of poop, have a tiny fraction of a fraction less poop during heavy rains. Our town for example. a 6" rain, might amount to 650k GPM of combined sewage flowing into the river over a 4 square mile area. At least 99% of that water is stormwater run-off. SOunds like a lot right? Not really when you consider the river during that same rain event, is flowing at nearly 20MM GPM. So at most, we're talking 1-2% of the water is this combined sewer and msot all of that is still stormwater.

Complete waste. Nearly bankrupting cities to do something that will have minimal environmental impact.
Support links would be nice. It is too easy for members to post things that we have heard that may not be accurate. That is the reason I have requested that government wastes be supported by linked materials.

[RoBoTeq]

Earmarks or pork thats added to many bills. Thats just screwing us right to our face.
Can you point us to any specific items?

[RoBoTeq]

The liberals need an app of this nature because they lack common sense in not knowing to seek shelter when its raining outside.

Pretty soon there will be an app to tell them when to take a dump so they don't sheit their pants.
Unfortunately, we all must pay for these wastes. That is the sort of thing I would like to see be put out in the open, with supported links, showing beyond doubt ways that government is wasting our money.

If a household budget were allowed to operate the way that government operates, we would all be bankrupted, evicted from our homes and living on welfare.

How about America's railroads? Why is money taken from American citizens being given to railroads without citizens even being able to take a train for less then it costs to take a plane somewhere?
The railroad is investing in projects critical for enhancing the passenger experience, and essential for supporting its national network and future, Amtrak officials said.

The $1.435 billion request for capital and infrastructure projects is a significant increase from the $657 million that Congress appropriated in FY2012, but is necessary to move beyond maintenance of existing equipment and infrastructure and invest in improvements that support faster, more frequent and more reliable service in the Northeast, Midwest and elsewhere, said Boardman.
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/Amtrak-requests-lower-operating-higher-capital-funding-for-FY2013--29827

A railroad is supposed to be a business. If a business cannot survive on it's own, then that business needs to go out of business. I resent having to pay for an industry that is not responsible enough to be able to take care of itself.

And just look at the name of the website this link goes to; Progressive Railroading. This is a blatant nod towards the Socialist use of the term "Progressive" to replace the unpopular term "Communist".
The Progressive Labor Party (originally the Progressive Labor Movement and often referred to as PL) is a transnational communist party based primarily in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Labor_Party_(USA)

This is from the left leaning Wikipedia, so it is not just some right wing conspiracy. Socialists and Communists in the U.S. don't even try to hide that when they say "Progressive", they mean "Communism".

I love Flo, but Progressive Insurance is owned by Peter Lewis, a well known Socialist. If you are insured by Progressive, you are supporting the ACLU, the Socialist Party of America and Moveon.org among many other Socialist organizations under Peter Lewis's care;
All of sudden “Progressive” Insurance takes on a new meaning. FYI, I discontinued the company several years ago… but the thought that I, as a Christian Conservative, supported Lewis for years still gives me a sick feeling in my stomach. I was just plain dumb. Liberal = Progressive, Progressive = Liberal…… so obvious![/qoute] http://expreacherman.com/2006/01/18/is-progressive-insurance-really-progressive/
[quote]The Truth:
According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) website, the chairman of Progressive Insurance, Peter Lewis, gave $8 million in 2003 and $7 million in 2001. Click for ACLU news release.

A March 10, 2004 Washington Post article reported that Lewis had contributed $3 million to America Coming Together (ACT), a liberal political action group dedicated to encourage voters to the polls and $500,000 to MoveOn.org, a group formed in response to the campaign to impeach President Bill Clinton. http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/a/aclu-lewis.htm

[newoldtech]

Can you point us to any specific items?


Nothing specific. But you always here about important national bills that only get passed by persuading some in congress by including their local pet projects in the bill. These earmarks/pork are common and IMO bad for the country.

[barbar]

The US banking system bail out, and worse of all the bonuses given to those who caused it then said they had fixed it.
I could reference Mike Moore,s movie.

[RoBoTeq]

Come on, guys! This is exactly how rumors and misinformation gets run in circles. If you believe that there is a way that government is wasting your tax money, take a few moments to check it out and see if what you have heard is actually true.

In this case, you will most likely find a lot more then you thought was going on. However, a statement without support information is just an opinion.

[barbar]

http://michaelmoore.com/books-films/capitalism-love-story

[RoBoTeq]

http://michaelmoore.com/books-films/capitalism-love-story
Sorry babar, but that was pretty useless. Now I have to suspect that there never was a government bailout of Wall Street.

[barbar]

Sorry babar, but that was pretty useless. Now I have to suspect that there never was a government bailout of Wall Street.
I have seen the whole movie!
I presume form your comment, that you are not a lover of Mr. Moore?
But does this not show how media and information are tied together. So any opinion is based upon what facts are given to us!
I have not seen a movie or doco, that is disputing his facts. What then are we to think!
I do realize that he is an entertainer, and that good entertainment needs a bit shyte stirring.

[acmanko]

I read an article that stated all but175 billion of the first stimulus package had been repaid. I'll have to look it up for a link. But the waste is that none of the repaid stimulus money has been used to repay the Government. I suppose it just got respent.

[RoBoTeq]

I have seen the whole movie!
I presume form your comment, that you are not a lover of Mr. Moore?
But does this not show how media and information are tied together. So any opinion is based upon what facts are given to us!
I have not seen a movie or doco, that is disputing his facts. What then are we to think!
I do realize that he is an entertainer, and that good entertainment needs a bit shyte stirring.
Movies are not factual support for anything. If they were, then we would all know for certain that aliens and vampires live among us and that when we die, we all get to meet George Burns.

I'm just suggesting you try reality.

[RoBoTeq]

I read an article that stated all but175 billion of the first stimulus package had been repaid. I'll have to look it up for a link. But the waste is that none of the repaid stimulus money has been used to repay the Government. I suppose it just got respent.
OK, so now you have a reasonable task to perform that should keep you from posting your usual silly nonsense....Good Job amigo :cheers:

[ControlsInMT]

So I have to find a link to the cost of Michelle's wasteful organic garden at the White House?

[ControlsInMT]

Okay so how's this one...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077625/Michelle-Obama-insisted-4m-getaway-Hawaii-husband-wanted-local-holiday.html

[RoBoTeq]

Okay so how's this one...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077625/Michelle-Obama-insisted-4m-getaway-Hawaii-husband-wanted-local-holiday.html
Perfect! I wasn't even thinking of this venue of waste in government, but the O'Bummer family certainly are throwing our money around traveling all over the world while O'Bummer tells us to stay at home for vacation time.

This one is a direct hit not only on government waste of money, but even hits on government waste in office.

[RoBoTeq]

Even the little ones add up;

AT YOUR SERVICE HEATING & COOLING, LLC

Contract: $10,346 - Public Buildings Service (http://stimuluswatch.org/2.0/agencies/view/79/public-buildings-service) - Jul. 2, 2009 http://stimuluswatch.org/2.0/awards/view/21042

This "Arizona" HVAC company was awarded over $10k to provide an escort for other HVAC contractors doing survey work at the Honolulu Court House. Can anyone spell "free vacation" for someone's buddy at this HVAC company?

[RoBoTeq]

I just love the rationale behind this one;
A $427,824 research grant to design better video games for senior citizens based on their unique “game-play needs”. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-01-26/edcuational-video-games-white-house/52908052/1

It doesn't hurt that the female gamer is a 37 year old hottie.
.
.
http://i.usatoday.net/webapps/optimus/resizeimage.ashx?path=http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2012/01/26/White-House-studies-video-games-40U7JTM-x-16-9.jpg&width=800

[acmanko]

Perfect! I wasn't even thinking of this venue of waste in government, but the O'Bummer family certainly are throwing our money around traveling all over the world while O'Bummer tells us to stay at home for vacation time.

This one is a direct hit not only on government waste of money, but even hits on government waste in office.

Bush is the one who said 'Vacation near home'

[barbar]

Movies are not factual support for anything. If they were, then we would all know for certain that aliens and vampires live among us and that when we die, we all get to meet George Burns.

I'm just suggesting you try reality.

M. Moore's movie, was a documentary!
Have you seen it? If not you should.!
What is fact and what is fiction? As with anything in life, you should get information from both sides, you tend to find the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
So going back to fact. or not.

