Go Back   This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum > Main Floor > Politics

Politics Step up and make your case on all manner of political topics.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-08-2012, 01:19 AM   #101
veggiecanner
Member Level 1
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 164
Thanks: 31
Thanked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
If it comes down to cutting grandma's social security checks and medicare or given up some military spending, what do you think politicians will do? People who are getting medicare and social security benefits are voters. It would be political suicide for a politician to start cutting those programs. People will go ballistic if they start cutting social security and medicare.
Again in ww2, people had to take care of granny. It's what people do that give a darn about their country. And now they say Iran can hit Alaska with missles they bought from China. So it is our country we are talking about.
veggiecanner is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 12:01 PM   #102
Greta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,302
Thanks: 172
Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by veggiecanner View Post
Again in ww2, people had to take care of granny. It's what people do that give a darn about their country. And now they say Iran can hit Alaska with missles they bought from China. So it is our country we are talking about.
I am not talking about what should happen. I am talking about what most likely will happen. Politicians are not likely to cut medicare and social security first because those are very popular programs. Politicians pander to that age group. In fact, they added to medicare benefits awhile back with the prescription drug act under the Bush administration. The problem is politicians don't want to cut spending or raise taxes, both are unpopular. Plain and simple. All these programs are important to somebody, and those people are voters. The voters keep politicians in office. It is a vicious cycle. No doubt, we will go through same thing Greece is going through eventually, except not sure who will bail out America?

And about the nukes, how many countries can the US hit with their nuclear weapons? So by your reasoning the United States is obviously a threat to other nations as well. And how would you feel about those other nations launching air strikes on US because the US has nuclear weapons?
Greta is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 12:08 PM   #103
Greta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,302
Thanks: 172
Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by leistb View Post
Citing the CBO and OMB as objective data sources (remember their analysis of Obamacare prior to its passing? ) is like citing ADP for payroll who adjusted their numbers by more than a million(!) last year or the NAR who was only off by 11% when it came to mis-reporting (intentionally ?) the housing numbers since 2007. They don't hold much water with me. Numbers can be and are twisted to fit any given agenda.

One point lost in your postings: of the spending costs your referencing, defense spending is the only spending mandated by the Constitution and if we were following the Constitution, federal tax revenues could be axed significantly and we'd still have more than enough to cover those needs. As much as war sucks and much of our spending unnecessarily supports the MIC, IMO, we are a superpower and we do have enemies so some spending is absolutely required.
So you really think politicians would cut medicare and social security benefits over national defense spending. I don't think so.

By the way, you have never really said what exactly you didn't like about the information I posted besides, you don't like the source and something about Obamacare. But where is your source?

Last edited by Greta; 03-08-2012 at 12:33 PM.
Greta is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 01:10 PM   #104
Greta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,302
Thanks: 172
Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
Wow! This thread has really gotten off track. It is about Ron Paul. So to the Ron Paul haters, if you don't like Ron Paul, then vote for Romney. Problem solved...
Greta is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 01:28 PM   #105
leistb
Senior Level 6
 
leistb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,495
Thanks: 317
Thanked 635 Times in 360 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
So you really think politicians would cut medicare and social security benefits over national defense spending. I don't think so.
What you think and what is reality are two different things.

Source:

Quote:
In his analysis accompanying the recently released Annual Report of the Medicare Board of Trustees, Richard Foster, Medicare's chief actuary, noted that Medicare payment rates for doctors and hospitals serving seniors will be cut by 30% over the next three years. Under the policies of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, by 2019 Medicare payment rates will be lower than under Medicaid. Mr. Foster notes that by the end of the 75-year projection period in the Annual Medicare Trustees Report, Medicare payment rates will be one-third of what will be paid by private insurance, and only half of what is paid by Medicaid.

Altogether, ObamaCare cuts $818 billion from Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) from 2014-2023, the first 10 years of its full implementation, and $3.2 trillion over the first 20 years, 2014-2033. Adding in ObamaCare cuts for Medicare Part B (physicians fees and other services) brings the total cut to $1.05 trillion over the first 10 years and $4.95 trillion over the first 20 years.

These draconian cuts in Medicare payments to doctors, hospitals and other health-care providers that serve America's seniors were the basis for the Congressional Budget Office's official "score"—repeatedly cited by the president—that the health-reform legislation would actually reduce the federal deficit. But Mr. Obama never disclosed how that deficit reduction would actually be achieved.

