marks2065

Obama's plan to educate the baby's definatly isn't going to help, if Obama wants a plan that works he should look at the plans being used in the top 4-5 countries

remember "it's time to be a patriot and let Obama spend your money" What a crock of shit. I don't want government handouts, or take my hard earned money and give it to the lazy / illegal welfare recipients. I have given enough money to the government. hell i've given 5 time what Biden has given to charity. people want to balance the budget here is what you do. bring 20% of the troops back to the US and put them on the border send all the illegals back home so they don't use up the free health care, prisons, and welfare put the currant welfare people into the jobs the illegal held (so they can get off welfare and pay taxes) cut off all money given to any country that votes against us in the united nations(if our way of life isn't good enough for them then niether are the procedes generated from it) finally cut 20% out of the fed gov budget across the board with increased tax revenue from the welfare people working, $218 billion saved from gov cuts, couple hundred billion saved from illegal imagrants, and the billions sent to the ungratefull middle east every year, the national debt would be paid of in 6-8 years and leave enough money to develope alt energy souces and the unemployment rate would be significantly lower, and we wouldn't need to raise taxes for anyone and they could all afford their own insurance. hell we might even be able to fix sos security.

i didn't call it infrastructure

buisiness. and most of the rest should be run by local buisinesses with oversight by a governing body

Apparently, you don't quite understand what the word infrastructure means. Perhaps a result of not having enough formal education? ------------------------------------------------------ Infrastructure typically refers to the technical structures that support a society, such as roads, water supply, wastewater, power grids, floodmanagement systems, communications (internet, phone lines, broadcasting), and so forth. In the past, these systems have typically been owned and managed by local or central governments this is the short form from wikipedia

did miss read the table but didn't forget about the other stuff

hospitals are a buisiness not an infrastructure and get built on loans sometimes from government but alot are from private investors. they get subsidised from government alot because of the losses due to illegals and welfare recipients.

Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%? Maybe you should have paid more attention to your math TEACHER. ---------------------------------------------------------- The President's actual budget for 2007 totals $2.8 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2006. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures: $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare $294.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology $23.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government I think it says 9%

insurance is not infrastructure

Ever hear of AIG? i'm not sure but isn't AIG running themselves with government oversight?

Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%?

Fine. Hope the same works out for you when you want a doctor. Or a lawyer. Or an engineered product that works. ---------------------------------------------------------- my brother is a doctor and most of his learning comes from fellow doctors, books, case studies and experience not from teachers at a university. his comment on the time spent in school was "the teachers are to far behind from time spent not being in the real world that most of what they know is to outdated to use"

no it is no. the government doesn't run insurance companies, insurance companies run them selves, offer a product and consumers buy it.

Well, apparently Bush and Paulson believe it's the right thing to do, but don't like it. That figures, the GOP is generally opposed to doing the right thing. ------------------------------------------------------------ government control of freddie and fanny mae was given to the private sector 30-40 years ago because it was deemed not proper to have independant companies competing with the federal government. little companies had a disadvantage. and today this is still true. so the take over is the wrong thing to do for those reasons but needed to stabilize the situation.

we already have that it is called insurance

i am in the service buisiness and i will take a self taught over a book smart employee any day. college means nothing in this buisiness and alot of blue collar jobs. eduacation is needed but can be learned without teachers with drive and ambition.

---------------------------------------------------------- ok enter the twisting - there is a diference between goods and services and infrastructure. but i think you know that and are just playing with it.

health care is a product or sevice you obtain for a cost. and i believe it is your reponsibility to take care of yourself. the next thing you'll be saying that housing, food and a car should be given out by the gov also

health care to me is the responsibilty of the person. it is something you use for yourself not some thing like a sewer that everyone shares. the government should only supply infrastructure not the goods or services people purchase.

just because Bush defended it doesn't mean he likes it. sometimes you just have no choice but to do things.

It says more about the repercussions of so many Americans taking pride in their ignorance, considering those with formal educations "elitist." -------------------------------------------------------- and remember the "formal eduacaters" are left leaning. If that is true, it would be consistent with my assertion. ----------------------------------------------------------- remember the old saying - Those that can do and those that can't do teach

---------------------------------------------------------- no spin the dems did start the bail out as it says in this paragragh from the washington times article "Mr. Bush didn't like the version emerging from Congress and initially said he would veto it, particularly over a provision containing $3.9 billion in neighborhood grants. He contended the money would benefit lenders who helped cause the mortgage meltdown, encouraging them to foreclose rather than work with borrowers." The bail out started months ago when the housing bill was put though congress. but like it said Bush didn't like it but had to work with the crap congress gave him.

beautifull place. alway wanted to go to that boogie, just never had the timing work out.

Treasury Secretary Paulson is a Democrat? What are you smoking, Mark? ------------------------------------------------------ who said anything about Paulson? just because he was put in charge of handling the mess doesn't mean he caused the mess. he is just trying to help clean it up and that doesn't take away the fact the democrats got money from them to work in their interests.

no have you?