Was there a financial break down?
Did the US Government (the people money) introduce money into the Banking sector?
Are the same people who ran the Banking system before the melt down, still running the system?
Do they continue to receive, larger than the average salary, with a lower % of tax paid.?

Re- vampires and aliens, Do you have religious affiliation, If so then on a fundamental level, they are all the same as "non are based upon fact!"

[RoBoTeq]

M. Moore's movie, was a documentary!
Have you seen it? If not you should.!
What is fact and what is fiction? As with anything in life, you should get information from both sides, you tend to find the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
So going back to fact. or not.

Was there a financial break down?
Did the US Government (the people money) introduce money into the Banking sector?
Are the same people who ran the Banking system before the melt down, still running the system?
Do they continue to receive, larger than the average salary, with a lower % of tax paid.?

Re- vampires and aliens, Do you have religious affiliation, If so then on a fundamental level, they are all the same as "non are based upon fact!"
I see. There is no use in our having a discussion any longer. Anyone who considers Michael Moore's or Al Gore's shlocumentalries anywhere near accurate is simply not worth my time. The fact that you are just another faith hating atheist wannabe doesn't help your cause.

You have fun in that little made up world of yours.

[barbar]

I see. There is no use in our having a discussion any longer. Anyone who considers Michael Moore's or Al Gore's shlocumentalries anywhere near accurate is simply not worth my time. The fact that you are just another faith hating atheist wannabe doesn't help your cause.

You have fun in that little made up world of yours.

In reverse
Faith is a wonderful thing, but should not be confused with religion which i do detest, or what i should say is what is done in the name of religion.
If your religion was fact, then it would be irrefutable. If we then we decide not to abide by the religion then that is a different case. The fact is "NO" religion has proved that they have the right to faith.
I presume that you read one of the great books, have read the other great books. You will find a lot of common ground, and that a lot of the instructions given were very much related to the time and location of the intended readers.
Your faith is between you and your God(s) and mine is between Me and Mine.
I respect your right to your faith, respect my right to what I believe.

Mike Moore, well he offers an opinion, Is he not entitled to this?
Is everything he says not the truth?, so everything he says must be a lie.
You never answered the question, have you seen it. If not how can you argue that any of his point are not valid.

Do I have the greatest regard for Mike Moore "No"

You prove to me that the good people of america, did not bail out the banks.
I am more than happy to change mind, "on anything", as long proof can be given.

[motoguy128]

In reverse
Faith is a wonderful thing, but should not be confused with religion which i do detest, or what i should say is what is done in the name of religion.
If your religion was fact, then it would be irrefutable. .

Of coruse it's not "irrefutable"... that's why it's called having faith. Although I fully understand and partially agree with your position. Although there a big difference between the politics and heirarchy of major demoinations as opposed to local congregations. You can be a Christain without associating with a particular church... at least that my opinion and interrpretation.


I tend to agree with Robo on Michael Moore. He's good at cherrypicking facts, then crafting a nice visual image and grabbing sound bites taken out of context and so forth. Once people have formed an opion, they often can only see what they want to believe. SO I don't think he's intentionally trying ot device people, MM is simply biased and perhaps somewhat ignorrant regarding technical aspects on most of the topics he produces.

My favorite of anything related to "pollution" is they immediately go to a shot of some factory with "smoke stacks" which in reality most of the time is nothing more than water vapor, and sometimes some CO2... you know that toxic stuff you and every lifeform that uses aerobic respiration spews out all the time.

I wonder how often those are simply dryer vents or evaporators. I can gurantee that Al Gore couldn't differentiate at a glance whether a stack is generating C02, particulate, or just water vapor. Even more ironic, I suppose, is that the more efficient a plant is with their energy, the more visible water vapor they produce. Our least efficient gas dryers at our plant don't even have visible water vapor until about 15F. The more efficient ones are visible on a 80F day.

[RoBoTeq]

In reverse
Faith is a wonderful thing, but should not be confused with religion which i do detest, or what i should say is what is done in the name of religion.
If your religion was fact, then it would be irrefutable. If we then we decide not to abide by the religion then that is a different case. The fact is "NO" religion has proved that they have the right to faith.
I presume that you read one of the great books, have read the other great books. You will find a lot of common ground, and that a lot of the instructions given were very much related to the time and location of the intended readers.
Your faith is between you and your God(s) and mine is between Me and Mine.
I respect your right to your faith, respect my right to what I believe.

Mike Moore, well he offers an opinion, Is he not entitled to this?
Is everything he says not the truth?, so everything he says must be a lie.
You never answered the question, have you seen it. If not how can you argue that any of his point are not valid.

Do I have the greatest regard for Mike Moore "No"

You prove to me that the good people of america, did not bail out the banks.
I am more than happy to change mind, "on anything", as long proof can be given.
We are actually in agreement about religions. I too detest organized religion because it is man made.

Michael Moore, as an American citizen, is certainly entitled to his opinion. However, there is not much of Michael Moore's opinion that is actual fact. Michael Moore is the epitomy of hypocrisy in that Michael Moore has made millions of dollars from attacking the very rationale that allowed him to make millions of dollars. Michael Moore is a Capitalist Pig disguising himself as a Socialist. Add to this the fact that what Michael Moore does is so very anti-American that his books are best sellers in Havana, Cuba (the only American authored books I saw there). I not only have seen all of Michael Moore's movies, I have done a lot of research on how innacurate they are.
Should a 400 lb man advise us on the evils of over-consumption?
Should the resident of a million-dollar apartment claim to be a poster boy of the working class?
Should a person who thought that Enron was a great investment, that Ralph Nader, Wesley Clark and John Kerry would win, and that North Korea's Kim Jong was changing for the better, advise us on ANYTHING? http://mooreexposed.com/
The good people of the U.S. have been deceived by politicians of all rankings to bail out corporate entities in the name of saving the people since the early 1900's; that's the problem.

[barbar]

Religion Sorted.
Man Made Climate Change, I am sat on the fence on this one, But what I can say is that I do think we do need to make better use of the mother earths resources.

MM i do know he is a sensationalist. Of course for me to make a informed opinion, I need the counter argument to his claims.
I would tend yo agree, with what you state he like as a person. Saying that some of the information portrayed, may have had some factual base.
I am do not live in the USA, so any news or information is limited about the USA. Imagine if you can that the rest of the world only see MM movies, what are they to think?
This is of course the the problem with propaganda and the media, in what ever country you live in. In the cold war, in the west the Russians were portrayed as Evil, and In Russia the Americans were portrayed as evil. This was clearly not the case the average Russian or American is not evil, but we our opinions are heavily swayed by information that is portrayed in everyday life.
Going back to your original thread.
My issue is not with the government bailing out the banks, but the lack of accountability for those that caused the problem, and that these same people are still taking large amounts of money, of the stimulus package.
I know in the UK similar moneys were introduced, however the Government now owns the bank, the head of the bank got sacked, and he has is Knighthood revoked.

[RoBoTeq]

Religion Sorted. Yes. Good to have common groung.

Man Made Climate Change, I am sat on the fence on this one, But what I can say is that I do think we do need to make better use of the mother earths resources. I agree that we need to be more responsible about how we keep peeing in our own pools, whether water, air or ground. As far as climate change being man made, a few questions help;


Has climate change similar or worse happened throughout the history of the Earth? The answer is "yes".
Do we know absolutley that CO2 levels are the cause of global warming? The answer is "no".
Is the Earth warmer then it should be when compared to the history of climatic changes of the Earth? The answer is "no, the Earth is actually cooler then the last warming trend should be causing it to be.
Would a warmer Earth be better or worse for the increased number of humans on Earth? All indications are the answer would be "better". I have never been able to get any environMENTAList to answer this question with any conviction.


MM i do know he is a sensationalist. Whether you are talking about the rapper or the Big Fat Liar, MM is in the entertainment business.
Of course for me to make a informed opinion, I need the counter argument to his claims. Most of his claims are counter to truth, so that is not a difficult thing to find. To counter Fahrenheit 9/11 just watch FahrenHYPE 9/11, narrated by liberal actor Ron Silver.

I would tend yo agree, with what you state he like as a person. Saying that some of the information portrayed, may have had some factual base. It is actually pretty amazing how little reality Michael Moore's claims are based on.