There will be additional cuts under ObamaCare to Medicare Advantage, the private option to Medicare that close to one-fourth of all seniors have chosen for their coverage under the program because it gives them a better deal. Mr. Foster estimates that 50% of all seniors with Medicare Advantage will lose their plan because of these cuts. Mr. Obama's pledge that "If you like your health plan, you will be able to keep it" clearly does not apply to America's seniors.

Moreover, there will be additional cuts to Medicare adopted by bureaucrats at the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board. ObamaCare empowers this board to close Medicare financing gaps by adopting further Medicare cuts that would become effective without any congressional action. Mr. Foster reports that "The Secretary of HHS is required to implement the Board's recommendations unless the statutory process is overridden by new legislation."

The drastic reductions in Medicare reimbursements under ObamaCare will create havoc and chaos in health care for seniors. Many doctors, surgeons and specialists providing critical care to the elderly—such as surgery for hip and knee replacements, sophisticated diagnostics through MRIs and CT scans, and even treatment for cancer and heart disease—will cease serving Medicare patients. If the government is not going to pay, then seniors are not going to get the health services, treatment and care they expect.

Mr. Foster reports that two-thirds of hospitals already lose money on Medicare patients. Under ObamaCare it will get much worse. Hospitals also will shut down or stop serving Medicare patients.

The president's concept of spreading the wealth includes sacking the Medicare system, on which America's seniors have come to rely for medical care, in favor of others the president's progressive vision deems more worthy.

Everyone should know by now that Medicare suffers dramatic long-term deficits and unfunded liabilities, and is in need of fundamental, structural reforms. But effectively refusing to pay the doctors and hospitals that provide the medical care the program promises to seniors is no way to solve that problem.
The denial of cost of living increases for the years 2010 and 2011 for social security recipients are two of the most recent -in your face cuts- I can provide for you. Explain to me how real inflation, forecast to be between 8% and 10% depending on your source, doesn't warrant a COLA? This translates into a reduction in purchasing power, which is another way of saying a cut in benefits. Who's responsible for approving the COLA? Congress (politicians). Who's responsible for inflation (mostly)? The Fed. Who's responsible for overseeing the Fed? The Board of Governors with the President appointed by the President (U.S.) and approved by the Senate (politicians). So cuts are indeed happening all the time -you just have to look a little deeper than what the MSM is spoon-feeding you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
By the way, you have never really said what exactly you didn't like about the information I posted besides, you don't like the source and something about Obamacare.
Let me clarify... The CBO and OMB are full of shit. They are not objective entities and are subject to the pressure of any given administration's agenda -much like any other reporting agency that has an influence over the economy or public opinion. Ratings agencies (S&P, Fitch et al, ADP, NAR, IMF, ECB, the Fed -ring any bells?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
But where is your source?
Click on the word twisted, which was part of my reply.
Quote:
Numbers can be and are twisted to fit any given agenda.
leistb is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to leistb For This Useful Post:
Greta (03-09-2012)
Old 03-08-2012, 06:14 PM   #106
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
God help us all! Wow! I am glad you are so sure about that.
Wow! I am surprised you not following the subject at all. Virtually every expert on the subject, left, right and center, says that a ground invasion of Iran. So does our military, and all our politicians on both sides of the aisle. It is amazing that you seem blissfully unaware of this.
----------
Quote:
Let's see. How would you feel about another country launching an air strike on America because the US has nuclear weapons?
Sorry, false analogy. America is not a terrorist state running one of the largest terrorist orgs on the planet.

So since you seem to be against bombing Iran's nuclear facilities, are you for sitting back and doing nothing while a terrorist state goes into full production of nuclear warheads? If not, then what is your plan to deal with the problem?
----------
Quote:
Oh that is interesting. Military spending doesn't cost anything. If Bernanke can print money to pay for it, then I guess you are right.
If you want to debate honestly, fine. But if you want to make up blatant lies and try to falsely insert them into my mouth, as you have attempted to do here, then say so and I will stop responding to your posts.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 07:09 PM   #107
veggiecanner
Member Level 1
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 164
Thanks: 31
Thanked 10 Times in 8 Posts
Another one who thinks Ron Paul can stop a nuke.
veggiecanner is offline  
Old 03-08-2012, 07:30 PM   #108
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
That article is the most amazing pack of lies, distortions and deceptions I have seen in a long time. Point by point....
---

1. America spends more on its military than THE NEXT 15 COUNTRIES COMBINED.

This is true on its face, but not so much when you look at the realities. The difference is that it is widely acknowledged that China's and Russia's official military spending figures are total fantasy. Their real spending levels are far, far higher. Also, with cheap labor and government-owned factories, these nations get much more 'bang for the buck'. When (as in China's case) you literally have slave labor churning out weapons for you, the price is awfully low for the same type of systems.

