Autonomous
-
Posts
157 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by Autonomous
-
-
You're referring to the "Total Public Debt", that's the amount owed in mortgages, credit cards, etc. by the american public. The "national debt", what is owed by the Federal Government is what I referred to. (Sorry).
No it isn't. Here's the information page:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/resourc...t.htm#DebtOwner
-
On your 2nd point, a former boss proposed something that I thought was pretty interesting. He wasn't advocating it, but just threw it out as food for thought.
Picture a progressive income tax based on a mathematical formula such that it changes smoothly rather than in discrete steps. Further, imagine that this curve crosses zero and becomes progressively more negative below a certain income level. Those with incomes in the negative tax bracket would receive money from the IRS rather than paying in. The curve would be close to linear at the low end, but taper off towards the high end so that it can never equal or exceed someones entire income. This tax curve would be more complex than a flat tax, but still much simpler than the current complex rules.
Here are some possible advantages to this:
1) It removes the disincentive that often happens with the current system, in which a person can be worse off by getting a job because of loss of benefits. In this system, loss of benefits (or increase in liability) would always be smaller than any gain in income. Conversely, to quit working and live on the public dole would always result in a loss of income.
2) It would be managed by a single entity, the IRS, and would not even be an additional job for them, but just an alteration of the tax rules. This removes the need for additional governmental entities, so should cost less to manage than current welfare programs.
3) Welfare cheating would become tax fraud. The IRS has existing methods to detect this, and formidable teeth to enforce it.
This is, of course, overly simplistic. Any realistic system would necessarily be much more complex.
Advantage #1, for example, has a fairly obvious flaw. That being that potential loss of welfare benefits isn't the only factor that gets people stuck on welfare. For example, a single parent can easily end up with little or even negative benefit from getting a job because of daycare expenses. And this can be a loss for both parent and child in non-monetary ways as well. This is also true for families living on a single, inadequate or barely adequate income. The one parent doesn't make enough to ensure a decent standard of living, and little or nothing would be gained by the other parent going to work. Some adjustment would be needed for such things if advantage #1 is to have any real impact.
Also, it would still be good to make some distinction between those who can't support themselves and those who merely choose not to. The negative tax should provide a painful enough existence to discourage able-bodied people from slacking, just enough that they have a starting point for pulling themselves up. But for those who have genuine mental or physical disabilities and simply can't support themselves, it should be basic, but not punishing.
It probably has more issues than I've thought of, but it is an interesting idea.
The IRS already has something called the Earned Income Credit. Basically, people who don't make very much get not only whatever they paid in back, but an additional sum on top of that.
The hard part of welfare reform is the kids of people who choose not to work. We can't starve them, and I'm not really anxious to start taking them away.
We have a real problem with irresponsibility in this country. The poor often get great tax returns, then blow it all in a week. Every month when the government refills the food stamp cards, you see people loading up shopping carts with crap, but by the end of the month they're eating ramen noodles. Yet we can't just starve them. Argh!
-
Bush has succeeded in lowering the national debt another 50 billion since Jan. 1
Bush's tax cuts are the reason for the booming economy and the reduction in the national debt. The defeatocrats in congress are strangely silent on this, they're trying to ignore the success of Bush's tax cuts. In spite of the millions being spent daily on the war on terror, Bush is still reducing the debt. Taking the fight to the bad guys, keeping us safe since 9/11 when Clinton allowed us to get attacked and reducing the debt. Bush will certainly go down as one of our greatest presidents.
God bless George Bush.
That would be great if it were true. Unfortunately, the government itself...
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
...shows the debt growing from 8,680,224,380,086.18 to 8,886,560,061,162.27 in that time. Sorry.
-
LMAO, any 14 year old can come up with a better argument than that.
A near-60 year old using LMAO? Now I've seen everything.
-
You "actually" thought of something !! Congratulations !! Better lie down now and rest your brain.
In this post...
http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...indpost&p=59887
...you stated that "VietNam vets would be too old."-while quoting me saying that I'm nowhere near old enough to have gone to Vietnam. You're hardly a shining example of the American education system.
-
If you really feel they're useless, put them on the ignore list. In the long run it could be less aggravating.
I did that with Bryan. His posts are SOOOO long and usually filled with dribble. I no longer feel like scrolling page after page just to get to the next post. Too bad ignore does not remove their quotes when other people quote them.