I am do not live in the USA, so any news or information is limited about the USA. Imagine if you can that the rest of the world only see MM movies, what are they to think? This is a major problem for the U.S. Not only the rest of the world, but even Americans mostly get only leftist media views of what the U.S.A. is really like. In reality, the bulk of Americans are just like the average people in European countries. We work, we have families, we take modest vacations that we pay dearly for, less then most European's take and our men pee standing while our women sit.

I usually rely on BBC news about the U.S. to get more accurate accounting of things that are happening here.

This is of course the the problem with propaganda and the media, in what ever country you live in. In the cold war, in the west the Russians were portrayed as Evil, and In Russia the Americans were portrayed as evil. This was clearly not the case the average Russian or American is not evil, but we our opinions are heavily swayed by information that is portrayed in everyday life. You should see the way you Kiwi's are portrayed here:censored::whistle:

Going back to your original thread.
My issue is not with the government bailing out the banks, but the lack of accountability for those that caused the problem, and that these same people are still taking large amounts of money, of the stimulus package.
I know in the UK similar moneys were introduced, however the Government now owns the bank, the head of the bank got sacked, and he has is Knighthood revoked. We agree on this as well. The main problems that got the U.S. started down the wrong path was when a century ago, the U.S. government intervened with failing banking and other industries rather then letting them fail and let capitalism run it's course.

[barbar]

Kiwi, does it include a sheep or are we hobbits, or running around in grass skirts pulling our tongues out, whilst bungy jumping?
I do see my self as a "social capitalist" I lean very left when it comes to Children, healthcare, education and protection. A child has no control over its parent. Then i tend to lean right towards adults, That as adults we should take responsibility for our action.
This then brings in government responsibility, Do I think they should bail out corporations?
If for example, GM were to lay off 100,000 employees, this would cost the country a lot in both money, moral and loss of manufacturing base. So the cost of the bailout, maybe somewhat cheaper than the loss of jobs. That would make good business sense. However, the money should not just be given! the shareholders, should have to repay the last 5 years dividend and monies made on share transfers. No dividend or bonus to be paid until the debt is paid in full. The government runs like a business and not a charity shop.
I know from my perspective,as the shareholder, i get the benefits for my investments (normally my own business) I believe that I should also shoulder the negatives. When my business is going through I low patch, I reinvest what the company had made previously. When i run out is when I close. Not good business I know, but no one has been strung by me not paying my bills. I think to many hide their wealth in trust funds or protect themselves with limited liability, so when it turns to shyte, they can run, and let others take the pain of their consequence. "maybe i am more left than i thought"
Going back to Mike Moore, i have only seen one of his movies.
the 2 parts that stuck in my mind.
1; For thinking! In my own words, If there was 20 of you working together (and all is well) Would lay of one of your co-workers/friend to obtain an extra 50cents an hour? This is what in effect happens to many companies when we are divorced from the people
2; (again my own word sorry, can remember the detail) He showed a copy of the document (2/3 pages) relating to the bank bailout. It basically indicated that all accountability on how the money was to be spend, had been removed.

[RoBoTeq]

Kiwi, does it include a sheep or are we hobbits, or running around in grass skirts pulling our tongues out, whilst bungy jumping? LOL! I don't know about any of these other things. I happened to bunk with a guy from New Zealand when I was skydiving and he referred to himself as a kiwi. Sorry if that was not PC or in any way insulting :cheers:

I do see my self as a "social capitalist" I lean very left when it comes to Children, healthcare, education and protection. A child has no control over its parent. Then i tend to lean right towards adults, That as adults we should take responsibility for our action. Hmmm, I really hate to think in terms of liberal and conservative when it comes to being socially responsible. I think the main difference is that those of a more conservative attitude tend to want social welfare to come from community while more liberal thinking persons feel that social welfare should be taxpayer money distributed by government. The U.S. is so large and diverse, with 50 different smaller governments that are supposed to be self sustaining for all but defense and foreign affairs, to have the federal government involved in any social issues.

This then brings in government responsibility, Do I think they should bail out corporations?
If for example, GM were to lay off 100,000 employees, this would cost the country a lot in both money, moral and loss of manufacturing base. So the cost of the bailout, maybe somewhat cheaper than the loss of jobs. That would make good business sense. However, the money should not just be given! the shareholders, should have to repay the last 5 years dividend and monies made on share transfers. No dividend or bonus to be paid until the debt is paid in full. The government runs like a business and not a charity shop. If the U.S. government runs like a business, it has been bankrupt for decades. If a company like GM fails and 100,000 workers are left without jobs, then by letting GM fail, other auto manufacturer's would pick up the slack of GM no longer producing vehicles and those 100,000 workers would soon be back to work for companies with policies that allow them to succeed where GM failed.

GM was not rescued for the workers, not directly. GM was rescued because of the labor union. Had GM been allowed to fail, GM workers would have wound up eventually going to work for auto manufacturer's who do not have the additional financial burdens that labor unions cause companies to have. The workers would be working for a company that succeeds where GM failed.

I know from my perspective,as the shareholder, i get the benefits for my investments (normally my own business) I believe that I should also shoulder the negatives. When my business is going through I low patch, I reinvest what the company had made previously. When i run out is when I close. Not good business I know, but no one has been strung by me not paying my bills. I think to many hide their wealth in trust funds or protect themselves with limited liability, so when it turns to shyte, they can run, and let others take the pain of their consequence. "maybe i am more left than i thought" If you ask me, you are more conservative then you claim to be.

Going back to Mike Moore, i have only seen one of his movies. Lucky you!

the 2 parts that stuck in my mind.
1; For thinking! In my own words, If there was 20 of you working together (and all is well) Would lay of one of your co-workers/friend to obtain an extra 50cents an hour? This is what in effect happens to many companies when we are divorced from the people When there is only so much money that can be made, if you add labor union costs to the labor fund, you must decrease the amount of workers to keep the costs the same. If a bad business practice is what is causing a corporation to fail, the bad business practice needs to be changed or the business needs to be allowed to fail so other businesses without those bad business practices can do the job properly and financially responsibly.

2; (again my own word sorry, can remember the detail) He showed a copy of the document (2/3 pages) relating to the bank bailout. It basically indicated that all accountability on how the money was to be spend, had been removed.
Michael Moore talks out of both sides of his mouth on this. While the anti-capitalism Capitalist pig puts down corporate America and banks for being bailed out by government, he also financially supports all political candidates that push for Socialist bailout funding. Moore is part of the problem, even as he defines the problem.

In reading your detailed thoughts on things, I don't think you are a leftist at all. You sound more like a rational moderate who has a skewed idea of what the U.S. is like. Please keep in mind that the U.S. is a very large and diverse country spanning every geographical type of area and having every ethnic nationality represented in our nationality of being American. Americans are everyone, and anyone can be an American. However, due to the vast diversity of the United States and of Americans, Socialist programs at the federal level are disasterous to everyone on many levels.

[barbar]

Has climate change similar or worse happened throughout the history of the Earth? The answer is "yes".
Do we know absolutley that CO2 levels are the cause of global warming? The answer is "no".
Is the Earth warmer then it should be when compared to the history of climatic changes of the Earth? The answer is "no, the Earth is actually cooler then the last warming trend should be causing it to be.
Would a warmer Earth be better or worse for the increased number of humans on Earth? All indications are the answer would be "better". I have never been able to get any environMENTAList to answer this question with any conviction.
The earth will continue to spin regardless of what we do to it.
History has shown that we have been through a number of changes, no doubt.
We do know that CO2 has an insulating effect.
We do know that we are unlocking CO2 (oil, coal, gas)
It is my understanding that there is little argument that CO2 levels have increased.

We do know that with more CO2 we do get increase plant production (sea and land).

A new equilibrium point will be reached and what is the effect and over what time scale.
Is it simply that the human race overtime move to higher altitude, not really a problem if it takes 100s-1000s years, but over a short period, quite disastrous.
Leaving the money out of it just for a moment (which is really hard), are we best to plan for worst and hope for the best.

[RoBoTeq]

Has climate change similar or worse happened throughout the history of the Earth? The answer is "yes".
Do we know absolutley that CO2 levels are the cause of global warming? The answer is "no".
Is the Earth warmer then it should be when compared to the history of climatic changes of the Earth? The answer is "no, the Earth is actually cooler then the last warming trend should be causing it to be.
Would a warmer Earth be better or worse for the increased number of humans on Earth? All indications are the answer would be "better". I have never been able to get any environMENTAList to answer this question with any conviction.
The earth will continue to spin regardless of what we do to it.
History has shown that we have been through a number of changes, no doubt.
We do know that CO2 has an insulating effect.
We do know that we are unlocking CO2 (oil, coal, gas)
It is my understanding that there is little argument that CO2 levels have increased.

