I'd rather have STD education, money for the arts and the extension on the DTV deadline, then spend more money on the overpriced war machine industry.
Remembering when peoples critizism of Ronald Regan was reduced to: "He busted the budget with deficit spending." Fair enough. then lets take a look at this $800 Billion monstrosity and all have a some whacks at it. If some of these programs are so important then consider raising taxes on all people, not just the richest 60,000 in a nation of 3 million people. Then we might hear some critique on spending if ALL people actually had to contribute something instead of just borrowing the money.
I know many more people working for social service agencies giving out STD information, people working for/in the Arts, then I do anyone working on the Raptor. As for DTV, we had a workable tv system, and much emergency information is broadcast through tv delivery. I am not comfortable with cutting the poor off from that access. Perhaps your wealthy republican friends stand to make more from tax cuts, but my friends need their jobs and prevent major medical situations. I think the poor deserve access to emergency information. Perhaps we should look at why the SPP wrote Rumsfield and his Bird Flu big pharma cohorts into their plan? Bird Flu vs STD education...I think STDs have more relevance.
The poor have radios ~ and some of them are KILLER: Auto-changing weather station for your position; immediate weather alerts with directions for cover, if any; immediate emergency alerts regarding the surrounds; battery operated OR those Shake-'Em-Up-'Em ones that need no external power source; etc. We have TV and cable, but we always keep a good radio on hand, too.
Those radios need batteries, the elderly and poor rely on what they can plug in and turn on. Why is it the republicans want to discount what this transition is doing to the poor? The poor budget for their utilities, why then should they budget for converter boxes and rooftop antennas? For a service that they once got for free when they signed up with their utility companies? So wireless companies could charge for services. Are we currently bailing out these companies...I'd like to know that.
so, all of those jobs from ww2 production, and infrastructure war, and postwar investment those were all a bad idea? the f-22 exists to keep nations who are buying f-35's from fucking us up. f-16 f-18 sort of thing. the f-16 was always designed to be an inferior fighter.
All public spending in job creation though, any money spent is going into the economy, to buy things, to fix things, to build things, to be given to people
Yes, they were. Military spending will stimulate an economy for a short time, but constant high military spending sucks talented people and money out of other sections of the economy. Look at all the high tech gadgets the military is/has developed since the 1950's, now imagine if that research and energy had gone into alternative energy or biomedical. Instead we have plenty of fine expensive killing machines, all produced at the taxpayers expense. And remember, the military-industrial complex was not meant to be permanent.
No, I'm saying if you need an aircraft carrier build an aircraft carrier. If you don't, don't build one just to keep a bunch of people busy. I think it was designed to be cheaper.
Does the F22 maneuver like it did in the Transformers movie? Because that fucker was more badass than Starscream and I was *so* pissed.
Didn't see the movie, but i doubt it. But, there is nothing that even comes close in reality. YouTube quite a few videos in related.
Well said, Polecat. A lot of military technology has made it into the market, but still that money could have been better spent like you said on alternative energy, biomedical or other civilian tech.