Also, our European allies have slashed their military spending to the bone, then started sawing away at the bones. Their militaries are, in many cases, a joke. They figure they can get away with this because there are no imminent threats to Europe at the moment, and thanks to their membership in NATO, they have the protection of the American military umbrella. I would very much like to see us pull out of Europe altogether, as well as Japan, South Korea and a number of other places where we have troops deployed.
---

2. The total known land area occupied by U.S. bases and facilities is 15,654 square miles -- bigger than D.C., Massachusetts, and New Jersey combined.

This amount of federal land is an obscenity, IMO. It is not just the military, it is the entire fedgov. That being said, most of the land under military control costs them next to nothing. They have gigantic test ranges in Nevada and Utah that are mostly empty desert. There are large Army and National Guard bases in a number of states that 90% undeveloped land. Land maintenance is not one of the big costs in military spending, so this point is really unimportant, though the article tries to make it sound important.
---

3. By 2033 the U.S. will be paying $59 billion a year to its veterans injured in the wars.

This is an estimate, which is utterly meaningless looking that far out into the future. We cannot possibly know what new medical techniques and drugs will be available for treatment. We have no idea what kind of medical care reform will be instituted by then. This projection is a static one that assumes the rise in costs we have seen in the past will remain constant. Like most static projections, it will almost certainly be quite wrong. And $59 billion$ would be two percent of our 2011 annual budget. By 2033, budgets will be much higher and that amount a much smaller percentage, unless we have a huge economic crash.
---

4. In 2007, the amount of money labeled 'wasted' or 'lost' in Iraq -- $11 billion -- could pay 220,000 teachers salaries.

This was not military spending at all. It was politically mandated spending on 'nation building' activities. People who want to falsely inflate military spending figures like to add in non-military spending like this.
---

5. Defense spending is higher today than at any time since the height of World War II.

6. America's defense spending doubled in the same period that its economy shrunk from 32 to 23 percent of global output.

8. Each day in Afghanistan costs the government more than it did to build the entire Pentagon


These lies are very easy to see through. They are simply using non-inflation adjusted dollars, pretending a 1947 dollar is 'exactly the same' as a 2012 dollar. As for 'our economy shrinking' from 32% to 23% of global output', this is an even more transparent lie. At the end of WWII, Europe was shattered from the war, its industrial centers bombed into rubble. Same with Japan. Overall our economy grew by leaps and bounds right up until the 2007 crash. But Europe, Japan, and later China and India created new and booming economies. So of course, with several big new competitors, our percentage of total global output shrank. But our economy shrank? A flat-out, blatant lie, meant to deceive and create a false impression. That is characteristic of this entire article.
---

7. The yearly cost of stationing one soldier in Iraq could feed 60 American families.

Feed them what, exactly? Notice they gave no hard figures. Stats like these are easily manipulated to fool the gullible. You lowball the cost of feeding a family, and inflate the amount it costs to deploy a soldier, and violá, instant false propaganda!
---

9. In 2008, the Pentagon spent more money every five seconds in Iraq than the average American earned in a year.

Yes, $200 billion$ is a lot of money. But social spending is literally five times that in 2008. Why are the authors of this article not outraged about that? Could it be because they are a wee bit left-leaning?
---

10. The pentagon budget consumes 80% of individual income tax revenue.

This is a nice way to try and manipulate perceptions. This sounds so big! But income taxes make up only 35% of government revenues. So that means that according to this, the military consumes 28% of government revenues. But our current administration is borrowing 40% of every dollar it spends. So military spending is 28% of the 60% of government spending that is actually paid for, which is 16.8% of total spending by their figuring. Sounds a little different when you strip away the razzle-dazzle.
---

11. Two decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Defense Department still has more than 40 generals, admirals or civilian equivalents based in Europe.

Finally! A valid point. The military is top-heavy with flag officers. We are in the process of reforming that to a degree right now. But that does not change the reality of overall spending stats.
---

12. The amount the government has spent compensating radiation victims of nuclear testing ($1.5 billion) could fully educate 13,000 American kids.