We do know that with more CO2 we do get increase plant production (sea and land).

A new equilibrium point will be reached and what is the effect and over what time scale.
Is it simply that the human race overtime move to higher altitude, not really a problem if it takes 100s-1000s years, but over a short period, quite disastrous.
Leaving the money out of it just for a moment (which is really hard), are we best to plan for worst and hope for the best.
Yes, CO2 levels have risen. Then again, what exactly does that mean. Does it surprise you to know that 200 years ago that CO2 did not make up even 1% of the Earth's atmosphere and today it still doesn't?

So yes, CO2 levels have risen and yes, it is most likely due to mankind in one form or another. If not our industrial production of CO2, then just the sheer amount of humans and additional livestock we breed breathing all of that CO2 into the atmosphere. BUT! Is CO2 in the atmosphere causing global warming? There are more indicators that CO2 is a result of global warming rather then a cause of it. High CO2 levels have historically "FOLLOWED" a period of global warming, as has occured over that past several decades.

There is also not one indicator other then made up models in which scientists that made them up admit to have manipulated the data to meet what they wanted it to show, that there is ever going to be any catastophicly sudden rise in the world's sea levels.

As the seas do gradually rise, there will be more surface area to absorb more CO2 and to allow for more water evaporation for more fresh water worldwide from more rainfall that will allow more areas to grow more vegetation to feed more people and livestock that will in turn feed more people and the seas will have more fish and.........life will go on as nature intends it to, whether we try to change it or not.

Give us one example of man's messing with nature that did not have an adverse affect.

[barbar]

No kiwi is not insulting, The Kiwi is our national bird. As he says with head in his hands. (A little fat thing that can not fly, or run fast with a very long beak)
Certainly not as majestic as an Eagle.
Unions, this is a difficult area, as i have seen the best and the worst of unions and for that matter the same applies to some employers.
Business is there to make benefits for the share/stake holder. Employment is a generally a requirement for this to be achieve. At what cost should the employees burden to achieve the business benefit. Without organised workers collectives, many business would just treat the employees like dogs. I have worked in third world counties, it would break you heart to see how these workers are treat! I was in a booming area of China, the workers earned US$100 a month (they thought they were well paid), at knock of time, they unrolled the bedding and slept.

[RoBoTeq]

No kiwi is not insulting, The Kiwi is our national bird. As he says with head in his hands. (A little fat thing that can not fly, or run fast with a very long beak)
Certainly not as majestic as an Eagle. Aside from pictures, I can't say I've really got a good look at a kiwi, but they seem to be kind of neat. In zoo's that have kiwi's, they are in darkened areas where you can't really see them.

A little trivia on the "majestic" Bald Eagle; it's a scavenger. We only like to show off the photos of the Bald Eagle swooping down on live prey, but they are easier to site dumpster diving behind restaurants;
.
.
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2230/2026952550_43faa0df95_z.jpg

Unions, this is a difficult area, as i have seen the best and the worst of unions and for that matter the same applies to some employers.
Business is there to make benefits for the share/stake holder. Employment is a generally a requirement for this to be achieve. At what cost should the employees burden to achieve the business benefit. Without organised workers collectives, many business would just treat the employees like dogs. I have worked in third world counties, it would break you heart to see how these workers are treat! I was in a booming area of China, the workers earned US$100 a month (they thought they were well paid), at knock of time, they unrolled the bedding and slept.
Yea, yea, yea,,,,that's the same story we get here in the U.S. from labor unions. Fact is that labor unions are not neccessary in the U.S. because of our current labor laws. Labor unions are the epitomy of Socialism in the U.S., only they also have organized crime influence. Combine those two factors and nothing overall good for the country is going to come out of it. It's funny you should bring up China's workers. What you saw in China is exactly what would happen in the U.S. if labor unions were able to force all American workers to be unionized. Equal does not mean well off. Once all workers are equal under labor unions, there is no need for those workers to have to be bribed any longer with high wages and obnoxious benefits. Back to China; all of China's workers are unionized.

[barbar]

I certainly not against unions, based upon my experiences, but it would "seem" that your unions, have an unsavory nature.
Again I say this with limited knowledge, I look at the info supplied regarding the Hoover Dam, and the issues with the labour force. It seems to me that the employers, used the great depression to ride roughshot over the workers. I know this is going back in time, but i think that it was correct that the workers joined together to achieve safe working conditions and a fair pay for a fair days work.
Without the unions in the past, the workers of today would still be treat just like dogs. I also have seen the bad side of unions where their power was to great and demanded benefits on and above what the businesses involved could possibly afford.
Safety should never be an issue, and these right should be fought for. "no question"
Coming to increased wages, this almost catch 22, the greater the wage, the greater cost of living becomes, the greater the wages are required to meet the cost of living. Who then fights for the rights of the workers, it does need to be someone.
How rich do the rich need to be, ( i am not against money), and who pays for their increased wealth.
Finding the balance, not quite as easy, as it is said.
China is an amazing country, and totally different to what i expected. Capitalism is running wild. There are rich people and poor people, very little in between.
I am an employer, so I am not anti the boss.

[RoBoTeq]

I certainly not against unions, based upon my experiences, but it would "seem" that your unions, have an unsavory nature. Some are quite unsavory;
Most people don't know just how many crimes are committed every year through which union officials hurt their own members. The number of reputed and verified crimes is staggering. Nothing illustrates this more clearly than the hundreds of indictments of union officials for violations of the Labor Management and Reporting Disclosure Act. According to the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS), those crimes include “embezzlement, filing false reports, keeping false records, destruction of records, extortionate picketing and deprivation of rights by violence.” and this is how the unions are treating their members! http://www.unionfacts.com/crime-corruption/union-leader-fraud
According to court papers, the executive who was stabbed in the neck asked a union organizer what benefit he would get if he hired members of the union. "You guys slash my tires, stab me in the neck, try to beat me up," he protested. "What are the positives?"



"The positives," reportedly replied the organizer, "are that the negatives you are complaining about would go away." ...this is right out of the Mafia's protection racket handbook!

And, to cover two issues with one article;

The American labor movement has always had a violent undertow. Union violence has taken hundreds of lives in the past century, and even a pro-union 1969 report on preventing violence in America acknowledged that “the United States has had the bloodiest and most violent labor history of any industrial nation in the world.”
I mention this because left-wing filmmaker and propagandist Michael Moore appeared yesterday on “The Rachel Maddow Show” and all but incited violence.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/03/10/labor-leaders-must-renounce-violence/#ixzz1ltFyTgNj


Again I say this with limited knowledge, I look at the info supplied regarding the Hoover Dam, and the issues with the labour force. It seems to me that the employers, used the great depression to ride roughshot over the workers. I know this is going back in time, but i think that it was correct that the workers joined together to achieve safe working conditions and a fair pay for a fair days work.
Without the unions in the past, the workers of today would still be treat just like dogs. I also have seen the bad side of unions where their power was to great and demanded benefits on and above what the businesses involved could possibly afford.
Safety should never be an issue, and these right should be fought for. "no question" All of your points are valid. Unfortunately, labor unions coming to the rescue of workers is a ruse that is designed by labor unions working with Socialist Democrat politicians. The politicians were paid by unions to not pass labor laws that would have rendered labor unions useless. Then labor unions came to the rescue of Americans who Socialist Democrats refused to protect with labor laws. Now you have the Socialist labor unions dictating law through the Socialist Democrats in government. Organized crime in the U.S. saw a way to legitimize their profiteering and protection rackets, and so they went for control of these Socialist labor organizations. It was a major coup for Communism in the U.S.

Coming to increased wages, this almost catch 22, the greater the wage, the greater cost of living becomes, the greater the wages are required to meet the cost of living. Who then fights for the rights of the workers, it does need to be someone. When the cost of living goes up due to inflated wages and benefits, the U.S. can no longer compete on the world market and American companies move their facilities to countries that are better suited for business. This is why the U.S. now has an approximate 25% rate of Americans who do not have jobs.