They're useless but amusingly easy to poke with the stick of reason.
I actually thought of something-another possibility is that 2dim simply apes Patriot. That would explain away most of the 'evidence' for them being the same person.
-
I would like to know who will pay for this health care for all. I'm not against it but that is a large nut to crack. Also, I understand that in Europe the health system is not all it's cracked up to be. People waiting months for treatments and operations. I think we should really call the insurance companies to task for our inflated problem. I'm not sure that socialized medicine is the way to go. But I'm open for ideas on the issue.
I don't support national healthcare, but right now our government spends more per capita on healthcare than Canada-which has it. I do believe we need to change the way we distribute aid to the poor so that people can afford to get back on their feet.
-
Me, vicious ?? I'm really just a nice guy that can't stand the LoonyLeft. I support Republican philosophy; a strong military,
Me too.
personal responsibilityThen show some.
and closed borders.How about a reasonable immigration policy?
I detest defeatocratic principles; a nanny state, national health care, high taxes, no personal responsibility, open borders and a weak military. And BTW, I don't know 2smart4u or BushBackerYou oppose a caricature of Democratic principles, in other words. You realize I haven't supported any of those things, right? In fact, right now there is a thread in which I explicitly detail my opposition to national healthcare.
-
I've tried to start discussions on other topics, but it seems that religion is what people here are interested in.
-
Sure put fire fighters on the ambulance just like harrison does so you can take companies out of service just like harrison does! your fire fighters are riding under staffed every day!! now you want them to start riding on ambulances also? thats just going to cause the down to shut down fire houses and put more lives at risk! sounds real smart to me
I'm not really sure what that has to do with what I said-my point was that people are capable of making a difference if they take matters into their own hands.
-
One more thing to add-what impact, if any, do you think Michael Moore's movie Sicko will have on the debate? He's a very polarizing figure-people who don't question the left accept everything he says, while people who don't question the right reject everything he says. I think it will move us a bit away from socialized healthcare. People on the left already want it, but this may make healthcare reform a "far-left issue," which will bolster the right's flagging opposition.
-
Just when one thinks things won't get worse...
One thing you can say with certainty about the Middle East-it can ALWAYS get worse.
However, I don't blame this one on Bush. The PKK was active in the years between our invasions, and Turkey has every right to defend itself. I just wonder what it will mean for the future of Iraq if they invade.
-
Someone thinks Patriot, BushBacker and 2smart4u are the same person because they make the same spelling mistake writing VietNam.
I wouldn't go that far.
BushBacker is a neocon bulldog. His posts defend or promote Republicans and/or denigrate Democrats. I have no problem with that-our main point of contention is that I don't like Giuliani. He has a more sophisticated syntax than the other two, indicating a probably greater intelligence. Other than his belief that anyone who disagrees with the current administration is part of the "Loony Left," (I'm center-right actually) he hasn't really had a moment of lunacy like Patriot's "Vietnam vets couldn't possibly have served in Iraq!" or 2dim's "30% of Democrats think Bush was behind 9/11!"
"VietNam" is apparently not an actual mistake, but it is an incredible coincidence to find these two using the same very uncommon spelling. It certainly isn't conclusive. However, the two are trolls, and sock-puppets are a staple of troll behaviour.
They don't ever really contribute anything intelligent to a discussion-in fact, I don't know of a single post by either of them that doesn't insult someone. In addition, they use very similar simple syntax, attacking one well invite a spirited defense by the other, it is rare to see them both respond to a particular post, and they seem to take turns-one day will see a lot of posts by one and not many by the other, the next will reverse the order.
However, the way they attack is very different. 2dim is the more juvenile of the two-he tends towards "Kool-aid" comments, insinuations of homosexuality, simplistic insults of his opponent's intelligence, and diminutives of user names. Patriot certainly does the same things, but he is more vicious. He tends to attack someone's character more.
Because of this I think that they probably know each other. They may very well be brothers. They might be the same person, but I'm more inclined to think they are just close.
-
I think this subject is a little over your head.
So you can tell me exactly where my analysis went wrong?
-
Why does Kearny always need mutual aid for its EMS service? Why are we not protected? Is there no one who will serve the town and it's citizens? Wait, there are a group that is already in town, is trained and can do it, it's called the Kearny Fire Dept!
Call your politicians and ask why if there is an EMS emergency they have to call out of town to help you! Ask to have the fire dept take over EMS for the town. The life of someone in your or my family could depend on it!
Why not you? I'm not being snarky here-it really isn't that difficult to run for a local office. Many times local politicians stay in office simply because no one runs against them.
-
I joined the Marines out of college in 1970 as a 2nd Lt. Got out in '76, spent one year in Nam as a logistics officer, didn't see any direct combat. As to your question about sending any of my family to Afganistan, I tried to send my mother-in-law but she wouldn't go. Sorry.
It doesn't matter.
On at least three occasions you have accused your fellow posters of lying about their service records. To 'support' this accusation you declared that it was impossible for a Vietnam vet to still be enlisted today.
The first problem is a flaw in your logic. I defeated your theory in seconds with a simple Google search. There are plenty of people serving in Iraq who served in 'Nam. Now, this isn't really a character flaw. I would hope one would test a theory before accusing others of such heinous dishonesty, but it could be just an oversight.
The second problem is only a problem in my specific case. I never claimed to be a Vietnam veteran. Now you might have been lying-but you might have been mistaken. Unlike you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Either way the choices are dishonesty or egregious oversight (again).
The result, however, is what is most telling. You have never apologized to either of us for accusing us of lying. For that matter, you haven't even admitted that you were wrong.
So it doesn't matter what your service record is. It doesn't matter whether or not you and 2Dim are the same person. It doesn't even matter whether or not you were man enough for the Marines. The one unquestionable fact is that you are NOT man enough to take responsibility for your own actions here.
-
Even the GOP might roll on that one if they think voting against it will hurt their chances of re-election.
True. I think there is still enough popular opinion against it (for now) to keep it from happening. Amusingly enough, Michael Moore's new movie will unite the right against it.
The rhetoric from the left and from the mainstream media has people believing that single-payer healthcare is an overwhelmingly good thing.Yes, it will make health-care available for all, but the quality of care will diminish. And when the entitlement crunch happens (social security and all the rest), health care will inevitably be affected. People will not have basic care because the government won't be able to justify it. They'll probably take it away from certain classes of people, first, like smokers (already going on in the UK).
I wonder if the obese are in the same boat? It takes as many years off your life as smoking.
An economic adviser to Barack Obama on the drawbacks of the single-payer system:http://www.slate.com/id/2169454/
(for those who don't realize the drawbacks already)
The only decrease in spending you'll get from a Democratic Congress is a decrease in defense spending.
I agree-we haven't seen any decreases in spending yet. I'm fine with cutting some bloat from military spending, however.
Thanks. I'm interested in discussing this further with you, so I started a new thread.Good suggestion. Putting free market incentives into what presently amount to entitlement programs should help them operate far more efficiently.Not so much as what we experienced when Carter turned on the Shah in favor of Ayatollah whatsisname (though not for long, as the rebel movement promptly invaded our embassy in Iran and took hostages).http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchro...eb/grinter.html
Good foreign policy will always consist largely of choosing the lesser of two evils.
You certainly won't see me defending Carter's foreign policy.
Both ends of the political spectrum could do a better job of refraining from assuming the worst.True.
-
In another thread I said:
The person you were responding to was me, btw.Hillarycare certainly would have been bad. It still will if the Democrats keep control of Congress and capture the White House. I think I'll be splitting my vote this time.
Drastically cutting government spending is a good long-term plan. I believe it needs to be done gradually though.
The problem with our current view of cutting welfare is that we need to rethink how we allocate it. Back in my college days I bought a floor scrubber and buffer and got a contract to clean a local grocery store. One of the guys there had a severe form of degenerative arthritis. He had to be careful not to work too many hours or he would lose Medicare-and his medicine was nearly $1000 a month. Because he couldn't work full-time, he also needed Food Stamps and housing assistance, draining the economy even more. Whenever welfare was cut, they'd lower the amount you could make and still draw benefits, so he'd have to work even less. Meanwhile, fatass meth-heads sit on there butts all day and do better than he did. It seems that you get punished for trying to get off welfare. If we had a system that would allow people to work full time until they were eligible for health insurance people like my friend could get off of it.
Bryan responded with:
Even the GOP might roll on that one if they think voting against it will hurt their chances of re-election.The rhetoric from the left and from the mainstream media has people believing that single-payer healthcare is an overwhelmingly good thing.
Yes, it will make health-care available for all, but the quality of care will diminish. And when the entitlement crunch happens (social security and all the rest), health care will inevitably be affected. People will not have basic care because the government won't be able to justify it. They'll probably take it away from certain classes of people, first, like smokers (already going on in the UK).
An economic adviser to Barack Obama on the drawbacks of the single-payer system:
http://www.slate.com/id/2169454/
(for those who don't realize the drawbacks already)
So I decided to make a new thread.
Healthcare is a subject in the news lately. Between the release of Sicko and the upcoming election, it is likely to be there for some time to come. There are both pros and cons to consider. Aside from those above, I'd like to present another.
One thing often overlooked is that the poor already often receive care which is never paid for by going to the emergency room for services and then simply never paying for the care received. What effect do you think this has on the system?
-
Interesting story here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_...key_iraq_border
Will Turkey invade northern Iraq?By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA, Associated Press Writer
Mon Jul 9, 8:07 PM ET
ISTANBUL, Turkey - Reports that Turkey has massed a huge military force on its border with Iraq bolstered fears that an invasion targeting hideouts of Kurdish rebels could be imminent. But how deeply into Iraq is the Turkish army willing to go, how long would it stay and what kind of fallout could come from allies in Washington and other NATO partners? ADVERTISEMENT
All these questions weigh on Turkey's leaders, who have enough on their hands without embarking on a foreign military adventure. Turkey is caught up in an internal rift between the Islamic-rooted government and the military-backed, secular establishment, less than two weeks ahead of July 22 elections that were called early as a way to ease tensions in a polarized society.
A military operation could disrupt Turkey's fragile democratic process by diverting attention from campaign topics such as the economy, and raise suspicion about whether the government and its opponents are manipulating the Iraq issue to win nationalist support at the polls.
On Monday, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Turkish television that Turkey would take whatever steps were necessary if the United States fails to fulfill its pledge to help in the fight against Kurdish rebels, but he appeared reluctant to order an invasion before the elections.
"We are seeing with great grief that America remains quiet as Turkey struggles against terrorism. Because there were promises given to us, and they need to be kept. If not, we can take care of our own business," Erdogan said. "We hope there won't be an extraordinary situation before the election. But there'll be a new evaluation after the elections."
The aim of any military push into Iraq would be to hunt separatist rebels of the Kurdish Workers' Party, or PKK, who rest, train and resupply in remote bases in the predominantly Kurdish region of northern Iraq before crossing mountain passes into Turkey to attack targets there. In recent months, rebels have stepped up assaults, adding to a sense of urgency in Turkey that something must be done.
A claim Monday by Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, a Kurd from northern Iraq, that Turkey had massed 140,000 soldiers on its border with Iraq rattled nerves on both sides of the border. Turkey's military had no comment, and the Bush administration said there has been no such mass buildup.
Although Turkish military commanders have said an invasion is necessary, it is difficult to know how prepared they are because many areas along the Iraqi border have been declared "security zones" and are essentially off-limits to civilians. There have been reports of Turkish shelling of rebel positions inside Iraq from time to time, and commandos are believed to periodically conduct so-called "hot pursuits" of guerrillas across the border.
Turkey also feels a special kinship for the ethnic Turkmen minority in northern Iraq, and Turkish military air ambulances on Sunday evacuated 21 people wounded in a devastating suicide attack in Armili, a town north of Baghdad, for treatment in Turkish hospitals. Turkey condemned the attack, but there was no indication that it gave impetus to calls for military intervention in the north to protect its ethnic brethren.
Turkey staged a series of major cross-border operations in the 1990s, involving tens of thousands of troops and jet fighters that attacked suspected rebels hideouts in the mountains. Results were mixed, with rebels regrouping after the bulk of the Turkish forces had left, even though some military units stayed behind to monitor guerrilla activities.
This time, Turkish forces could face the possibility of a confrontation with Iraqi Kurds who are emboldened by newfound autonomy since the downfall of Saddam Hussein in the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Some U.S. forces are also in the area, with American warplanes known to fly close to the Iraqi-Turkish border.
Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkish Research Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, acknowledged that part of Turkey's goal was likely to draw increased U.S. attention to the issue, but said the Turks were likely to act if attacks continued.
Cagaptay said there are already Turkish forces in Iraq, operating about 10 to 15 miles beyond the border, where the steep mountains turn into hills that are more easily navigable. He said monitoring this area was "the only way (Turkey) could control the border."
