Tiered minimum wage?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Absolutely. Did you know that we spent over $400 billion dollars on defense alone in 2004? Did you know that our defense budget is more than double the defense budget of the entire rest of the world COMBINED? That means that if we cut our defense budget in half we'd have over $200 billion more dollars each year -- and we'd still have a defense budget larger than the rest of the world combined. Our budget and priorities are seriously flawed. It's like America is full of scared pussies, so we have to spend astronomical amounts of money to "protect" us.

Also, do you remember when the Iraq war started Congress passed $75 billion dollars in a week? What a mockery of the system. We can push through that much money for war in a week, but we can't improve healthcare and education over the course of several years?

I'll tell you one thing: I'm not scared of ANY terrorists -- I'm scared of the government.

Budget of the United States Government, FY 2006

I think that our defense spending is double that of what any other country spends and not double of all countries put together. I'll pass on the rest of what you stated so not to make this a political thread.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I think that our defense spending is double that of what any other country spends and not double of all countries put together. I'll pass on the rest of what you stated so not to make this a political thread.

Military budget of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is wikipedia after all, and I didn't confirm their sources, but it looks like the US spends more than twice of all other spenders combined. Just check out the graph.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Military budget of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is wikipedia after all, and I didn't confirm their sources, but it looks like the US spends more than twice of all other spenders combined. Just check out the graph.

It looked to me as they only used around 10 other countries while running the numbers it kind of jumped around alot and was hard to tell. The one thing I did notice is it accounts for only about 4% of our GDP which is not bad. Also alot is spent on technology which protects our troops. It did say that we spend 47% of the total world spending defence. That is not twice what they spend its not even half.

[hooskins]

Either way that money could easily be spent on directly protecting our country, which is more then open for another terrorist attack. Beefing up technology at all public transportation locations, starting at subway and rail stations because at this point in time there is absolutely no security whatsoever at many major cities like DC and NYC. Airport security is pathetic and lagging behind. How about more money on emergency response teams and connecting local emergency systems with national.

The problem is that these areas receive near minimum funding while overseas adventures for oil and dominance in the Mid-East really do not secure our nation anymore.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by firstdown

It looked to me as they only used around 10 other countries while running the numbers it kind of jumped around alot and was hard to tell. The one thing I did notice is it accounts for only about 4% of our GDP which is not bad. Also alot is spent on technology which protects our troops. It did say that we spend 47% of the total world spending defence. That is not twice what they spend its not even half.

From wikipedia:
"Yet some say that to compare government spending on the military to the total sum of all goods and services produced by the national economy in a year (the GDP) is to mislead, since the U.S. GDP has dramatically risen over time, and therefore the military budget can still go up, while simultaneously demanding a smaller percentage of the GDP."

The Defense Budget Is Bigger Than You Think: Newsroom: The Independent Institute:
"Although the public may appreciate that $401.3 billion is a great deal of money, few citizens realize that it is only part of the total bill for defense. Lodged elsewhere in the budget, other lines identify funding that serves defense purposes just as surely as—sometimes even more surely than—the money allocated to the Department of Defense (DoD)"

[Monkeydad]

For those that whine about defense spending, do you realize that the entire defense budget (not just war expenses) is a drop in the bucket when compared to welfare spending...and you KNOW how much fraud and waste there is with that. Fraud and waste in the welfare system aren't just tolerated or overlooked, it seems they're ENCOURAGED.

If any government spending needs reigned in, it's there.

If you CAN work, you SHOULD work. Then, if you don't work, you don't eat.

[hooskins]

I am NOT talking about welfare I am talking about spending on the real issue, homeland security. That is a typical counter many Republicans bring up, but that doesn't hold when you are comparing the defense budget versus the homeland security budget(which was cut).

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Buster

For those that whine about defense spending, do you realize that the entire defense budget (not just war expenses) is a drop in the bucket when compared to welfare spending...and you KNOW how much fraud and waste there is with that. Fraud and waste in the welfare system aren't just tolerated or overlooked, it seems they're ENCOURAGED.

If any government spending needs reigned in, it's there.

If you CAN work, you SHOULD work. Then, if you don't work, you don't eat.

Fraud and waste is everywhere in the government -- not just welfare. I'm in favor of eliminating it wherever possible.

Also, I do not believe that more money is spent on welfare than defense. I'm not sure, but I believe defense spending accounts for over 50% of the entire gov't budget.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by hooskins

I am NOT talking about welfare I am talking about spending on the real issue, homeland security. That is a typical counter many Republicans bring up, but that doesn't hold when you are comparing the defense budget versus the homeland security budget(which was cut).

Homeland security budget was not cut.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Fraud and waste is everywhere in the government -- not just welfare. I'm in favor of eliminating it wherever possible.

Also, I do not believe that more money is spent on welfare than defense. I'm not sure, but I believe defense spending accounts for over 50% of the entire gov't budget.

Its not even close to 50%.

[RobH4413]

Bottom Line:

Our country has a huge problem with poverty. I don't know what is considered a liveable amount, or how they determin that... so I can't comment on that alone.

I do however think affirmitive action should be adjusted. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe a rich black male who's father is a doctor gets admitted into school before a vietnamese immigrant does. The system is skewed and outdated.
------------------

Here's a thought. Let's not base AA on race, but rather poverty. Is it harder to grow up dirt poor or a minority?

If anyone takes offense to this I am sorry, and I do sympathize with minorities. I don't mean to take away from an issue as serious as race, but rather to shed light to an issue that isn't really talked about enough. There needs to be a great deal of legislation passed to battle racism and nepotism that exists in both politics and throughout the country.

I do however, believe that the #1 issue in this country should be helping educate the uneducated, and to eliminate poverty. Reaganomics is BS and I'm sick of it...

I know I'm all over the place... but I had to give my 2 cents. -all love

[dmek25]

to me, affirmative action is a joke. able bodied people, that are more then qualified, not getting jobs. to hand a job to someone, based strictly on race, is just downright stupid.

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by dmek25

to me, affirmative action is a joke. able bodied people, that are more then qualified, not getting jobs. to hand a job to someone, based strictly on race, is just downright stupid.

It's original purpose (and if it still did justice to it, I would support) was to combat nepotism. How many job's are given just because you "know someone"?

Through injustice, most notably "slavery", minorities we're not able to get the head start other races had. There was no guy in charge whom they knew to help them get through the system.

I really don't want to get into this because I don't know enough to accuratly represent the issue, but I'll give it my best shot:

Long story short, because a white guy knew a white guy, who knew a white guy, the black guy is still getting screwed. I may not by the most articulate on the subject, but nevertheless the point is there. This is not shenanigans.

This is not whining. This is the truth, and alot of people are too ignorant and brash to empathize, but it's how the world is.

The problem is, the current system, and probably any system, cannot do justice to the overall issue. It's unfortunate, but now, we need a new system, one that better helps those who don't have the same oppurtunity as us higher income. (I'm by no means rich, but I'm secure, and that's awesome)

We as a society are known to bend and buckle for those who don't have the same oppurtunity as us. We lend a helping hand, and I think a revised AA plan would be just that.

If we're going to design buildings for those less fortunate (handicapped) why not continue to design a society meant to help the less fortunate. I by no means imply we all sacrifice ourselves so poor drug addicts continue to get there fix and stay poor.I do think, however, that designing an incentive laden path (community colleges are an excellent example) for those who want to become more successful and haven't had the oppurtunity is an ideal solution.

[dmek25]

i have friends who are fire fighters. the most qualified person doesn't get the job because of A.A. would you want your life in an unqualified fire fighters hands? i agree originally this would help balance out the good old boys network. but now its almost working as reverse discrimination

[Beemnseven]

Let's say everybody in the United States all chipped in and gave each poverty-stricken, less fortunate person a one-time payout of $50,000 -- what do you think would happen?

I've always been skeptical of the "working poor" or the "less fortunate". Everybody gets 12 years of free education in this country. After that, there are scholarships, grants, and all sorts of college loan financing options available for higher education.

By and large I think most people who claim they are poor are probably in that state because of one person: Themselves. Honestly, if each of us were to examine the reasons why we haven't made it to where we truly want to be, doesn't the finger ultimately get pointed right back at us? Sure, there are certainly exceptions. And no, I'm not talking about the mentally or physically disabled. I believe the bottom line is, if you are of sound mind and able body, there is NO reason you cannot achieve great success in this country.