How rich do the rich need to be, ( i am not against money), and who pays for their increased wealth. In the U.S., the rich can be as rich as they want to be. If you look at the benefits that come from the rich, you will realize why Socialists want to take money from the rich. The rich give a lot to charities. Whether out of the goodness of their hearts or to keep that money from being taken by the government doesn't matter, others benefit from the wealthy. The more government takes from the rich in order to redistibute their wealth the way government Socialists want to spend other peoples money, the more corruption occurs at the government level. This is about as far as it can go in the U.S. right now, without Socialist Democrats declaring O'Bummer el presidente and making him the Fascist leader that he wants to be.

Without the wealthy, we are left with only elitist fascists in government to provide work for everyone. How has that worked out for the USSR? East Berlin? Cuba? North Korea?

Finding the balance, not quite as easy, as it is said. The balance can only occur with the least amount of government influence on the people as is possible.

China is an amazing country, and totally different to what i expected. Capitalism is running wild. There are rich people and poor people, very little in between. This is what happens when Socialism rules. Capitalism is part of every society, whether legally or illegally. Capitalism in China is a false facade that can be taken away from anyone who gains through capitalism by the Communist government. China has done just this in the past and I have no doubt that China will do it again.

I am an employer, so I am not anti the boss. I have been an employer and I have been an employee, and I have never been anti-boss other then at a personal level.

[motoguy128]

How do you explain that as or whenever government regulation of financial sectors and taxes have decreased in the last 50 years that the wealthy get wealthier and the middle class errodes. Perhaps there simply too many vairables involved and can be explained by the changing dynamics for the modern economy that more diverse, more service oriented as opposed to labor intensive manufacturing and that the percentage of the population with a skilled trade or higher education has increased, but its now a requirement for a middle class standard of living, so therefore the middle class has decreased.

OT the untrained eye, it just seems that "trickle down" has only amounted to the rich getting righer at the cost of everyone else. But perhaps, it's only the reality that hte standard of livign has climbed disproprtionately. IF you compare the stadard of living for a person livign on SS closely, you might find that they live nearly as well as a lower middle class family in the 1950's that had 1 full time working parent. OF course one was productive, the other is not.

So maybe it's a matter of perceptions. What's cosidered middle class (house size, type and number of cars, electronics and so on is somehow skewed. Our expectations are too high. W're spoiled. But OTOH, as a comparison of wealth disparity, it has grown quite a bit.

[scrogdog]

I think it is very much a matter of perception.

I think it pretty clear that we can't afford "protectionist" wealthy people who just sit on it and live in a bubble. Therefore, we are seeing an effort to give incentive to the wealthy to take risks with their money.

Here's the rub though. As with any investment, if you take a risk and win you make a good deal of profit. But the other side of the win means that the risky venture is now paying off with jobs and taxes. So let's not look at only one side of the equation (which is done when one has the agenda of class warfare). Let's also not forget to view the other side; if the risk fails EVERYONE loses, including the wealthy person who took the risk. No matter what incentive he or she got to invest, it WILL NOT make up for an outright loss.

However, I think it is fair to say that sometimes we need to criticize the weak points of any policy, not just this one. I just wish people would keep their eye on the ball and talk about the REAL issues rather than just agenda pandering.

[corny]

Yes... In the beginning labor unions had their purpose.....protecting the american workers from evil employers like the mine owners.......but now that we have laws in place that make the workplace safe and insure that workers are treated fairly.....the unions dont really have any place.

Greedy folks keep the unions alive today.....

Run from the union label when you see it unless you like to support gangsters and greedy union officials.

Im not totally against union workers though.......these guys and gals are doing what america expects them to do.......whats drilled into our heads from the beginning...... make as much money as you can...

[ControlsInMT]

Moto, the difference (or at least the big one) is that you and I get our money from a paycheck that has a tax rate and the ultra rich make their money off investments which has a different tax rate, code, and loop holes!

[RoBoTeq]

How do you explain that as or whenever government regulation of financial sectors and taxes have decreased in the last 50 years that the wealthy get wealthier and the middle class errodes. Perhaps there simply too many vairables involved and can be explained by the changing dynamics for the modern economy that more diverse, more service oriented as opposed to labor intensive manufacturing and that the percentage of the population with a skilled trade or higher education has increased, but its now a requirement for a middle class standard of living, so therefore the middle class has decreased.

OT the untrained eye, it just seems that "trickle down" has only amounted to the rich getting righer at the cost of everyone else. But perhaps, it's only the reality that hte standard of livign has climbed disproprtionately. IF you compare the stadard of living for a person livign on SS closely, you might find that they live nearly as well as a lower middle class family in the 1950's that had 1 full time working parent. OF course one was productive, the other is not.

So maybe it's a matter of perceptions. What's cosidered middle class (house size, type and number of cars, electronics and so on is somehow skewed. Our expectations are too high. W're spoiled. But OTOH, as a comparison of wealth disparity, it has grown quite a bit.
You need to show us some sources for your claims here. I don't believe that what you are thinking is factual really is. Please post something to support your opinions.

[RoBoTeq]

Yes... In the beginning labor unions had their purpose.....protecting the american workers from evil employers like the mine owners.......but now that we have laws in place that make the workplace safe and insure that workers are treated fairly.....the unions dont really have any place.

Greedy folks keep the unions alive today.....

Run from the union label when you see it unless you like to support gangsters and greedy union officials.

Im not totally against union workers though.......these guys and gals are doing what america expects them to do.......whats drilled into our heads from the beginning...... make as much money as you can...
Had politicians in the heavily Socialist turn of the centure era over a century ago done their jobs in passing labor laws that were available, the Socialists pushing for labor unions would not have ever been needed. The need for labor unions was a calculated assault on the U.S. by Socialist Democrats and Socialist labor unions. Socialism was a huge assault all over the world at that time, and the U.S. got a double dose of Socialism through labor unions and Socialist Democrats, both being bolstered by Russian and German Socialists fleeing to the U.S. at that time.

American workers who union for the better wages and benefits are to be commended for doing what is best for them. That is what the U.S. is all about; opportunity. I personally could not bring myself to work union due to my political convictions at a fairly young age. I turned down a job with a union mechanical contracting company that one of my uncles was a shop steward with, so I don't want to hear that leftist bullcrap that I couldn't get in a union. It just wasn't a good fit for my political and social leanings. But for those who just work union because it is a benefit to them to do so, more power to you, take advantage of it while you can.

[DeltaT]

motorguy has brought up an interesting point and I'll talk about what I've experienced as the new type of "wealth" in the world especially in the USA.

Wealth has been redefined by the onslaught of new technologies. Young men & women have made vast fortunes in cash in a short period of time due to such things as simply writing up software.

Never before has this happened in our history. And that screws everything up simply because you and me and all the rest of the truely hand craftsman and skilled workers that this board represents and all the rest of the world's public have no chance of doing the same. We are excluded from the availibiliy of this new wealth.

In the origins of America, as an example, the average Joe who worked hard & smart to build his/her future could do so in our country by inventing/building/installing/servicing those products. And that way was available to all Americans.

No longer do we produce so that segment of our society has pretty much dissapeared as well as the skills required to inventing/building/installing/servicing. We have a nation of willing to work skilled workers with nothing to do except greet people at Walmart.

But in American if you are a young person, good grades, afford to go to the right school and get the right degree dealing with software as one example you can graduate, go to work for one of a number of worldwide companies and make unbelievable amounts of money in a few short years which will forever put you above the crowd.

Simply stated: that bridge to wealth through hard and intelligent work that use to exist is no longer there for us.

Then take a Federal Government where the representative listen more to the new wealth folks than us and you have what we have today.

Ain't no way out as I see it without a lot of screeming, crying and action on our part. And it's going to be extremely difficult.

[barbar]

Just a quick one. (a full day with the bean counters)
I can understand the dislike of your unions, especially with the criminal involvement, I think this on a theoretical level, is a different issue to how and why unions are required.

[barbar]

Communism is a great ideal, only problem is just can not work.
Please do not think of China, North Korea or Russia of old being socialist, the never were, it is just a smoke screen, for those who hold power.
How many of the world leaders and there mates really care for the people??
The only one that comes to mind is Gandi.

[RoBoTeq]

Communism is a great ideal, only problem is just can not work.
Please do not think of China, North Korea or Russia of old being socialist, the never were, it is just a smoke screen, for those who hold power.
How many of the world leaders and there mates really care for the people??
The only one that comes to mind is Gandi.
Socialism is a core need for Communism. You are correct that Communism cannot actually work because it attempts to create a utopian government. Since utopia is different for each person, utopia cannot exist for more then a 1 person country.