Cagaptay said Zebari's announcement that there are Turkish troops on the border was likely a sign that the Iraqi foreign minister takes the threat of further incursion seriously and is trying to draw international attention to the border games to eliminate the possibility that Turkey could execute raids under the radar.
Besides possible tension with the United States, another concern for Turkey is the impact that a military intervention might have on its troubled efforts to join the European Union. Accusations of human rights abuses by Kurds could slow the process even further; the Turkish military has already expressed frustration with what it perceives as European leniency toward PKK sympathizers.
Sinan Ogan, head of the Turkish Center for International Relations and Strategic Analysis, said one option was a limited air force operation, which would help the government deal with domestic demand for action. If ground forces do go in, he said, the military would want them to stay for at least six months to assess the impact of the mission.
"An operation before the elections will bring the ruling government more votes so they might be willing to allow such an operation," he said. "A clash with several soldiers getting killed or a bombing at an important spot might be the spark for a military operation."
One must wonder what the US or the Iraqis will do if the Turks send a sizeable force across the border to punish the Kurds. Turkey is probably our most valued ally in the area, so I doubt we'll fight them. As part of NATO, they can invoke the treaty. They have been attacked, and have every right to fight back. Problem is-during the first Gulf War we encouraged the Kurds to fight Saddam. After we pulled out, they were massacred. Now there is a possibility of more massacres-and we can't do a thing about it for political reasons. I wonder how many Iraqi Kurds will be attacking us in the future?
-
Yes I do because my white grand children will be the ones to get shit on. Let's see if PC is still around in twenty years!!!
My wife and I were visiting her grandparents over the holiday and the subject came up. They were amused-they're old enough to remember the "black people will outbreed whites!" scare last century, and see this nonsense as what it is.
-
You served in Viet Nam and retired rather than serve in Iraq ??? Since the wars are more than 25 years apart, if you were a veteran of Viet Nam, you would have been out of the military before 9/11/01. I think you're a phony, "proud american". I think the closest you ever got to the military is reading Action Comics.
Seriously, how hard is it to Google "Vietnam Veterans in Iraq" to avoid this? Here's the first result of A LOT:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/20...tnam-vets_x.htm
Guess they're lying.
-
I don't understand why people oppose universal health care. Most developed countries have it, and they do very well with it. They enjoy higher living standards and longer life expectancies than we do. The opposition seems like just another instance of American cowboy-ism.
I have seen arguments for and against both sides. However, the medical and insurance lobbies are among the most powerful in Washington. Not gonna happen until we take care of that issue. Which is effectively the same as not gonna happen.
-
The key word there is "usually". There's a good discussion of this here:
http://www.lib.washington.edu/southeastasi...ietnamORVN.html
I've only read about 1/3 of the posts there, but that was enough to get the gist of it. Which, best I understand it, is something like this:
Writing "Vietnam" as a single word is part of the Anglicization of it for use in English writing. However, In its original language, it is normal to write all syllables separately, even when belonging to a single word. Because of this, the Anglicized version is also occasionally written with the syllables separated. This is less common, probably because it confuses non-Vietnamese speakers who would normally interpret that to mean that it's two words, though it should rightfully still be considered as only one. Dropping the space and leaving the "N" capitalized is even less common, but is not unheard of. It keeps the syllables together so that it is identifiable as a single word, but still retains some sense of the Vietnamese style. Patriot's two variants are not what is most often seen in English writing, but they aren't necessarily incorrect. And, could arguably even be taken as an indication of having had a more intimate familiarity with it than those of us who have only read about it.
So, sorry guys. It looks like Patriot is in the clear on this one.
Damn it. Very well, I apologize for accusing him of misspelling.
-
Right after you apologize for misspelling E-X-P-E-C-T, dummy.
Because misspelling a word is exactly the same as accusing someone of being a phony and using flawed logic to 'prove' your case. You call me a dummy, yet I disproved your theory in seconds using a simple Google search.
Great News
in Kearny
Posted
What you are referring to as Public Debt is actually called Consumer Debt. As of August 2006 it was at 2.17 trillion*-high, but nowhere near the Public Debt, which the page my last post contained explained. Radagast is referring to the Public Debt correctly. Perhaps you should do some research before insulting other posters' intelligence.
*source:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14251360/site/newsweek/