I would be interested in learning how people feel about the current political structure. Do you think it represents and fulfills your needs? How do you envisage a political structure that would truly reflect the society it represents? Do you think that a political structure should be executed at a local, national or worldwide level? Should the electorate be more involved in the political decisions that are made or are you happy to leave this to an elected group? Should groups of individuals hold power over a society or should they be more responsive to its electorate?
A political concensus
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
The more centralized the gov't becomes, the less likely that it will be able to service the population. A one-world gov't will satisfy about 28 people, 37 if the weather's nice.
The smaller the gov't and the smaller it's spere of service (note it should be 'service' not 'control') the more likely it will listen to it's constituents.
The smaller the gov't and the smaller it's spere of service (note it should be 'service' not 'control') the more likely it will listen to it's constituents.
A political concensus
Thank you Acc. Your comments have been noted.
A political concensus
What do you think the role of govt should be ? There seems to be a considerable difference between europe & the US on the issue. Here most would accept the govt has a role in helping people out of poverty and making life better for the less fortunate and shou,d provide educaion, health services etc as a matter of right to the people electing them. I might be wrong but inthe US if you can't afford medical services they seem to leave you to die. At least every US medical drama seems to bring the ussie up.
If labour get back in looks like our political concensus might be in for a shake up.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/06336772-5df4- ... e2340.html
Whitehall insiders predicted the review would tighten Gordon Brown’s grip on the levers of government once he succeeded Mr Blair as prime minister.
“Gus is preparing the way for a power-base for Gordon Brown that Tony Blair could only dream of,†a government member said on Friday, predicting that the report would lead to a “shaking down of the Cabinet Office to create something that is leaner and more powerful, making the cabinet secretary more powerful in government and giving the prime minister a bigger power-base in Whitehall as wellâ€.
Maybe we should restrict the trem a prime minister can hold office. After two terms they seem to go power mad.
If labour get back in looks like our political concensus might be in for a shake up.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/06336772-5df4- ... e2340.html
Whitehall insiders predicted the review would tighten Gordon Brown’s grip on the levers of government once he succeeded Mr Blair as prime minister.
“Gus is preparing the way for a power-base for Gordon Brown that Tony Blair could only dream of,†a government member said on Friday, predicting that the report would lead to a “shaking down of the Cabinet Office to create something that is leaner and more powerful, making the cabinet secretary more powerful in government and giving the prime minister a bigger power-base in Whitehall as wellâ€.
Maybe we should restrict the trem a prime minister can hold office. After two terms they seem to go power mad.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
I think that our government would work more toward taking care of actual constituents if big business wasn't allowed to bankroll candidates.
More affordable healthcare or free healthcare like they have in some countries will never happen in the U.S. so long as insurance money is used to elect candidates. Just like nothing will be done about any type of serious gun control so long as the NRA is spending big bucks on lobbying and getting their "people" in office.
Yes, smaller governments would be better. And even city governments should be held more accountable to it's citizens then it is. While I must admit, I haven't looked lately, but I don't even know where to start to look to see what is on the agenda of our next city council meeting. There isn't a city paper, so it sure isn't there.
Thanks. Now I feel the need to do some looking. Like I don't have enough to do already.
More affordable healthcare or free healthcare like they have in some countries will never happen in the U.S. so long as insurance money is used to elect candidates. Just like nothing will be done about any type of serious gun control so long as the NRA is spending big bucks on lobbying and getting their "people" in office.
Yes, smaller governments would be better. And even city governments should be held more accountable to it's citizens then it is. While I must admit, I haven't looked lately, but I don't even know where to start to look to see what is on the agenda of our next city council meeting. There isn't a city paper, so it sure isn't there.
Thanks. Now I feel the need to do some looking. Like I don't have enough to do already.
Sandi
A political concensus
To GMC. Is this a question aimed at me, the thread starter, or are you adding to the thread to invoke opinion from the forum?
A political concensus
To LilacDragon. I see that you would have issues that you would like to air. I'm sorry if I have added to your burden of work. The purpose of this thread is to make people think about how things should be as opposed to power politics.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
OpenMind wrote: To LilacDragon. I see that you would have issues that you would like to air. I'm sorry if I have added to your burden of work. The purpose of this thread is to make people think about how things should be as opposed to power politics.
I am a woman - of course I have issues to air!
And it isn't really a matter of adding to my burden. It is just that getting anything done is so, for lack of a better word - political.
It seems to me that unless you have money and friends you have no place in the decision making process of our government.
I am a woman - of course I have issues to air!
And it isn't really a matter of adding to my burden. It is just that getting anything done is so, for lack of a better word - political.
It seems to me that unless you have money and friends you have no place in the decision making process of our government.
Sandi
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: I am a woman - of course I have issues to air!
And it isn't really a matter of adding to my burden. It is just that getting anything done is so, for lack of a better word - political.
It seems to me that unless you have money and friends you have no place in the decision making process of our government.
LilacDragon - so well put. This is the problem. We, the individuals, have no voice in today's politics other than a the opportunity to vote every four or five years. Personally, I think someone's extracting the urine.
If there is a way out of this predicament, I am willing to start the ball rolling. First, however, I must find out the opinions of my fellows.
I am British, but there is not a single Government that has had my vote.
And it isn't really a matter of adding to my burden. It is just that getting anything done is so, for lack of a better word - political.
It seems to me that unless you have money and friends you have no place in the decision making process of our government.
LilacDragon - so well put. This is the problem. We, the individuals, have no voice in today's politics other than a the opportunity to vote every four or five years. Personally, I think someone's extracting the urine.
If there is a way out of this predicament, I am willing to start the ball rolling. First, however, I must find out the opinions of my fellows.
I am British, but there is not a single Government that has had my vote.
A political concensus
posted by openmind
To GMC. Is this a question aimed at me, the thread starter, or are you adding to the thread to invoke opinion from the forum?
Both actually, What TB is up to probably only means anything to British posters, our electoral system is in need of reform, hopefully spineless our labour MP's will stop TB in his tracks before he does any more damage. People are showing their lack of belief in the political coinsensus by not voting because they don't think anybody listens or cares how they actually vote. Only a die-hard balirire would be able to convince themselves that TB has the trust of the electorate any more, at least in my increrasngly disenchanted opinion.
In the UK and europe in general we start out with the assumption that govt should take care of education, health etc as a main priority and it is our right as citizens to receive such things regardless of ability to pay for it at the point of need. It's one of the functions of government. It's not free remember, I've been paying for it for a long time without being ill so have millions of others. Do I feel hard done by? No, because if I need cancer treatment, heart surgery whatever I know I will not have to worry about how I'm going to pay for it. IMO only an idiot would want the private sector playing a greater role especially in health provision. You often get people complaining about cost, waiting lists etc but then expect to use the NHS when their private cover doesn't cover them or they want an ambulance in a hurry.
How true it is I know not, but I have an impression that in the states and you are ill long trem you are in serious financial stchook. Our system isn't perfect but I l know which general approach I prefer.
To GMC. Is this a question aimed at me, the thread starter, or are you adding to the thread to invoke opinion from the forum?
Both actually, What TB is up to probably only means anything to British posters, our electoral system is in need of reform, hopefully spineless our labour MP's will stop TB in his tracks before he does any more damage. People are showing their lack of belief in the political coinsensus by not voting because they don't think anybody listens or cares how they actually vote. Only a die-hard balirire would be able to convince themselves that TB has the trust of the electorate any more, at least in my increrasngly disenchanted opinion.
In the UK and europe in general we start out with the assumption that govt should take care of education, health etc as a main priority and it is our right as citizens to receive such things regardless of ability to pay for it at the point of need. It's one of the functions of government. It's not free remember, I've been paying for it for a long time without being ill so have millions of others. Do I feel hard done by? No, because if I need cancer treatment, heart surgery whatever I know I will not have to worry about how I'm going to pay for it. IMO only an idiot would want the private sector playing a greater role especially in health provision. You often get people complaining about cost, waiting lists etc but then expect to use the NHS when their private cover doesn't cover them or they want an ambulance in a hurry.
How true it is I know not, but I have an impression that in the states and you are ill long trem you are in serious financial stchook. Our system isn't perfect but I l know which general approach I prefer.
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
There seems to be a considerable difference between europe & the US on the issue. Here most would accept the govt has a role in helping people out of poverty and making life better for the less fortunate and shou,d provide educaion, health services etc as a matter of right to the people electing them. I might be wrong but inthe US if you can't afford medical services they seem to leave you to die. At least every US medical drama seems to bring the ussie up.
That's pretty much how it is, sad isn't it?
That's pretty much how it is, sad isn't it?
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
A political concensus
gmc wrote: posted by openmind
Both actually, What TB is up to probably only means anything to British posters, our electoral system is in need of reform, hopefully spineless our labour MP's will stop TB in his tracks before he does any more damage. People are showing their lack of belief in the political coinsensus by not voting because they don't think anybody listens or cares how they actually vote. Only a die-hard balirire would be able to convince themselves that TB has the trust of the electorate any more, at least in my increrasngly disenchanted opinion.
In the UK and europe in general we start out with the assumption that govt should take care of education, health etc as a main priority and it is our right as citizens to receive such things regardless of ability to pay for it at the point of need. It's one of the functions of government. It's not free remember, I've been paying for it for a long time without being ill so have millions of others. Do I feel hard done by? No, because if I need cancer treatment, heart surgery whatever I know I will not have to worry about how I'm going to pay for it. IMO only an idiot would want the private sector playing a greater role especially in health provision. You often get people complaining about cost, waiting lists etc but then expect to use the NHS when their private cover doesn't cover them or they want an ambulance in a hurry.
How true it is I know not, but I have an impression that in the states and you are ill long trem you are in serious financial stchook. Our system isn't perfect but I l know which general approach I prefer.
What you say hear strikes many chords in my heart. I have never voted in my life. When I was a young man, it was all over my head. In the eighties, I studied Social Science. Because of this study, I predicted the rise of China. More importantly, I realised that there wasn't a single political party that represented me.And yet, there are aspects of our social structure, reinforced by politics, that we have come to depend upon. The NHS is an example. Nonetheless, today, it is a shambles.
I have my own ideas for a free society providing for itself, but not entirely as individuals. But first, I felt that I should seek out the views of others in this respect. This forum is ideal in this respect as it is frequented by individuals different parts of the world. I am nonetheless, intrigued by the low turn out on this thread. This represents to me the interest people have in how their lives are ruled. Nonetheless, the replies so far have been intelligent and heartwarming.
In my mind, we are led by a primitive system that enables power hungry individuals to rule over us at our expense. And that's without the rule of powerful enterprise. Surprisingly, the present circumstances was enabled by the churches who needed money to fund their causes. For this, they turned to the venture capitalists. Ultimately, the majority of us are still slaves to a system that beguiles us into thinking that we have freedom of choice. But our choices are more limited now than then ever. Nothing exists that didn't come to be without much bloodshed and all for the whims of a single group of people.
Personally, I don't believe society needs a government to tell it what it needs. On the other hand, there is always a need for an administration to serve the needs of the people. But, it should be the people who make the decisions. This is not as impractical as it seems.
Both actually, What TB is up to probably only means anything to British posters, our electoral system is in need of reform, hopefully spineless our labour MP's will stop TB in his tracks before he does any more damage. People are showing their lack of belief in the political coinsensus by not voting because they don't think anybody listens or cares how they actually vote. Only a die-hard balirire would be able to convince themselves that TB has the trust of the electorate any more, at least in my increrasngly disenchanted opinion.
In the UK and europe in general we start out with the assumption that govt should take care of education, health etc as a main priority and it is our right as citizens to receive such things regardless of ability to pay for it at the point of need. It's one of the functions of government. It's not free remember, I've been paying for it for a long time without being ill so have millions of others. Do I feel hard done by? No, because if I need cancer treatment, heart surgery whatever I know I will not have to worry about how I'm going to pay for it. IMO only an idiot would want the private sector playing a greater role especially in health provision. You often get people complaining about cost, waiting lists etc but then expect to use the NHS when their private cover doesn't cover them or they want an ambulance in a hurry.
How true it is I know not, but I have an impression that in the states and you are ill long trem you are in serious financial stchook. Our system isn't perfect but I l know which general approach I prefer.
What you say hear strikes many chords in my heart. I have never voted in my life. When I was a young man, it was all over my head. In the eighties, I studied Social Science. Because of this study, I predicted the rise of China. More importantly, I realised that there wasn't a single political party that represented me.And yet, there are aspects of our social structure, reinforced by politics, that we have come to depend upon. The NHS is an example. Nonetheless, today, it is a shambles.
I have my own ideas for a free society providing for itself, but not entirely as individuals. But first, I felt that I should seek out the views of others in this respect. This forum is ideal in this respect as it is frequented by individuals different parts of the world. I am nonetheless, intrigued by the low turn out on this thread. This represents to me the interest people have in how their lives are ruled. Nonetheless, the replies so far have been intelligent and heartwarming.
In my mind, we are led by a primitive system that enables power hungry individuals to rule over us at our expense. And that's without the rule of powerful enterprise. Surprisingly, the present circumstances was enabled by the churches who needed money to fund their causes. For this, they turned to the venture capitalists. Ultimately, the majority of us are still slaves to a system that beguiles us into thinking that we have freedom of choice. But our choices are more limited now than then ever. Nothing exists that didn't come to be without much bloodshed and all for the whims of a single group of people.
Personally, I don't believe society needs a government to tell it what it needs. On the other hand, there is always a need for an administration to serve the needs of the people. But, it should be the people who make the decisions. This is not as impractical as it seems.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: I think that our government would work more toward taking care of actual constituents if big business wasn't allowed to bankroll candidates.Hear hear! Corporations aren't citizens; they should have ZERO influence over the political process. Let the individual stockholders do their own dirty work without hiding behind the corporate logo.
LilacDragon wrote: More affordable healthcare or free healthcare like they have in some countries will never happen in the U.S. so long as insurance money is used to elect candidates. Just like nothing will be done about any type of serious gun control so long as the NRA is spending big bucks on lobbying and getting their "people" in office. No such thing as free. Somebody pays for it. If I'm not mistaken Japan (similar healthcare system to UK) taxes the pigeon poop out of corporations. However, corporations in turn don't have to offer healthcare as a benefit, which saves some.
As for the other part: The insurance companies are corporations and fall under my earlier rant a few lines above. The NRA, however, is a group of concerned citizens formed to protect the second amendment, which has been raped enough.
LilacDragon wrote: Yes, smaller governments would be better. And even city governments should be held more accountable to it's citizens then it is. While I must admit, I haven't looked lately, but I don't even know where to start to look to see what is on the agenda of our next city council meeting. There isn't a city paper, so it sure isn't there.
Thanks. Now I feel the need to do some looking. Like I don't have enough to do already.YAY! Call your City Hall for information. If you follow through and go to the meetings, you'll find a few self-righteous people you'd rather not hang around or be associated with. Get over it and fight for what you know is right. Those are the people who hold undue influence in your town, thus over your life (to a small degree).
Also, write your state & federal reps. They won't personally see your letters & emails, but they will have an impact for no other reason than relatively few people go to the trouble. A State Representative once told a meeting I attended that a letter from a registered voter represents between 1000 and 10,000 votes depending on the size of the state. So, following up is 1000 to 10,000 times more powerful than actually voting, if you're registered.
LilacDragon wrote: More affordable healthcare or free healthcare like they have in some countries will never happen in the U.S. so long as insurance money is used to elect candidates. Just like nothing will be done about any type of serious gun control so long as the NRA is spending big bucks on lobbying and getting their "people" in office. No such thing as free. Somebody pays for it. If I'm not mistaken Japan (similar healthcare system to UK) taxes the pigeon poop out of corporations. However, corporations in turn don't have to offer healthcare as a benefit, which saves some.