China, North Korea, the USSR, Russia under Lenin and Stalin, Cuba etc. are indeed all Socialist countries. They are exactly what the Socialist Democrats in the U.S. want to turn the U.S. into. Just because the dear leaders of Socialist countries are elitist fascists who live very well and wealthy does not prevent that country from being considered Socialist. To fascist elites, Socialism is a tool in which they can make everyone equal, just that the elitists will be more equal.

[acmanko]

I wish you would stop equaling socialists and fascists, The fascist governments of Germany , Italy and Spain hated communism and Marxism totally, enough to invade and kill millions of people in the socialist and democratic countries. Your ignorance of facism is only equaled by your ignorance of unions

[Gib's Son]

You are correct that Communism cannot actually work because it attempts to create a utopian government. Since utopia is different for each person, utopia cannot exist for more then a 1 person country.



Utopia was a fictitious Nation created by Sir Thomas More and was based upon isolationism, and egalitarianism. As with Plato's perfect republic, the ultimate outcome, by the author, was a "failed society" because you can't predict or control all of man kinds actions and thoughts.

With all the drug's they push nowadays (who knows what's in them) maybe they will overcome that hurdle. :whistle:

[barbar]

Regardless of the system some will always float to the top, the cream and the shyte.
This may seem i little off subject, but hep me reply to some of the comments made.
"What does the average working american "in employent" need to earn before taxes, to support a 4.2 family, and have a life simply greater than just existing?
( I understand that this may change form area to area, so lets say your major cities) Base this on say 45 hours week clocked in at work.

[acmanko]

Regardless of the system some will always float to the top, the cream and the shyte.
This may seem i little off subject, but hep me reply to some of the comments made.
"What does the average working american "in employent" need to earn before taxes, to support a 4.2 family, and have a life simply greater than just existing?
( I understand that this may change form area to area, so lets say your major cities) Base this on say 45 hours week clocked in at work.

a good life for a family of 4, about 50k to stay above water, but bumping 100k would be a lot better with less worries about keeping up with the Jones

[Gib's Son]

a good life for a family of 4, about 50k to stay above water, but bumping 100k would be a lot better with less worries about keeping up with the Jones

Strictly geographical and life style choices/ expectations. And if you care about "keeping up with the Jones'", you will forever be chasing your tail and will never be happy or content. As long as my basic needs are cared for, I could care less:.02:

[barbar]

So at 50K, you would be rent 3 bed house, with water, power and heat/cool, enough to ensure, your medical and educational needs are met, enough to have a weeks vacation a year, say within 500 miles of home, Dysney land or the like. keep a car, and replace it every 10 years, have a pint on Friday night, take her indoors out for a nice meal once a month.
And being able to splash out just a little at Christmas and/or thanksgiving (not sure what this is but is on TV a lot) and enough to cover retirement (all of this is with out any assistance) I would see this as more than existance but certainly not excessive. $25 per hour?
Would that be a fair assumption?

[acmanko]

So at 50K, you would be rent 3 bed house, with water, power and heat/cool, enough to ensure, your medical and educational needs are met, enough to have a weeks vacation a year, say within 500 miles of home, Dysney land or the like. keep a car, and replace it every 10 years, have a pint on Friday night, take her indoors out for a nice meal once a month.
And being able to splash out just a little at Christmas and/or thanksgiving (not sure what this is but is on TV a lot) and enough to cover retirement (all of this is with out any assistance) I would see this as more than existance but certainly not excessive. $25 per hour?
Would that be a fair assumption?

You could kiss the Disneyland vacation goodbye and might have problems with medical insurance. Retirement savings would be sparse, but at $25 an hour you could be comfortable.

[barbar]

So these on 25Hr certainly are not living the high life, so the vacation is camping holiday, (i can live with that), medical insurance i would of though was a necessity (something I take for granted, we have a taxed paid national health service, not free but looks that way)
So if i come to America, every adult who is full time employment, should on or around this figure. In order i would meet the workers. Baggage handler, Airport Security guard, policemen, customers officer. Airport cleaner ,hot dog sales person (got try one of those), Starbucks checkout, Porter taxi Driver, hotel receptionist, Hotel Porter, Hotel Cleaner (a very important person), Barman/women. Off to my first bit of business.
The bus driver, the business receptionist. The Boss (not another bloody New Zealander he says), fork lift driver, the guy welding up the coil blocks. The cook in the company cafe. all earn $25 give or take.

[acmanko]

So these on 25Hr certainly are not living the high life, so the vacation is camping holiday, (i can live with that), medical insurance i would of though was a necessity (something I take for granted, we have a taxed paid national health service, not free but looks that way)
So if i come to America, every adult who is full time employment, should on or around this figure. In order i would meet the workers. Baggage handler, Airport Security guard, policemen, customers officer. Airport cleaner ,hot dog sales person (got try one of those), Starbucks checkout, Porter taxi Driver, hotel receptionist, Hotel Porter, Hotel Cleaner (a very important person), Barman/women. Off to my first bit of business.
The bus driver, the business receptionist. The Boss (not another bloody New Zealander he says), fork lift driver, the guy welding up the coil blocks. The cook in the company cafe. all earn $25 give or take.

Far from it. I think factory workers average about $18-$19 an hour and the average salary for all middleclass is about 35-40k per year. And we get paid for any hours over 40 time and a half, sometimes.

[RoBoTeq]

I wish you would stop equaling socialists and fascists, The fascist governments of Germany , Italy and Spain hated communism and Marxism totally, enough to invade and kill millions of people in the socialist and democratic countries. Your ignorance of facism is only equaled by your ignorance of unions
These statements are only true if you only use the term "fascist" as leftists use the term "fascist". I suggest you read "Liberal Facism" by Jonah Goldberg. It is quite enlightening about how the left manipulated the term "fascist".

Hitler was a Socialist, hence the term NAZI, ie; National Socialist German Workers' Party. The main difference between Marxist Communism and Hitler's NAZI Germany is that Hitler hated that Communist's under Lenin accepted all ethnicities of peoples. Russian Jews prospered under Lenin, and that caused Hitler problems with German Jews.



Definition of FASCISM

1
often capitalized: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition Does this not sound exactly like where O'Bummer is headed?

[acmanko]

These statements are only true if you only use the term "fascist" as leftists use the term "fascist". I suggest you read "Liberal Facism" by Jonah Goldberg. It is quite enlightening about how the left manipulated the term "fascist".

Hitler was a Socialist, hence the term NAZI, ie; National Socialist German Workers' Party. The main difference between Marxist Communism and Hitler's NAZI Germany is that Hitler hated that Communist's under Lenin accepted all ethnicities of peoples. Russian Jews prospered under Lenin, and that caused Hitler problems with German Jews.

Does this not sound exactly like where O'Bummer is headed?

Only to those with a mental block

[RoBoTeq]

Regardless of the system some will always float to the top, the cream and the shyte.
This may seem i little off subject, but hep me reply to some of the comments made.
"What does the average working american "in employent" need to earn before taxes, to support a 4.2 family, and have a life simply greater than just existing?
( I understand that this may change form area to area, so lets say your major cities) Base this on say 45 hours week clocked in at work.
Even in our major cities there is too much of a variance to come up with a common number. The average person in New York city living in an apartment without rats or drug deals outside the door must make more money the average person living in Baltimore who owns their own single home with a garage and built in pool.

In the U.S., we are supposed to all be equally able to "pursue" our own version of happiness. We are supposed to all have equal opportunities based on our individual desires and willingness to strive for what we want. Unfortunately, Socialist government intervention has divided us into ethnic and even gender classes in which some Americans are allowed more opportunities then others are.

[barbar]

This now what I do not understand about the number of arguments made.
If the factory workers are below what, is not the highest standard of living, why should they not have the right to club together "a union", and ask to at least reach this standard.
How are these people who are under this standard and those who fight for them, being blamed for the demise of the USA. Is it acceptable that the standards should drop further, solely to increase the wealth of those who already have wealth. This being the case should those who have wealth, pay more taxes to cover the difference in at least keeping a minimum standard for those who are working.
Why are things so expensive, is just because the workers want have the same standard.
Is rent cheap! If not who owns the buildings!
The world has become global, and labor is a commodity, so those who choose go to the places with the lower rate. You as citizens of a country choose where you products you purchase come from.

[RoBoTeq]

a good life for a family of 4, about 50k to stay above water, but bumping 100k would be a lot better with less worries about keeping up with the Jones
Try living off of that in New York City.

[motoguy128]

You need to show us some sources for your claims here. I don't believe that what you are thinking is factual really is. Please post something to support your opinions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Share_top_1_percent.jpg

You can see that when the evil socialists took office, the disparity shrank... when the others were in charge, it increased. The periods where inequity was high, were capped with the great depression and great recession.


Although the 2nd point made later on about the younger crowd getting rish quick is interesting. It's not a new thing. The tech boom created it this time. But other inventions as well as rabid stock market investing, booms in construction and post war opportunities in the 1920's created a similar situation.

Both situations could be characterized as capitalism "run-amock" and deregulation, or simply lack of regulation not keeping greed in check.

[RoBoTeq]

Only to those with a mental block
That's it? You are not going to address the rest of the post? Ohhhh, I get it, you can only retain the last 10 words you read...:whistle:

[RoBoTeq]

So these on 25Hr certainly are not living the high life, so the vacation is camping holiday, (i can live with that), medical insurance i would of though was a necessity (something I take for granted, we have a taxed paid national health service, not free but looks that way)
So if i come to America, every adult who is full time employment, should on or around this figure. In order i would meet the workers. Baggage handler, Airport Security guard, policemen, customers officer. Airport cleaner ,hot dog sales person (got try one of those), Starbucks checkout, Porter taxi Driver, hotel receptionist, Hotel Porter, Hotel Cleaner (a very important person), Barman/women. Off to my first bit of business.
The bus driver, the business receptionist. The Boss (not another bloody New Zealander he says), fork lift driver, the guy welding up the coil blocks. The cook in the company cafe. all earn $25 give or take.
People live comfortably enough all over the U.S. on far less. The average income for Americans is less then $50k, so at least 50% of Americans are living on less then $50k.

[barbar]

Even in our major cities there is too much of a variance to come up with a common number. The average person in New York city living in an apartment without rats or drug deals outside the door must make more money the average person living in Baltimore who owns their own single home with a garage and built in pool.

In the U.S., we are supposed to all be equally able to "pursue" our own version of happiness. We are supposed to all have equal opportunities based on our individual desires and willingness to strive for what we want. Unfortunately, Socialist government intervention has divided us into ethnic and even gender classes in which some Americans are allowed more opportunities then others are.
Fair enough about location, full understandable.
So that being the case, Working at Mcdonalds in New York you need to earn $40 an hour for a semi reasonable standard, and Mcdonalds then pay $40 an hour.

[barbar]

People live comfortably enough all over the U.S. on far less.
And does that cover full health care, dental, future provision for retirement, education for the kids. (No govt, local/fed assistance)

[RoBoTeq]

This now what I do not understand about the number of arguments made.
If the factory workers are below what, is not the highest standard of living, why should they not have the right to club together "a union", and ask to at least reach this standard.
How are these people who are under this standard and those who fight for them, being blamed for the demise of the USA. Is it acceptable that the standards should drop further, solely to increase the wealth of those who already have wealth. This being the case should those who have wealth, pay more taxes to cover the difference in at least keeping a minimum standard for those who are working.
Why are things so expensive, is just because the workers want have the same standard.
Is rent cheap! If not who owns the buildings!
The world has become global, and labor is a commodity, so those who choose go to the places with the lower rate. You as citizens of a country choose where you products you purchase come from.
Why do you think a factory worker with little skills should make as much money as a doctor? That is the way Cuba is and that is why doctors in Cuba have to drive cabs for tourists in order to make a decent living.

[RoBoTeq]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Share_top_1_percent.jpg

You can see that when the evil socialists took office, the disparity shrank... when the others were in charge, it increased. The periods where inequity was high, were capped with the great depression and great recession.


Although the 2nd point made later on about the younger crowd getting rish quick is interesting. It's not a new thing. The tech boom created it this time. But other inventions as well as rabid stock market investing, booms in construction and post war opportunities in the 1920's created a similar situation.

Both situations could be characterized as capitalism "run-amock" and deregulation, or simply lack of regulation not keeping greed in check.
OK, I rely on Wikipedia for some things as well. However, Wikipedia is a very leftist oriented site where you are not going to get all of the information about political or social subjects.

While Wikipedia information is usually "accurate" to the degree that the owners allow it to be, it is always far left leaning.

The entire concept of being an American is that everyone can strive to be as rich, famous or powerful as we have the inclination and energy to do so. If we penalize American's for succeeding, we are destroying the basis for the American dream.

Rather then having an overbloated government with outrageous Socialist programs trying to figure out how to get more money from successful Americans, how about we demand that government stop spending so much of our money?

[barbar]

I do not think that a factory worker should earn more than a doctor. But I do not agree that the doctor should earn 100 more at the cost of the factory worker.
My statement is based upon an acceptable standard of living for a full time employed worker. I am trying to find out what is an acceptable standard and the cost of this standard.
In the past I agree that mistakes were made, in all facets, but we can not change the past. All we can best hope to change is the present and the future for the better.

[RoBoTeq]

I do not think that a factory worker should earn more than a doctor. But I do not agree that the doctor should earn 100 more at the cost of the factory worker.
My statement is based upon an acceptable standard of living for a full time employed worker. I am trying to find out what is an acceptable standard and the cost of this standard.
In the past I agree that mistakes were made, in all facets, but we can not change the past. All we can best hope to change is the present and the future for the better.
So, you think that government should set specific standards of pay for various occupations? In that way, a plumber can never make it really rich by doing an outstanding job in his chosen field and a doctor who has failed at everything they do still gets to be better then a fantastic plumber with a great business ability.

Just who gets to decide what we all can be and by what standards are we going to be judged on? I suggest you watch the movie Gattaca and really pay attention. One of your countrymen wrote the screenplay.

[RoBoTeq]

And does that cover full health care, dental, future provision for retirement, education for the kids. (No govt, local/fed assistance)
That is one of the beauties of what the U.S. at least used to be. Before government intervention, it all depended on the individual as to what their respective earnings covered. There are families living on $25k a year that are better off and have more security then other families living on $250k a year. It all depends on how we handle our money. Or, at least it did before BIG BROTHER became the new government.

I personally am one who has made a lot of money in my life and have very little to show for it. Why? Because I did not handle my money well. I can't say I have regrets. I didn't spend my money on frivolous material things or personal excesses. Most of my money has gone to helping others who I felt were in more need then I was. Even if I die destitute, I will not regret my decisions. I would rather live as a free poor person who must go without or beg from others then to live as a slave under some government regime taking care of me.

[barbar]

Please do not misunderstand where i am coming from.
There is standard that you expect. This what you are used to. at least what you have now. What is a reasonable standard and what does this cost, i am not interested how to improve your lot. Just what is and what does cost, without the need for any govt assistance. This must cover till your death.
This a minimum of what I would expect from a full working life. No limit on maximum
Full Health Care
Dental
Education upto till the age of 18
A savings/pension to see me through to 80 years (to cover all cost associated with living)
3 square meals days.
To be able cover all utilities bills.
To be able to replace equipment at the end of designed life (TV, Fridge Washing machine, car)
And a small amount of concessionary spend each year (this can be used as saving, vacation, tithing (if this part of your believes)

[Space Racer]

Half a million of a 1.5 million DOE grant was used to retrofit the engines on a Port of Los Angeles yacht:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/house-reviews-doe-money-upgrading-yacht/364996

[RoBoTeq]

Half a million of a 1.5 million DOE grant was used to retrofit the engines on a Port of Los Angeles yacht:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/house-reviews-doe-money-upgrading-yacht/364996
Another great example.
"This is the American people’s money that was borrowed in stimulus," said House Oversight and Government Reform Chair Darrell Issa in a local CBS broadcast. "It was supposed to create net new jobs. Could that half a million dollars have been used better? Was this really just show without substance?"Keep em coming. Let's see just how well those we elect to serve us are doing at screwing us over.

[RoBoTeq]

Please do not misunderstand where i am coming from.
There is standard that you expect. This what you are used to. at least what you have now. What is a reasonable standard and what does this cost, i am not interested how to improve your lot. Just what is and what does cost, without the need for any govt assistance. This must cover till your death.
This a minimum of what I would expect from a full working life. No limit on maximum
Full Health Care
Dental
Education upto till the age of 18
A savings/pension to see me through to 80 years (to cover all cost associated with living)
3 square meals days.
To be able cover all utilities bills.
To be able to replace equipment at the end of designed life (TV, Fridge Washing machine, car)
And a small amount of concessionary spend each year (this can be used as saving, vacation, tithing (if this part of your believes)
All well and good if you are willing to work to achieve these things. If you are not willing to do what you can to achieve these things, do you really deserve to have them anyway? Should those who would prefer not to work towards these values be allowed to choose to not have them?

[acmanko]

People who refit yatch engines have to eat also. Just how often do you think they get an oppotunity to refit a yatch engine?

[RoBoTeq]

People who refit yatch engines have to eat also. Just how often do you think they get an oppotunity to refit a yatch engine?
So, is that where you believe that amount of money should have gone? What would it cost to put all of the unemployed Americans back to work at that cost?

[DeltaT]

People who refit yatch engines have to eat also. Just how often do you think they get an oppotunity to refit a yatch engine?

Speaking of which ironically my main helper, one year older than me, did that for a living for years and did well at it. Business was booming and he kept very busy plus the boat yard he worked in had been around for a long time.

Then something happened about 3 years ago and the rich folks started withdrawing their money in the US and put it in other places to protect their investments. Based on them, the rich folks, the US was not a place to invest in or trust anymore....that's according to them....lots of my rich customers have told me the same.

So anyway the boat yard went out of business and my helper is now sitting in Mexico so he can survive on what money he has left as prices down there are much more reasonable.

Good news for me is he's coming back in March to help me with what projects I have left. Bad news is those projects, of which I use to have a lot of until, oh, about 3 years ago, are few and far between these days.

Mexico is starting to look good to me but I'll think I'll wait until November to see if there is any future for this country.

[Space Racer]

Good one, DT.

Here are a few more examples:
http://dirtyspendingsecrets.com/

[Space Racer]

Most Americans blame our debt on wasteful government spending:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147338/americans-blame-wasteful-government-spending-deficit.aspx

[Space Racer]

Here are a few items selected by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) at the end of 2010:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/tribu/sns-pgc-wastebook-2010-pg,0,4199163.photogallery

[Space Racer]

Here are a few items from 2011:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2012/01/16/nows-the-time-to-start-cutting-wasteful-government-programs/

[barbar]

All well and good if you are willing to work to achieve these things. If you are not willing to do what you can to achieve these things, do you really deserve to have them anyway? Should those who would prefer not to work towards these values be allowed to choose to not have them?

I have made it clear, this is for those people who are in "full employment for their working lives."
So they are willing to work to achieve these things.
So if this is the case what do they need to earn, in the major cities.

[RoBoTeq]

Good one, DT.

Here are a few more examples:
http://dirtyspendingsecrets.com/
That is amazing. Some of those I had heard about, some not, a couple were so absurd I had to look them up to confirm it was really true.

We are a country of absolute fools for letting this kind of thing go on.

[RoBoTeq]

I have made it clear, this is for those people who are in "full employment for their working lives."
So they are willing to work to achieve these things.
So if this is the case what do they need to earn, in the major cities.
I'll say it again; there is no set number. The U.S. is too vast with too much of a difference to come up with a number for what you are asking.

How about this; pretty much anyone who has a steady job can commit to a lifestyle that would allow all of the things you have stated. As I have already stated, there are many Americans doing much better on $25k a year then others are doing on $250k a year. It all depends on how responsible the person is.

You can give two people the same exact amount of money and one will prosper and the other will wane, that's the nature of man.

[RoBoTeq]

Space Racer has posted enough great examples of what I was looking for to blow this thread into space. Thanks, Space Racer.....:cheers:

[acmanko]

And you needed to waste a post to tell us what we already figured out on our own?

[RoBoTeq]

And you needed to waste a post to tell us what we already figured out on our own?
Recognition. Something you may not be familiar with.

[acmanko]

I'm bona fide recognized

[barbar]

I'll say it again; there is no set number. The U.S. is too vast with too much of a difference to come up with a number for what you are asking.

How about this; pretty much anyone who has a steady job can commit to a lifestyle that would allow all of the things you have stated. As I have already stated, there are many Americans doing much better on $25k a year then others are doing on $250k a year. It all depends on how responsible the person is.

You can give two people the same exact amount of money and one will prosper and the other will wane, that's the nature of man.

Sorry for the delay RoBo.
Just reading on another thread, that family health insurance and dental is $2000 per month, I can not see how a family on $25K can have insurance and live.
( I am not interested in those who have poor money management, but you have to have the money first before you have major poor management).

Do you see health care as a benefit or right?

Is this sort of benefit that unions push for, or salary increases to cover this.

Is the shortfall for families made up by the government, is this classed as a waste of money by the leftist govt.

[corny]

Ive worked for a lot of government entitys...and one thing that I have always noticed...and been told..... Is that none of them try to save any money from their budget because if they do they wont get an increase next year or they will get a cut.

We get a lot of end year work from places that have x amount of dollars left over in their budget and they have to find somewhere to spend it.

Our government rewards waste...... with more funds next year....

How the heck are you supposed to fight that ???

[acmanko]

Ive worked for a lot of government entitys...and one thing that I have always noticed...and been told..... Is that none of them try to save any money from their budget because if they do they wont get an increase next year or they will get a cut.

We get a lot of end year work from places that have x amount of dollars left over in their budget and they have to find somewhere to spend it.

Our government rewards waste...... with more funds next year....

How the heck are you supposed to fight that ???

Government is not the only place that happens. If you don't bust your budget, you get the same next year or less , happens everywhere

[corny]

government drill you long time..........

Im having trouble working "the kracken" into my posts lately.....

[RoBoTeq]

Sorry for the delay RoBo.
Just reading on another thread, that family health insurance and dental is $2000 per month, I can not see how a family on $25K can have insurance and live.
( I am not interested in those who have poor money management, but you have to have the money first before you have major poor management).

Do you see health care as a benefit or right?

Is this sort of benefit that unions push for, or salary increases to cover this.

Is the shortfall for families made up by the government, is this classed as a waste of money by the leftist govt.
Health care is a benefit. Health care is provided as a benefit by most employers. Some Americans work mostly for the health care benefits. Those Americans who do not have health care are better off with charitable help from religous or social organizations then the entire country is by forced government health care. We are different! We are Americans! We are where we are because our American ancestors worked hard and fought for what they had. In order to keep the U.S. what made it strong, we Americans of today, whether deep in American ancestry or new Americans from foreign lands, we need to do what made the U.S. great and not what has kept other countries from achieving the freedoms and liberties of the United States of America.

[RoBoTeq]

Ive worked for a lot of government entitys...and one thing that I have always noticed...and been told..... Is that none of them try to save any money from their budget because if they do they wont get an increase next year or they will get a cut.

We get a lot of end year work from places that have x amount of dollars left over in their budget and they have to find somewhere to spend it.

Our government rewards waste...... with more funds next year....

How the heck are you supposed to fight that ???
How to fight government from rewarding waste is to completely take away funding to all but neccesary evils that must be performed by a federal government. It really is this simple. We need to take the U.S. Federal government back to 1900 standards. Private enterprises, religious and social organizations will then have the abilities to get Americans in need back on track by providing social and spiritual teachings along with providing the basic needs for food and shelter.

[RoBoTeq]

Government is not the only place that happens. If you don't bust your budget, you get the same next year or less , happens everywhere
But government is the only place it happens with "OUR" money.:gah:

[acmanko]

But government is the only place it happens with "OUR" money.:gah:

How many times do I have to tell you to get it through your thick head that after the Government taxes you , the money is the Governments money. You as a single entity have no say it how the money is spent. I think it takes around a half a million people to create a House seat, so suck it up a learn to live with it.

[RoBoTeq]

How many times do I have to tell you to get it through your thick head that after the Government taxes you , the money is the Governments money. You as a single entity have no say it how the money is spent. I think it takes around a half a million people to create a House seat, so suck it up a learn to live with it.
I didn't even have to bait the hook for this one....:grin2:

[acmanko]

I didn't even have to bait the hook for this one....:grin2:

That's cool, I'm spooling my reel with new line:cheers: