Convict on 27/1/2007 at 05:47
It's a travesty that $900? million (and more importantly the lives lost) have gone into this war and the final situation will probably be worse than what it started out as!
Could America move some of its forces from Japan and Germany over to Iraq (or have they done so already)?
Swiss Mercenary on 27/1/2007 at 06:23
Quote Posted by Convict
Could America move some of its forces from Japan and Germany over to Iraq (or have they done so already)?
I'm pretty sure they have, in the case of Germany.
Although here, 'more troops' seems to be more of a synonim for 'more targets'.
Aerothorn on 27/1/2007 at 16:27
Quote Posted by Convict
It's a travesty that $900? million
I believe you're looking for 'billion'. Million would be cheap.
Yeah, taken one at a time some things are worse, but overall the #1 thing this administration has SUCKED at is spending money properly. Cutting education while increasing oil subsidies? Slashing the EPA budget while spending money on Star Wars? WTF.
dlw6 on 28/1/2007 at 12:46
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
Cutting education while increasing oil subsidies?
Slashing the EPA budget while spending money on Star Wars?
I agree, but probably not for the same reasons.
Oil subsidies keep gas prices down, but I'd rather have workers who can read, write and do math because then they could be more productive and afford higher gas prices. The problem with public education is bad spending choices. Instead of paying good teachers what they are worth and getting rid of bad ones, states use the money to hire a massive admin staff (often teachers who weren't competent enough to stay in the classroom) at local and state levels to do busy work. Private schools do a better job with half the money, because they have to.
While preserving the environment is a bad short-term investment, and nobody trying to make money or get reelected cares about long term, SDI is a worse investment. It is more likely that the first nuke to detonate on US soil will arrive in a suitcase than in a missile.
Don
aguywhoplaysthief on 28/1/2007 at 17:54
Quote Posted by dlw6
Oil subsidies keep gas prices down
I think this has to be proven.
BEAR on 28/1/2007 at 21:09
Quote Posted by aguywhoplaysthief
People say that like it's a bad thing, but money is very powerful, and therefore very important.
I didnt mean to say it like its a bad thing, but I think there are more important sacrafices to be made.
I also find it ironic that our economy is fueled by poor/middle class people spending their hard earned money so that it can pile up in the bank accounts and off-shore money holes of the rich, but yes by all means go out there and spend that money that you would like to be putting in your smaller and smaller savings account.
The economic system of this country seems well tuned to keeping the majority of the working class as close to broke as possible while still having enough money to spend to keep everything going.
Quote Posted by aguywhoplaysthief
I think this has to be proven.
Even if it was true its not a good thing, low gas prices will hurt us in the long run. How about a motherfucking subsidies for solar or somthing like that? Oh thats right theres no money in that for politicians yet, no high priced solar lobbiests so yeah I guess they wont get heard.
aguywhoplaysthief on 30/1/2007 at 05:15
Quote Posted by BEAR
I also find it ironic that our economy is fueled by poor/middle class people spending their hard earned money so that it can pile up in the bank accounts and off-shore money holes of the rich
I'm rather confident that the people who haven't convinced themselves that they need three new cars, a half-million dollar home, and a home entertainment center, and that six figures worth of student loans is actually a sensible investment, are racking up a decent return on investments.
People don't save money because they haven't decided that it's a priority. And why would they? The government bailed out the two generations, why wouldn't people think that it'll bail them out to?
Quote Posted by BEAR
Even if it was true its not a good thing, low gas prices will hurt us in the long run.
I agree.
lambizkit on 30/1/2007 at 05:40
Quote Posted by aguywhoplaysthief
People don't save money because they haven't decided that it's a priority. And why would they? The government bailed out the two generations, why wouldn't people think that it'll bail them out to?
I think another reason that people don't save is because the government has worked so damn hard with the media to convince people that they need to buy, buy, buy and own two or more credit cards. And sadly enough the American populace has blindly followed the government's wishes.
In the end it's all about the big, rich corporations getting richer and richer at the expense of the people. As I see it, it's not going to be getting any better. Mark my words, those crooked bastards will run this country into the ground.
Bebop on 31/1/2007 at 05:35
The problem democrats have with Hillary is that she seems to be too "middle of the road". She is too eager to compromise and she supports the war. Her support of the war a tactful move. She is a woman, if she didn't support the war she would be seen as too soft, not fit to be commander-in-chief. She HAS to appear hawkish, even though she isn't. Those reasons are exactly why she will win the general election if she passes the primary.
First, let's state the obvious. She is a woman. She will get a large portion of the woman vote, that includes Republican women. She has a very recognizable name which even though you may hate the name Clinton, during those years the economy grew, we stayed out of prolonged wars, and the Bulls won three more championships. Also, people are tired of the Republicans and their bungling of just about everything. They lost complete face as was seen in the midterm elections. Small government? Hardly. Corrupt? Jack Abramoff scandal. Even their bread and butter, religion: Mark Foley Scandal. They're full of shit and now hopefully naive nominal republicans, who glance at the newspaper once in a while, know it. Also, Hillary seems to be bi-partisan meaning she will steal votes from the disillusioned Republicans (at least, the rational ones...) and a lot of the undecided votes.
Now, for all the negatives: Some people will vote against her just cause they hate her, but don't know why they hate her. The majority of them will be Republicans, but they wouldn't vote for any democrat anyways. Now, the democrats (when it comes to a general election) sure as hell won't vote for a republican, so they'll be stuck with Hillary. That is why she will win the general election.
She gets the democratic vote, the women vote, and the disillusioned republican vote. Hillary in a landslide will get 55-57% of the popular vote.
PS. McCain is too old and has sold his soul to the religious right trying to win his party's nomination. He will be doomed in a general election against Hillary.
User was banned by David on 31-1-2007
BEAR on 31/1/2007 at 14:53
I hope your right. You make good points but I've just seen so many people with irrational hatred of her, I dont know if she can get the republican votes. I know alot of republican women who would not vote for her period.
And AGWPT, granted rich people spend alot of money but I think alot of the 'economic boom' can be attributed to a)the american class working longer hours with less vacation (now more than japan iirc), and b)spending more of the money they have (and more of the money they dont).
I try to not be a total communist but it bothers me to hear stuff like that.