Yes, instead we could have done no nuclear testing, had no nuclear arsenal after WWII. Without the 'MAD' policy, just about every historian agrees that there would have been a Third World War soon after the Second one that would have killed over 50 million more people. But we could have saved $1.5 billion$; less one two-thousandth of our total budget for this year. Brilliant!
---

13. The Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety.

Combined spending for all the states this year is $1.4 trillion$. ([url=http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total]LINK[/urll]) That is more than the total cost of all spending on Iraq and Afghanistan combined since 2001. (LINK). Somebody really has their head implanted in their colon on this claim.
---

14. The U.S. has 5% of the world's population -- but almost 50% of the world's total military expenditure.

Yeah, we spend a lot on our military compared to, say, Lower Volta, or Luxembourg, or Outer Mongolia. And we are back to our point about how much more 'bang for the buck' countries with cheap labor and state-owned factories get. Of course, we could always follow their lead and create a gulag labor system to build tanks, guns and such.
---

15. So where do they get all that money?

The same place they get the five times as much they spend on social spending.
---

Those who are willing to swallow lies without fact-checking will always be doomed to ignorance.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.

Last edited by Ought Six; 03-08-2012 at 07:41 PM.
Ought Six is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 12:30 PM   #109
Greta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,302
Thanks: 172
Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
This thread is about Ron Paul. If you have something to say about Ron Paul, then feel free to comment. If you are here to start an argument, then I suggest you move on...
Greta is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 01:10 PM   #110
Coyote
Senior Level 2
 
Coyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,957
Thanks: 12
Thanked 182 Times in 103 Posts
Quote:
So to the Ron Paul haters, if you don't like Ron Paul, then vote for Romney. Problem solved...
Yep.

There are many reasons to not like Ron Paul. Let's face it, very very few people in this country actually agree with his philosophy. Some like his foreign policy, others his fiscal stance and others his constitutional ideas but it seems everyone has some overriding problem with him.

He is not going to be the nominee.

For his supporters, the next best thing is the rumor that Romney will pick him as VP.

If that doesn't happen, I think he is done with politics. If I'm not mistaken, he has said he will not run for another term in the house. It will be a shame not to have his presence in the future political debates. He has been the only libertarian of note and I'm afraid libertarian thinking will cease to be present in the political discourse once he is no longer active.
__________________
Do not mess with the forces of nature, for thou art small and biodegradable
Coyote is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Coyote For This Useful Post:
Greta (03-09-2012)
Old 03-09-2012, 03:02 PM   #111
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
This thread is about Ron Paul. If you have something to say about Ron Paul, then feel free to comment. If you are here to start an argument, then I suggest you move on...
LOL! You posted an article, which I posted a correction to. Now you claim that me responding to a subject *you* brought up is dragging the thread off-topic ?!?

How about this.... This is a discussion forum where there is free speech, and I will respond as I see fit. Deal with it. If you want the thread to stay on-topic, then not posting articles that are not about Ron Paul, as you did with that one, would be advisable.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 03:38 PM   #112
Greta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,302
Thanks: 172
Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
Maybe you should move-on O6, you are only here to argue. I am not wasting anymore of my time responding to comments.
Greta is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 03:49 PM   #113
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Nice face-saving post. Now how about you keep your promise, stop bothering me and 'move on'?
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 04:05 PM   #114
MDINMT
Member Level 4
 
MDINMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NW MT
Posts: 518
Thanks: 668
Thanked 94 Times in 53 Posts
Default How did Ron Paul lose Alaska?

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/articl...aska?page=full
MDINMT is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to MDINMT For This Useful Post:
Greta (03-09-2012)
Old 03-09-2012, 08:49 PM   #115
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Ron Paul seeks breakthrough in Kansas caucuses

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...tory?track=rss
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 09:52 PM   #116
Glockd
5.56, faster than 911
 
Glockd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,540
Thanks: 9
Thanked 455 Times in 235 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greta View Post
Maybe you should move-on O6, you are only here to argue. I am not wasting anymore of my time responding to comments.
\

Tell me Greta, with you arguing with everyone else on everything else but Ron Paul, how the fuck you posted that with a straight face.
__________________


"When the enemy is in range, so are you!" - Murphy
كافر & Proud
Glockd is offline  
Old 03-09-2012, 10:21 PM   #117
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
paul, ron, thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.