As for the other part: The insurance companies are corporations and fall under my earlier rant a few lines above. The NRA, however, is a group of concerned citizens formed to protect the second amendment, which has been raped enough.
LilacDragon wrote: Yes, smaller governments would be better. And even city governments should be held more accountable to it's citizens then it is. While I must admit, I haven't looked lately, but I don't even know where to start to look to see what is on the agenda of our next city council meeting. There isn't a city paper, so it sure isn't there.
Thanks. Now I feel the need to do some looking. Like I don't have enough to do already.YAY! Call your City Hall for information. If you follow through and go to the meetings, you'll find a few self-righteous people you'd rather not hang around or be associated with. Get over it and fight for what you know is right. Those are the people who hold undue influence in your town, thus over your life (to a small degree).
Also, write your state & federal reps. They won't personally see your letters & emails, but they will have an impact for no other reason than relatively few people go to the trouble. A State Representative once told a meeting I attended that a letter from a registered voter represents between 1000 and 10,000 votes depending on the size of the state. So, following up is 1000 to 10,000 times more powerful than actually voting, if you're registered.
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
And to think - Mom wanted me to start quilting to keep my mind of my husband in Iraq.
Sandi
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: There seems to be a considerable difference between europe & the US on the issue. Here most would accept the govt has a role in helping people out of poverty and making life better for the less fortunate and shou,d provide educaion, health services etc as a matter of right to the people electing them. I might be wrong but inthe US if you can't afford medical services they seem to leave you to die. At least every US medical drama seems to bring the ussie up.
That's pretty much how it is, sad isn't it?
That's not how it is at all. How many people make the papers, having been left on the steps of the hospital to die because they lacked insurance? Let me help. The answer is ZERO!
Illegal aliens get better medical care than middle class citizens, because we care so much for the poor. The middle class family has to accept what little their expensive insurance deigns to pay for. When insurance people fart, dogs cry. The poor, on the other hand, can't afford insurance, so the gov't picks up the tab. That gives the hospital far more freedom to run appropriate tests.
That's pretty much how it is, sad isn't it?
That's not how it is at all. How many people make the papers, having been left on the steps of the hospital to die because they lacked insurance? Let me help. The answer is ZERO!
Illegal aliens get better medical care than middle class citizens, because we care so much for the poor. The middle class family has to accept what little their expensive insurance deigns to pay for. When insurance people fart, dogs cry. The poor, on the other hand, can't afford insurance, so the gov't picks up the tab. That gives the hospital far more freedom to run appropriate tests.
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: That's not how it is at all. How many people make the papers, having been left on the steps of the hospital to die because they lacked insurance? Let me help. The answer is ZERO!
Illegal aliens get better medical care than middle class citizens, because we care so much for the poor. The middle class family has to give what little their expensive insurance deigns to pay for. When insurance people fart, dogs cry. The poor, on the other hand, can't afford insurance, so the gov't picks up the tab. That gives the hospital far more freedom to run appropriate tests.
It is true, get a clue.
Illegal aliens get better medical care than middle class citizens, because we care so much for the poor. The middle class family has to give what little their expensive insurance deigns to pay for. When insurance people fart, dogs cry. The poor, on the other hand, can't afford insurance, so the gov't picks up the tab. That gives the hospital far more freedom to run appropriate tests.
It is true, get a clue.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
Who can stand before such a cogent and poetic argument? Obviously, you presented the superior argument. I will be more careful driving by hospitals from now on, to avoid running over the corpses left rotting on the curb.
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: Who can stand before such a cogent and poetic argument? Obviously, you presented the superior argument. I will be more careful driving by hospitals from now on, to avoid running over the corpses left rotting on the curb.
Do you wear blinders all the time, It's not just about the poor, It's everyday people, you may have military medical benefits, but the real deal is you have no job you will soon have no medical benifits.....and then you are one of those "poor" that you speak of and then you go to a hospice so you don't die on a street. (many times because you have no money for treatment.) you have no medical insurance...how do I know....I lost a brother a year and a half ago.
Do you wear blinders all the time, It's not just about the poor, It's everyday people, you may have military medical benefits, but the real deal is you have no job you will soon have no medical benifits.....and then you are one of those "poor" that you speak of and then you go to a hospice so you don't die on a street. (many times because you have no money for treatment.) you have no medical insurance...how do I know....I lost a brother a year and a half ago.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Do you wear blinders all the time, It's not just about the poor, It's everyday people, you may have military medical benefits, but the real deal is you have no job you will soon have no medical benifits.....and then you are one of those "poor" that you speak of and then you go to a hospice so you don't die on a street. (many times because you have no money for treatment.) you have no medical insurance...how do I know....I lost a brother a year and a half ago.Well I hope your brother was not the fatalist you appear to be. Assuming your brother was "fixable" and got shelved as you imply, I hope you sued their asses off.
Look Mr Tricks - can I call you Stupid? - as long as you look around complaining about what you don't have, you won't get. Stop depending on the gov't to provide for you. If you had the wisdom of your years, you'd realize the gov't is the problem, not the solution. Use you energies to become self-dependent so the bureaucracy will be irrellevant.
Look Mr Tricks - can I call you Stupid? - as long as you look around complaining about what you don't have, you won't get. Stop depending on the gov't to provide for you. If you had the wisdom of your years, you'd realize the gov't is the problem, not the solution. Use you energies to become self-dependent so the bureaucracy will be irrellevant.
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: Well I hope your brother was not the fatalist you appear to be./ he was fatal Assuming your brother was "fixable" and got shelved as you imply, I hope you sued their asses off./ his estate is still in probate that doesn't help when you are dieing
Look Mr Tricks - can I call you Stupid? -I'm female,but go ahead, its for that cowboy in my AV (and all the little sheep ) as long as you look around complaining about what you don't have, you won't get. Stop depending on the gov't to provide for you. If you had the wisdom of your years, you'd realize the gov't is the problem, not the solution. Use you energies to become self-dependent so the bureaucracy will be irrellevant.
I have worked for the same company 27 years come this June, I do not depend on the government and I do not get benefit of a "Military Medical benifit....(government hand out????)
As Americans we are all a few pay periods away from .....well lets see I guess you can count bankruptcy out now(what do you do ?)
Tell me what you do when you are ill and must quit work and you can't get food stampsbecause you make too much money with that minimum wage job your wife takes to pay bills. Tell me this wonderful plan man.....
Look Mr Tricks - can I call you Stupid? -I'm female,but go ahead, its for that cowboy in my AV (and all the little sheep ) as long as you look around complaining about what you don't have, you won't get. Stop depending on the gov't to provide for you. If you had the wisdom of your years, you'd realize the gov't is the problem, not the solution. Use you energies to become self-dependent so the bureaucracy will be irrellevant.
I have worked for the same company 27 years come this June, I do not depend on the government and I do not get benefit of a "Military Medical benifit....(government hand out????)
As Americans we are all a few pay periods away from .....well lets see I guess you can count bankruptcy out now(what do you do ?)
Tell me what you do when you are ill and must quit work and you can't get food stampsbecause you make too much money with that minimum wage job your wife takes to pay bills. Tell me this wonderful plan man.....
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: I have worked for the same company 27 years come this June, I do not depend on the government and I do not get benefit of a "Military Medical benifit....(government hand out????) It's called partial payment for laying my life on the line so that you can take your rights and freedoms for granted. Every time I hear people like you whine I mark it up to the excellent job our military is doing.
Don't you believe everyone can do what you do? Where does your bigotry come from, that says poor people are simply not good enough to find work that would enable them to be independent as you and I are? I believe virtually anyone can make it on their own, and it is the rarest of situations that completely blocks all opportunity.
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: As Americans we are all a few pay periods away from .....well lets see I guess you can count bankruptcy out now(what do you do ?)Untrue, though I'd say well over half would be a good estimate. Some of us manage our budgets and live within our means. Only those unable to do so who borrow more than they can pay back get the privilege of shirking their responsibilities through bankruptcy. The more dependable of us pick up the tab indirectly.
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Tell me what you do when you are ill and must quit work and you can't get food stampsbecause you make too much money with that minimum wage job your wife takes to pay bills. Tell me this wonderful plan man.....Why would I need food stamps if I make too much to get them? I mean, even a Staff Sergeant with a family of 3 qualifies for food stamps, right?
Don't you believe everyone can do what you do? Where does your bigotry come from, that says poor people are simply not good enough to find work that would enable them to be independent as you and I are? I believe virtually anyone can make it on their own, and it is the rarest of situations that completely blocks all opportunity.
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: As Americans we are all a few pay periods away from .....well lets see I guess you can count bankruptcy out now(what do you do ?)Untrue, though I'd say well over half would be a good estimate. Some of us manage our budgets and live within our means. Only those unable to do so who borrow more than they can pay back get the privilege of shirking their responsibilities through bankruptcy. The more dependable of us pick up the tab indirectly.
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Tell me what you do when you are ill and must quit work and you can't get food stampsbecause you make too much money with that minimum wage job your wife takes to pay bills. Tell me this wonderful plan man.....Why would I need food stamps if I make too much to get them? I mean, even a Staff Sergeant with a family of 3 qualifies for food stamps, right?
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: It's called partial payment for laying my life on the line so that you can take your rights and freedoms for granted. Gee I do think My taxes pay for that Every time I hear people like you whine I mark it up to the excellent job our military is doing.We will hear you whine when they tinker more with your benefits
Don't you believe everyone can do what you do? Where does your bigotry come from, that says poor people are simply not good enough to find work that would enable them to be independent as you and I are? I never said that is that you Rush or Hannininny I believe virtually anyone can make it on their own, and it is the rarest of situations that completely blocks all opportunity.
Untrue, though I'd say well over half would be a good estimate. Some of us manage our budgets and live within our means. Only those unable to do so who borrow more than they can pay back get the privilege of shirking their responsibilities through bankruptcy. The more dependable of us pick up the tab indirectly.There but for the grace of God go I.....lol
Why would I need food stamps if I make too much to get them?Get with it if you were ill with cancer, and you had to pay for cobra for your wife and yourself, there is about $800.00 a month right there and you have to pay bills , so your wife who is also taking care of you decides to get part time job,she is told that little amount at the part time Job will put you two over the limit get it? I mean, even a Staff Sergeant with a family of 3 qualifies for food stamps, right?duh! I bet there is a child involved
LMAO @ the know it all
Live in your bubble........
miss the point completely
ignorance is bliss
The whole world sees it, funny you don't.
Yes the majority of Americans would love to have some kind of universal coverage like Canada, Britain, Europe.
Don't you believe everyone can do what you do? Where does your bigotry come from, that says poor people are simply not good enough to find work that would enable them to be independent as you and I are? I never said that is that you Rush or Hannininny I believe virtually anyone can make it on their own, and it is the rarest of situations that completely blocks all opportunity.
Untrue, though I'd say well over half would be a good estimate. Some of us manage our budgets and live within our means. Only those unable to do so who borrow more than they can pay back get the privilege of shirking their responsibilities through bankruptcy. The more dependable of us pick up the tab indirectly.There but for the grace of God go I.....lol
Why would I need food stamps if I make too much to get them?Get with it if you were ill with cancer, and you had to pay for cobra for your wife and yourself, there is about $800.00 a month right there and you have to pay bills , so your wife who is also taking care of you decides to get part time job,she is told that little amount at the part time Job will put you two over the limit get it? I mean, even a Staff Sergeant with a family of 3 qualifies for food stamps, right?duh! I bet there is a child involved
LMAO @ the know it all
Live in your bubble........
miss the point completely
ignorance is bliss
The whole world sees it, funny you don't.
Yes the majority of Americans would love to have some kind of universal coverage like Canada, Britain, Europe.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
It's called partial payment for laying my life on the line so that you can take your rights and freedoms for granted. Gee I do think My taxes pay for that Every time I hear people like you whine I mark it up to the excellent job our military is doing.We will hear you whine when they tinker more with your benefits
Military members pay taxes too! So we do pay for our medical benefits.
And you know what - I seldom hear military members whine about their pay or their benefits. There isn't a recruiter in the U.S. that promised someone they would make a ton of money if they joined the military. They did promise that there was a chance they would be called on to lay their lives on the line to protect YOUR freedoms. And yes, that includes your freedom to complain about your lot in life.
So tell me, what kind of paycheck do you think the young private who burned to death in his humvee should have gotten? And what about his young wife? Should she get any benefits at all?
And why did this young man bother to sign up for the military at all? Because terrorists came to HIS country and flew a couple of planes into a couple of buildings, killing people he never met. He thought that maybe he could do some small thing to keep more of these people from coming back to HIS country and killing more people. Maybe even you and your wife. And in return, he gets to listen to people whine and complain about HIS benefits. Oh, sorry, he died so he won't be getting any benefits at all. I guess that'll save you - the taxpayer - some cash.
Sorry, but I get to attend this funeral. It really ticks me off to listen to people complain about the "benefits" the military and their families get.
Sorry, but it seems to me that when New Orleans was wiped out by a hurricane it wasn't til the U.S. Military stepped in that people were evacuated in an orderly and timely manner.
Sir, I am sorry that you have cancer and your wife had to take a lousy job to help out. I truly hope that you never need help from a single soldier in the U.S. military but I promise you - if you ever do - they will be there, no questions asked. Maybe then you won't hold them in such contempt.
Military members pay taxes too! So we do pay for our medical benefits.
And you know what - I seldom hear military members whine about their pay or their benefits. There isn't a recruiter in the U.S. that promised someone they would make a ton of money if they joined the military. They did promise that there was a chance they would be called on to lay their lives on the line to protect YOUR freedoms. And yes, that includes your freedom to complain about your lot in life.
So tell me, what kind of paycheck do you think the young private who burned to death in his humvee should have gotten? And what about his young wife? Should she get any benefits at all?
And why did this young man bother to sign up for the military at all? Because terrorists came to HIS country and flew a couple of planes into a couple of buildings, killing people he never met. He thought that maybe he could do some small thing to keep more of these people from coming back to HIS country and killing more people. Maybe even you and your wife. And in return, he gets to listen to people whine and complain about HIS benefits. Oh, sorry, he died so he won't be getting any benefits at all. I guess that'll save you - the taxpayer - some cash.
Sorry, but I get to attend this funeral. It really ticks me off to listen to people complain about the "benefits" the military and their families get.
Sorry, but it seems to me that when New Orleans was wiped out by a hurricane it wasn't til the U.S. Military stepped in that people were evacuated in an orderly and timely manner.
Sir, I am sorry that you have cancer and your wife had to take a lousy job to help out. I truly hope that you never need help from a single soldier in the U.S. military but I promise you - if you ever do - they will be there, no questions asked. Maybe then you won't hold them in such contempt.
Sandi
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
To Lilac: :yh_hugs
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: Military members pay taxes too! So we do pay for our medical benefits.
And you know what - I seldom hear military members whine about their pay or their benefits. There isn't a recruiter in the U.S. that promised someone they would make a ton of money if they joined the military. They did promise that there was a chance they would be called on to lay their lives on the line to protect YOUR freedoms. And yes, that includes your freedom to complain about your lot in life.
So tell me, what kind of paycheck do you think the young private who burned to death in his humvee should have gotten? And what about his young wife? Should she get any benefits at all?
And why did this young man bother to sign up for the military at all? Because terrorists came to HIS country and flew a couple of planes into a couple of buildings, killing people he never met. He thought that maybe he could do some small thing to keep more of these people from coming back to HIS country and killing more people. Maybe even you and your wife. And in return, he gets to listen to people whine and complain about HIS benefits. Oh, sorry, he died so he won't be getting any benefits at all. I guess that'll save you - the taxpayer - some cash.
Sorry, but I get to attend this funeral. It really ticks me off to listen to people complain about the "benefits" the military and their families get.
Sorry, but it seems to me that when New Orleans was wiped out by a hurricane it wasn't til the U.S. Military stepped in that people were evacuated in an orderly and timely manner.
Sir, I am sorry that you have cancer and your wife had to take a lousy job to help out. I truly hope that you never need help from a single soldier in the U.S. military but I promise you - if you ever do - they will be there, no questions asked. Maybe then you won't hold them in such contempt.
WTF?
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.
And you know what - I seldom hear military members whine about their pay or their benefits. There isn't a recruiter in the U.S. that promised someone they would make a ton of money if they joined the military. They did promise that there was a chance they would be called on to lay their lives on the line to protect YOUR freedoms. And yes, that includes your freedom to complain about your lot in life.
So tell me, what kind of paycheck do you think the young private who burned to death in his humvee should have gotten? And what about his young wife? Should she get any benefits at all?
And why did this young man bother to sign up for the military at all? Because terrorists came to HIS country and flew a couple of planes into a couple of buildings, killing people he never met. He thought that maybe he could do some small thing to keep more of these people from coming back to HIS country and killing more people. Maybe even you and your wife. And in return, he gets to listen to people whine and complain about HIS benefits. Oh, sorry, he died so he won't be getting any benefits at all. I guess that'll save you - the taxpayer - some cash.
Sorry, but I get to attend this funeral. It really ticks me off to listen to people complain about the "benefits" the military and their families get.
Sorry, but it seems to me that when New Orleans was wiped out by a hurricane it wasn't til the U.S. Military stepped in that people were evacuated in an orderly and timely manner.
Sir, I am sorry that you have cancer and your wife had to take a lousy job to help out. I truly hope that you never need help from a single soldier in the U.S. military but I promise you - if you ever do - they will be there, no questions asked. Maybe then you won't hold them in such contempt.
WTF?
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: To Lilac: :yh_hugs
Thanks. I really did need one of those today.
Thanks. I really did need one of those today.
Sandi
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: WTF?
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.
I am sorry - I could have sworn it was your post that referred to military medical benefits as a government handout. As a military wife with a husband in a war zone I hardly think that any money he makes or benefits his family gets qualifies as a handout.
If you have worked for the same company for 27 years and don't have a decent medical plan then you might want to look for a new job.
And YES, Accountable and I do "get" it. We live in the real world just like you do. Maybe more so. We both know what it means to sacrifice - not for love of family but for love of country. And you know what - neither of us is laughing.
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.
I am sorry - I could have sworn it was your post that referred to military medical benefits as a government handout. As a military wife with a husband in a war zone I hardly think that any money he makes or benefits his family gets qualifies as a handout.
If you have worked for the same company for 27 years and don't have a decent medical plan then you might want to look for a new job.
And YES, Accountable and I do "get" it. We live in the real world just like you do. Maybe more so. We both know what it means to sacrifice - not for love of family but for love of country. And you know what - neither of us is laughing.
Sandi
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: I am sorry - I could have sworn it was your post that referred to military medical benefits as a government handout. As a military wife with a husband in a war zone I hardly think that any money he makes or benefits his family gets qualifies as a handout.
If you have worked for the same company for 27 years and don't have a decent medical plan then you might want to look for a new job.
And YES, Accountable and I do "get" it. We live in the real world just like you do. Maybe more so. We both know what it means to sacrifice - not for love of family but for love of country. And you know what - neither of us is laughing.
Do you know of any that have medical retirement anymore? I did not say they were handouts I was making an analogy from a previous post to accountable........on contrary I think the Military and family is getting screwed.
If you have worked for the same company for 27 years and don't have a decent medical plan then you might want to look for a new job.
And YES, Accountable and I do "get" it. We live in the real world just like you do. Maybe more so. We both know what it means to sacrifice - not for love of family but for love of country. And you know what - neither of us is laughing.
Do you know of any that have medical retirement anymore? I did not say they were handouts I was making an analogy from a previous post to accountable........on contrary I think the Military and family is getting screwed.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: WTF?
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.Where does the Constitution give us that right?
Who gets to define "affordable"?
Who pays for the amount over "affordable"?
One person cannot claim a right that imposes upon another person. To do so creates inequality.
That isn't any of what I had to say.......
LOL!
As a an American citizen we do have a right to decent afordable health care. This is not the case right now, either you are wealthy, very poor, too many 'middle class' Americans fall through the cracks. Accountable is retired military ( has medical retirement) and can not relate.
We deserve a national health care plan.....it's a shame that America has not got one.Where does the Constitution give us that right?
Who gets to define "affordable"?
Who pays for the amount over "affordable"?
One person cannot claim a right that imposes upon another person. To do so creates inequality.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: I am sorry - I could have sworn it was your post that referred to military medical benefits as a government handout. As a military wife with a husband in a war zone I hardly think that any money he makes or benefits his family gets qualifies as a handout.
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Do you know of any that have medical retirement anymore? I did not say they were handouts I was making an analogy from a previous post to accountable........on contrary I think the Military and family is getting screwed.
Actually, that's exactly what you said:
"I have worked for the same company 27 years come this June, I do not depend on the government and I do not get benefit of a "Military Medical benifit....(government hand out????) "
StupidCowboyTricks wrote: Do you know of any that have medical retirement anymore? I did not say they were handouts I was making an analogy from a previous post to accountable........on contrary I think the Military and family is getting screwed.
Actually, that's exactly what you said:
"I have worked for the same company 27 years come this June, I do not depend on the government and I do not get benefit of a "Military Medical benifit....(government hand out????) "
-
LilacDragon
- Posts: 1382
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:23 am
A political concensus
I did not say they were handouts I was making an analogy from a previous post to accountable........on contrary I think the Military and family is getting screwed.
That is very sad. Rarely would you hear a military family say the same thing.
That is very sad. Rarely would you hear a military family say the same thing.
Sandi
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
LilacDragon wrote: That is very sad. Rarely would you hear a military family say the same thing.
Here is one source, if you cruise down there is a forum/message board.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,1 ... 92,00.html
I have customers that are active and retired military, I don't have to make stuff up.
Here is one source, if you cruise down there is a forum/message board.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,1 ... 92,00.html
I have customers that are active and retired military, I don't have to make stuff up.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
StupidCowboyTricks
- Posts: 1899
- Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 3:51 pm
A political concensus
November 13, 2005
Veterans Know: It’s Buyer! Beware!
Representative Steve Buyer continues his war on veterans
Opinion by Larry Scott
There is one thing of which America’s military veterans can be sure. When Steve Buyer opens his mouth, it’s really bad news. Buyer has called for sweeping changes in veterans’ benefits and compensation. If implemented, these changes would deny benefits to many veterans and reduce benefits for many more.
Representative Steve Buyer (R-IN) is Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (HCVA). Buyer ascended to that powerful position after Republican Party politics led to the unceremonious ouster of Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) earlier this year. Smith’s fall from grace was so complete that he not only lost the Chair but was taken off the Committee.
Rep. Smith had parted company with the Republican hierarchy on the issue of veterans’ benefits. Smith was an outspoken veterans’ advocate and had sought increases in funding for the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) healthcare budget.
Not so with Rep. Buyer. Buyer is known in the Republican Party as a team-player who does not stray from the Party line. In the veterans’ community, Buyer is known as an attack dog who tenaciously resists any effort to fully fund VA healthcare.
Rep. Buyer’s laundry-list of insults to America’s veterans got longer last week. Last Tuesday (Nov. 8), in a quietly-issued press release, Buyer announced he would now be holding hearings on the VA budget in February instead of March. The hearings would be before the HCVA only, not the traditional House and Senate venue. Buyer said he was doing this to “ensure that veterans have greater input in the [VA’s budget] process.†(Buyer’s press flack, Jeff Phillips, is a master at making the really bad sound really good.)
For almost two days this seemingly “little†news story went unnoticed. Then the firestorm struck.
Veterans’ groups realized that Rep. Buyer was trying to pull a “fast one†with their annual VA budget testimony. For 55 years veterans’ groups, including the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) and others, have come to Capitol Hill in March to testify before a JOINT SESSION of the HCVA and Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (SCVA).
Now, Rep. Buyer will limit veterans’ group’s testimony to just the HCVA, thus eliminating access to the Senators who are directly involved in the VA budget process.
But, there is a nasty political side to Rep. Buyer’s decision. By moving the testimony from March back to February, veterans’ groups come to the table with only part of the information they need to adequately make recommendations on the VA budget.
During the Joint Committee hearings held in March, veterans’ groups have had the VA’s budget request AND the White House’s response to that request (generally a lower dollar amount). And, there would be enough time to analyze both sets of figures and give testimony in the best interest of veterans.
With the single Committee hearing moved to February, the veterans’ groups would have to outline their VA budget priorities at the SAME TIME the White House figures are released. There wouldn’t be time to go through the White House’s VA budget numbers and come up with a response.
Veterans’ groups dismissed Rep. Buyer’s contention that the February hearings would give them greater influence on the VA’s budget. They claim Buyer is seeking to avoid the public-relations nightmare of having angry veterans’ groups blasting the White House. “Some people don’t want to be criticized for being deficient,†said Richard Fuller, legislative director for the PVA.
This move is Rep. Buyer’s way of paying back the White House for his Chair on the HCVA. With February hearings, veterans’ groups would not be able to criticize the low dollar figure offered by the White House for the VA budget. Rep Buyer is doing his job by protecting the White House from criticism by veterans’ groups who have become increasingly vocal about the Bush Administration’s underfunding of the VA.
That was Rep. Buyer’s “dirty trick†for the week. But, he couldn’t stop there. On Thursday (Nov. 10), the day before Veterans’ Day, Buyer had to take one more swipe at veterans.
On Thursday, VA Secretary Jim Nicholson announced that the VA was canceling the review of 72,000 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) claims that were granted to veterans, giving them compensation for a 100 per cent disability. The VA had looked to lower or deny PTSD benefits based on faulty record-keeping on their part.
There was overwhelming bi-partisan praise for the VA’s decision to stop the review. Senators and Representatives issued press releases and held news conferences on the eve of Veterans’ Day to let veterans know they stood beside them and agreed with the VA’s decision.
However, there was one muted voice. Rep. Steve Buyer did not issue a press release. He did not hold a press conference. He did not praise the VA. When contacted by a reporter and asked for comment, Buyer said he would “accept†the VA’s decision to stop the PTSD review and added, “…the system works.†If the system worked, the VA would not have tried to review 72,000 PTSD claims in the first place.
The military veteran community has learned that they cannot “accept†any more of Rep. Steve Buyer’s anti-veteran agenda on Capitol Hill. And, veterans know, that come Election Day 2006, “the system works†and Buyer can be removed from his Chair at HCVA by removing him from his office representing Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District.
Veterans Know: It’s Buyer! Beware!
Representative Steve Buyer continues his war on veterans
Opinion by Larry Scott
There is one thing of which America’s military veterans can be sure. When Steve Buyer opens his mouth, it’s really bad news. Buyer has called for sweeping changes in veterans’ benefits and compensation. If implemented, these changes would deny benefits to many veterans and reduce benefits for many more.
Representative Steve Buyer (R-IN) is Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (HCVA). Buyer ascended to that powerful position after Republican Party politics led to the unceremonious ouster of Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) earlier this year. Smith’s fall from grace was so complete that he not only lost the Chair but was taken off the Committee.
Rep. Smith had parted company with the Republican hierarchy on the issue of veterans’ benefits. Smith was an outspoken veterans’ advocate and had sought increases in funding for the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) healthcare budget.
Not so with Rep. Buyer. Buyer is known in the Republican Party as a team-player who does not stray from the Party line. In the veterans’ community, Buyer is known as an attack dog who tenaciously resists any effort to fully fund VA healthcare.
Rep. Buyer’s laundry-list of insults to America’s veterans got longer last week. Last Tuesday (Nov. 8), in a quietly-issued press release, Buyer announced he would now be holding hearings on the VA budget in February instead of March. The hearings would be before the HCVA only, not the traditional House and Senate venue. Buyer said he was doing this to “ensure that veterans have greater input in the [VA’s budget] process.†(Buyer’s press flack, Jeff Phillips, is a master at making the really bad sound really good.)
For almost two days this seemingly “little†news story went unnoticed. Then the firestorm struck.
Veterans’ groups realized that Rep. Buyer was trying to pull a “fast one†with their annual VA budget testimony. For 55 years veterans’ groups, including the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) and others, have come to Capitol Hill in March to testify before a JOINT SESSION of the HCVA and Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (SCVA).
Now, Rep. Buyer will limit veterans’ group’s testimony to just the HCVA, thus eliminating access to the Senators who are directly involved in the VA budget process.
But, there is a nasty political side to Rep. Buyer’s decision. By moving the testimony from March back to February, veterans’ groups come to the table with only part of the information they need to adequately make recommendations on the VA budget.
During the Joint Committee hearings held in March, veterans’ groups have had the VA’s budget request AND the White House’s response to that request (generally a lower dollar amount). And, there would be enough time to analyze both sets of figures and give testimony in the best interest of veterans.
With the single Committee hearing moved to February, the veterans’ groups would have to outline their VA budget priorities at the SAME TIME the White House figures are released. There wouldn’t be time to go through the White House’s VA budget numbers and come up with a response.
Veterans’ groups dismissed Rep. Buyer’s contention that the February hearings would give them greater influence on the VA’s budget. They claim Buyer is seeking to avoid the public-relations nightmare of having angry veterans’ groups blasting the White House. “Some people don’t want to be criticized for being deficient,†said Richard Fuller, legislative director for the PVA.
This move is Rep. Buyer’s way of paying back the White House for his Chair on the HCVA. With February hearings, veterans’ groups would not be able to criticize the low dollar figure offered by the White House for the VA budget. Rep Buyer is doing his job by protecting the White House from criticism by veterans’ groups who have become increasingly vocal about the Bush Administration’s underfunding of the VA.
That was Rep. Buyer’s “dirty trick†for the week. But, he couldn’t stop there. On Thursday (Nov. 10), the day before Veterans’ Day, Buyer had to take one more swipe at veterans.
On Thursday, VA Secretary Jim Nicholson announced that the VA was canceling the review of 72,000 Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) claims that were granted to veterans, giving them compensation for a 100 per cent disability. The VA had looked to lower or deny PTSD benefits based on faulty record-keeping on their part.
There was overwhelming bi-partisan praise for the VA’s decision to stop the review. Senators and Representatives issued press releases and held news conferences on the eve of Veterans’ Day to let veterans know they stood beside them and agreed with the VA’s decision.
However, there was one muted voice. Rep. Steve Buyer did not issue a press release. He did not hold a press conference. He did not praise the VA. When contacted by a reporter and asked for comment, Buyer said he would “accept†the VA’s decision to stop the PTSD review and added, “…the system works.†If the system worked, the VA would not have tried to review 72,000 PTSD claims in the first place.
The military veteran community has learned that they cannot “accept†any more of Rep. Steve Buyer’s anti-veteran agenda on Capitol Hill. And, veterans know, that come Election Day 2006, “the system works†and Buyer can be removed from his Chair at HCVA by removing him from his office representing Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District.
Someone asked me why I swear so much. I said, "Just becuss.":)
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
Humanitarian political structure expired when a CIA bullet ripped into Olaf Palme’s chest on February 28, 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
High Threshold wrote: Humanitarian political structure expired when a CIA bullet ripped into Olaf Palme’s chest on February 28, 1986.Thanks for bringing us back on point. My apologies for helping to divert the thread.
Let me be lazy by not researching this myself. Who is Olaf Palme?
Let me be lazy by not researching this myself. Who is Olaf Palme?
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: Let me be lazy by not researching this myself. Who is Olaf Palme?
Our Prime Minister.
Our Prime Minister.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
1926- 1986
Swedish Politician
Swedish politician Olaf Palme was born in Stockholm and received most of his education in the United States. He attended law school in Stockholm, however. In 1949, he joined the Socialist Party, and soon became the leader of its youth wing. In 1955, he was elected to the Swedish Parliament. Eight years later, he became a member of the government and, in 1969, he became Prime Minister. Palme was a dominant figure in Swedish politics. A confirmed Socialist, he was committed to strengthening Swedish Socialist policies.
Palme strongly criticized US involvement in Vietnam and was equally critical of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Palme was assassinated in 1986 while walking home from a movie. His assailant was never apprehended.
Bibliography:
Reddy, E.S. (Editor) Liberation of Southern Africa : Selected Speeches of Olof Palme . 1990. Vikas Pub.
Reddy, E.S. (Editor) Socialism, Peace and Solidarity: Selected Speeches of Olof Palme. 1990. Vikas Pub.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And your evidence that the CIA did it, please? Mind you, I wouldn't put it past them, I'm just curious why you think the American gov't would place such a high value on the Swedish Prime Minister that they would take such a risk.
Swedish Politician
Swedish politician Olaf Palme was born in Stockholm and received most of his education in the United States. He attended law school in Stockholm, however. In 1949, he joined the Socialist Party, and soon became the leader of its youth wing. In 1955, he was elected to the Swedish Parliament. Eight years later, he became a member of the government and, in 1969, he became Prime Minister. Palme was a dominant figure in Swedish politics. A confirmed Socialist, he was committed to strengthening Swedish Socialist policies.
Palme strongly criticized US involvement in Vietnam and was equally critical of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Palme was assassinated in 1986 while walking home from a movie. His assailant was never apprehended.
Bibliography:
Reddy, E.S. (Editor) Liberation of Southern Africa : Selected Speeches of Olof Palme . 1990. Vikas Pub.
Reddy, E.S. (Editor) Socialism, Peace and Solidarity: Selected Speeches of Olof Palme. 1990. Vikas Pub.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And your evidence that the CIA did it, please? Mind you, I wouldn't put it past them, I'm just curious why you think the American gov't would place such a high value on the Swedish Prime Minister that they would take such a risk.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: I'm just curious why you think the American gov't would place such a high value on the Swedish Prime Minister that they would take such a risk.
The U.S. government has been conducting such risks by employing the CIA in close to a hundred such assassinations (and deposing) of international leaders (both democratic and otherwise) since their first operation “TP AJAX†in 1953.
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
Furthermore, American, Vietnam deserters were allowed refuge in Sweden and their reports and experiences of life in Sweden were causing grave disconcert in the U.S. propaganda machine with serious risk of the American population demanding fairer treatment of their own government.
* If you’re interested in learning more about Sweden read, Sweden: Prototype of Modern Society by R. F. Tomasson. I apologise for some rather “dry†reading but the book is quite thorough.
The U.S. government has been conducting such risks by employing the CIA in close to a hundred such assassinations (and deposing) of international leaders (both democratic and otherwise) since their first operation “TP AJAX†in 1953.
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
Furthermore, American, Vietnam deserters were allowed refuge in Sweden and their reports and experiences of life in Sweden were causing grave disconcert in the U.S. propaganda machine with serious risk of the American population demanding fairer treatment of their own government.
* If you’re interested in learning more about Sweden read, Sweden: Prototype of Modern Society by R. F. Tomasson. I apologise for some rather “dry†reading but the book is quite thorough.
A political concensus
Finland is looking more interesting as a model than Sweden.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe ... 023629.stm
Finland is the only Nordic EU member to adopt the euro as the national currency.
The country invests heavily in education, training and research, investment which pays dividends by delivering one of the best educated and trained workforces in the world. This has been a key factor in the development of a modern, competitive economy in which a cutting-edge telecommunications sector has been added to the traditional timber and metals industries.
I think part of the problem in both the US and UK is very few companies seem able to think much beyond the immediate balance sheet and performance is judged on a distorting range of objectives. Do companies exist to make money or to make new things? We give to much credence to economists and accountants.
Economic theorists in particular-they're like the soothsayers of old axcept instead of looking at chicken entrails they gaze knowing at spreadsheets and kid on they know the future.
We keep having the old education debate-do you educate people or just train them just to do jobs. If you look over the last century all the innovation came from countries that invested in education and allowed a free exchange of ideas rather than just looking after a narrow range of interests
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe ... 023629.stm
Finland is the only Nordic EU member to adopt the euro as the national currency.
The country invests heavily in education, training and research, investment which pays dividends by delivering one of the best educated and trained workforces in the world. This has been a key factor in the development of a modern, competitive economy in which a cutting-edge telecommunications sector has been added to the traditional timber and metals industries.
I think part of the problem in both the US and UK is very few companies seem able to think much beyond the immediate balance sheet and performance is judged on a distorting range of objectives. Do companies exist to make money or to make new things? We give to much credence to economists and accountants.
Economic theorists in particular-they're like the soothsayers of old axcept instead of looking at chicken entrails they gaze knowing at spreadsheets and kid on they know the future.
We keep having the old education debate-do you educate people or just train them just to do jobs. If you look over the last century all the innovation came from countries that invested in education and allowed a free exchange of ideas rather than just looking after a narrow range of interests
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
High Threshold wrote: The U.S. government has been conducting such risks by employing the CIA in close to a hundred such assassinations (and deposing) of international leaders (both democratic and otherwise) since their first operation “TP AJAX†in 1953.
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
Furthermore, American, Vietnam deserters were allowed refuge in Sweden and their reports and experiences of life in Sweden were causing grave disconcert in the U.S. propaganda machine with serious risk of the American population demanding fairer treatment of their own government.
* If you’re interested in learning more about Sweden read, Sweden: Prototype of Modern Society by R. F. Tomasson. I apologise for some rather “dry†reading but the book is quite thorough.Compulsory "sharing" of wealth is mutually exclusive with freedom. And since when is that a democratic principle? That's more a communist principle.
This subject would make a great thread.
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
Furthermore, American, Vietnam deserters were allowed refuge in Sweden and their reports and experiences of life in Sweden were causing grave disconcert in the U.S. propaganda machine with serious risk of the American population demanding fairer treatment of their own government.
* If you’re interested in learning more about Sweden read, Sweden: Prototype of Modern Society by R. F. Tomasson. I apologise for some rather “dry†reading but the book is quite thorough.Compulsory "sharing" of wealth is mutually exclusive with freedom. And since when is that a democratic principle? That's more a communist principle.
This subject would make a great thread.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
gmc wrote: Finland is looking more interesting as a model than Sweden.
Finland is based upon the Swedish model. However, whereas we take in thousands of refugees annually, Finland's quota is something in the region of 3 persons each year and foreigners are badly discriminated against there.
Perhaps this doesn't prove anything but our largest group of foreigners living in Sweden are Finns, who make up more than a million of our population. That is an enormous amount considering our total population.
* Before quoting me on my statistics, you might want to check them first, i.e. thousands of regugees to Sweden annually, 3 persons quota to Finland each year, and more than a million Finns living in Sweden. I gave these figures off the top of my head.
Finland is based upon the Swedish model. However, whereas we take in thousands of refugees annually, Finland's quota is something in the region of 3 persons each year and foreigners are badly discriminated against there.
Perhaps this doesn't prove anything but our largest group of foreigners living in Sweden are Finns, who make up more than a million of our population. That is an enormous amount considering our total population.
* Before quoting me on my statistics, you might want to check them first, i.e. thousands of regugees to Sweden annually, 3 persons quota to Finland each year, and more than a million Finns living in Sweden. I gave these figures off the top of my head.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
Accountable wrote: Compulsory "sharing" of wealth is mutually exclusive with freedom. And since when is that a democratic principle? That's more a communist principle.
- "Compulsory sharing"?
- "mutually exclusive with freedom"?
- "a communist principle"?
Eh? You have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about, do you.
- "Compulsory sharing"?
- "mutually exclusive with freedom"?
- "a communist principle"?
Eh? You have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about, do you.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
ArnoldLayne wrote: "Well why dont you explain what YOUR talking about ... "
Buy a book.
I can't imagine discussing Calculus with someone who doesn't understand the fundamental principles of mathematics (addition & subtraction) and I can't be bothered explaining politics to someone who doesn't understand the principles of democracy and yet harbours false pre-conceptions about someone else's country. I am not making criticism - it is merely earnest observation.
ArnoldLayne wrote:
" ... mutually respected swapping of ideas and opinions ... "
Insinuating that my country is communist? That's your idea of a mutally respected opinion?
Buy a book.
I can't imagine discussing Calculus with someone who doesn't understand the fundamental principles of mathematics (addition & subtraction) and I can't be bothered explaining politics to someone who doesn't understand the principles of democracy and yet harbours false pre-conceptions about someone else's country. I am not making criticism - it is merely earnest observation.
ArnoldLayne wrote:
" ... mutually respected swapping of ideas and opinions ... "
Insinuating that my country is communist? That's your idea of a mutally respected opinion?
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
ArnoldLayne wrote: "Explain your point of view ..."
I have - complete with a period after each sentence. So why won't you let it be so we can "get on", as you say? I'm not perpetuating the thing, you are.
I have - complete with a period after each sentence. So why won't you let it be so we can "get on", as you say? I'm not perpetuating the thing, you are.
A political concensus
posted by threshold
Finland is based upon the Swedish model. However, whereas we take in thousands of refugees annually, Finland's quota is something in the region of 3 persons each year and foreigners are badly discriminated against there.
Perhaps this doesn't prove anything but our largest group of foreigners living in Sweden are Finns, who make up more than a million of our population. That is an enormous amount considering our total population.
* Before quoting me on my statistics, you might want to check them first, i.e. thousands of regugees to Sweden annually, 3 persons quota to Finland each year, and more than a million Finns living in Sweden. I gave these figures off the top of my head.
I never actually mentioned refugees but was commenting on differing approaches to the economy and the balance between social policy and the need to have a viable economy to pay for it all. Finland seems to have gone off in a slightly different direction from Sweden.
posted by high threshold
Buy a book.
I can't imagine discussing Calculus with someone who doesn't understand the fundamental principles of mathematics (addition & subtraction) and I can't be bothered explaining politics to someone who doesn't understand the principles of democracy and yet harbours false pre-conceptions about someone else's country. I am not making criticism - it is merely earnest observation.
Which book? I can't imagine making the assumption that the individual I am discussing calculus with can't add and subtract. It is rather an inane comment.
posted by accountable
Compulsory "sharing" of wealth is mutually exclusive with freedom. And since when is that a democratic principle? That's more a communist principle.
This subject would make a great thread.
From each according to his means to each according to his needs is a basic socialist tenet so yes compulsory sharing of wealth is one way of looking at it. Mutually exclusive with freedom? I would say not but it is a moot point.
I would suspect that accountable probably knows sweden is not a communist country even if he may not be able to find it on a map (Joke, just kidding, not having a dig at americans:sneaky: )
Finland is based upon the Swedish model. However, whereas we take in thousands of refugees annually, Finland's quota is something in the region of 3 persons each year and foreigners are badly discriminated against there.
Perhaps this doesn't prove anything but our largest group of foreigners living in Sweden are Finns, who make up more than a million of our population. That is an enormous amount considering our total population.
* Before quoting me on my statistics, you might want to check them first, i.e. thousands of regugees to Sweden annually, 3 persons quota to Finland each year, and more than a million Finns living in Sweden. I gave these figures off the top of my head.
I never actually mentioned refugees but was commenting on differing approaches to the economy and the balance between social policy and the need to have a viable economy to pay for it all. Finland seems to have gone off in a slightly different direction from Sweden.
posted by high threshold
Buy a book.
I can't imagine discussing Calculus with someone who doesn't understand the fundamental principles of mathematics (addition & subtraction) and I can't be bothered explaining politics to someone who doesn't understand the principles of democracy and yet harbours false pre-conceptions about someone else's country. I am not making criticism - it is merely earnest observation.
Which book? I can't imagine making the assumption that the individual I am discussing calculus with can't add and subtract. It is rather an inane comment.
posted by accountable
Compulsory "sharing" of wealth is mutually exclusive with freedom. And since when is that a democratic principle? That's more a communist principle.
This subject would make a great thread.
From each according to his means to each according to his needs is a basic socialist tenet so yes compulsory sharing of wealth is one way of looking at it. Mutually exclusive with freedom? I would say not but it is a moot point.
I would suspect that accountable probably knows sweden is not a communist country even if he may not be able to find it on a map (Joke, just kidding, not having a dig at americans:sneaky: )
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
gmc wrote: [...]I would suspect that accountable probably knows sweden is not a communist country even if he may not be able to find it on a map (Joke, just kidding, not having a dig at americans:sneaky: )I would've been disappointed otherwise.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
A political concensus
High Threshold wrote: - "Compulsory sharing"?
- "mutually exclusive with freedom"?
- "a communist principle"?
Eh? You have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about, do you.Is it Swedish tradition to sidestep a touchy issue & disguise it as insufferable arrogance, or is it just your personal charm?
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
I assume that this "sharing" is mandated by law, thus compulsory. Of course, if people give voluntarily of their own wealth to help the poor, I am in awe.
Either way, I am extremely interested in how the society keeps the average citizen motivated to exel, rather than sitting back waiting for the more affluent to share their wealth with them.
- "mutually exclusive with freedom"?
- "a communist principle"?
Eh? You have absolutely no clue of what you're talking about, do you.Is it Swedish tradition to sidestep a touchy issue & disguise it as insufferable arrogance, or is it just your personal charm?
Olaf Palme was a thorn in the side of the U.S. as we were a living example of true democratic principles and the sharing of wealth to all citizens while taking care of everyone with regards to income, housing, medical cares, freedom (speech, expression and movement), paid holidays (six weeks each year), racial equality, etc. The United States was (and is) far behind, despite their claim to the contrary, although since they assassinated Olaf Palme, our standards have sunk notably.
I assume that this "sharing" is mandated by law, thus compulsory. Of course, if people give voluntarily of their own wealth to help the poor, I am in awe.
Either way, I am extremely interested in how the society keeps the average citizen motivated to exel, rather than sitting back waiting for the more affluent to share their wealth with them.
-
High Threshold
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:20 am
A political concensus
gmc wrote: I never actually mentioned refugees but was commenting on differing approaches to the economy and the balance between social policy and the need to have a viable economy to pay for it all. Finland seems to have gone off in a slightly different direction from Sweden.
I wrote in the condensed fashion, sorry; equating social economy with social debt and the effects of an immigration policy gone mad – hence footing the bill for an enormous influx of legal/illegal immigrants on welfare in the face of skyrocketing unemployment and the subsequent loss of our own titbits of unique, Swedish security and culture.
I brought up this difference between Sweden and Finland only as a common-man’s view to the ever-increasing frustration we are experiencing and the distinct lack of just such experience in Finland. You may not agree on the importance of such with regards to your issue but "the domino factor" must be taken into account in any case. Naturally, it's more complicated than what this tiny corner of the Forum can accommodate.
gmc wrote: Which book? I can't imagine making the assumption that the individual I am discussing calculus with can't add and subtract. It is rather an inane comment.
My comments on that subject were directed to someone else, in reply to his post to me.
* I've taken note of your final comment but I refuse to respond and tred on that banana skin ... :wah:
I wrote in the condensed fashion, sorry; equating social economy with social debt and the effects of an immigration policy gone mad – hence footing the bill for an enormous influx of legal/illegal immigrants on welfare in the face of skyrocketing unemployment and the subsequent loss of our own titbits of unique, Swedish security and culture.
I brought up this difference between Sweden and Finland only as a common-man’s view to the ever-increasing frustration we are experiencing and the distinct lack of just such experience in Finland. You may not agree on the importance of such with regards to your issue but "the domino factor" must be taken into account in any case. Naturally, it's more complicated than what this tiny corner of the Forum can accommodate.
gmc wrote: Which book? I can't imagine making the assumption that the individual I am discussing calculus with can't add and subtract. It is rather an inane comment.
My comments on that subject were directed to someone else, in reply to his post to me.
* I've taken note of your final comment but I refuse to respond and tred on that banana skin ... :wah: