Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Bromsy wrote:The only problem with massive military cuts is that we get f'd down the road if something unforseen happens, since it isn't something you can just throw money at and get effective short term returns later on.

I mean okay, we slash the military, then the aliens from Independence Day show up. What are we gonna do? I mean, Will Smith only survived that first battle because there were like 100 other planes. Without all that ablative cover, he woulda died. Then who is going to fly Jeff Goldblum up to the alien mothership? Huh? Who?!

This is the best argument Ive ever read on Dakka.

I' black, mildly funny, and rap like I'm a goody two shoes from the 80's, plus I've served in the airforce. I'll fly Mr. Goldblum myself damn it.

But can you also fight robots? Cause that's next.

He's the sexiest_hero; of course he can fight robots.

I'd trust him with all of my Jeff Goldblum defense-related needs.

D'ye think he could have stopped the T-Rex? Because that is clearly the pinnacle of the Goldblum Defender field, unless you count saving him from himself in the Fly, which would require skills in physical combat, psychology, and high end 80's science. If either is true.... hold on to yer butts!

You guys saved the thread.

And here I thought repugs liked babies and pregnant women, but I suppose they only care about either when the issue of abortion comes up.

Maybe they are against them because they think they are some sort of alien/human hybrid? I mean earth girls, they are easy.

Classic Republican.

"Hinder the Democrats as much as possible, say we can do better, but we won't"

Bromsy wrote:Maybe they are against them because they think they are some sort of alien/human hybrid? I mean earth girls, they are easy.

They are damn easy. I think sexiest_hero would be a MORE than adequate replacement for a Wayans brother. We just need to figure out who here on Dakka could replace Jim Carrey...

Mannahnin wrote:

Bromsy wrote:Maybe they are against them because they think they are some sort of alien/human hybrid? I mean earth girls, they are easy.

They are damn easy. I think sexiest_hero would be a MORE than adequate replacement for a Wayans brother. We just need to figure out who here on Dakka could replace Jim Carrey...

I'm more of a Drew Carey...

Mannahnin wrote:...Wayans brother.

It was a good show! They didn't even...get...a...final..episode...!

Mannahnin wrote:
We just need to figure out who here on Dakka could replace Jim Carrey...

Malfred, or Alpharius.

Alpharius is more tall and gangly. He can make more funny faces (although they both make funny faces). You're right that they both have the proper level of enthusiasm to sub in for early Carrey.

Saldiven wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
I would like that. I would do it too. I'd spend years doing it if I got payed too. I don't believe government programs need to be reflected in the constitution however, America grew to its greatest prominence, effectiveness, and power once we fully grasped the idea of the state and thats not really in there as method for prosperity. The constitution isn't a roadmap. To answer your question though, raise taxes, cut healthcare, reform healthcare, non privatize healthcare (privatized healthcare is logically going to be corrupt and has been in every case ever demonstrated on a national level) and cut military spending. Farm subsidies gotta go too. Same with a good number of other senseless wastes of cash.

Unfortunately, nationalized healthcare is just as possible to become corrupt as private healthcare, without having the fundamental drive to turn a profit that makes private healthcare self police its finances. Check out healthcare fraud in countries llike Canada and Brittain, as well as the rampant Medicare fraud occurring here in the USA. Nationalizing healthcare will do virtually nothing to eliminate fraud; the fact of the matter is that human beings will be the ones making the decisions regardless of whether or not the system is public or private, and all human beings are subject to the same foibles.

Why is it that privatised healthcare in the USA costs per capita as a proportion of GDP roughly double the national healthcare of the UK, Canada, Japan etc, and produces worse results?

If that's the sort of corruption that arises from being non-private, we could do with more of it!

I have to side with Killkrazy on this one. Our private healthcare system is totally fethed.

With proper regulation it MIGHT work... but as it is, it's a total fail.

Saldiven wrote:Frankly, I think spending cuts should be across the board, and non-essential organizations (such as the NEA, for example) should suffer the greatest cuts.

You can cut the NEA entirely and it won't make the slightest dent in the budget. Hell, you could write letters to everyone who ever received an NEA grant and tell them to send the money back and you still won't have saved a material amount.

Talking about a scaling back of total US spending, and talking about the NEA makes no sense. Their budget is about $150 million.

chaos0xomega wrote:As someone that follows the military budget closely, I can tell you that the military budget HAS been cut. The difference was there wasn't much of a fight about it, because the military, under SecDef Gates, was smart enough to cut its own budget. something like 80 bil over the next 5 years.

No, they agreed to a reduction in budgeted growth. That is, where they had plans to grow by 5 or 6% each year (I can't remember the exact figures) they've now committed to grow by just 3 or 4% each year.

Saldiven wrote:Well over 75% of the US budget goes to social programs. That's not an arguable data point. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid made up 1438 Billion compared to 663 billion for the Military budget. Other social programs include the Dept of Ed, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, etc.

And this GOP plan isn't touching on social security in any meaningful way. They're crapping about with minor programs to yell about saving a billion dollars here or there, to score some cheap points with the folk that really want government to spend less but don't actually know what'd be required for the government to break even.

Saldiven wrote:Unfortunately, nationalized healthcare is just as possible to become corrupt as private healthcare, without having the fundamental drive to turn a profit that makes private healthcare self police its finances.

This is not something that can be so broadly generalised. It really, really depends on the specifics of the program in place.

The problem with the US isn't that it's a private system, the problem is that it presently has the worst of the private system and the worst of the public system.

Nationalizing healthcare will do virtually nothing to eliminate fraud; the fact of the matter is that human beings will be the ones making the decisions regardless of whether or not the system is public or private, and all human beings are subject to the same foibles.

Fraud isn't what causes US citizens to pay twice as much as the rest of us for poorer healthcare results. Inefficiency is the problem, and while simply nationalising won't solve that problem, the point is that no change would involve simply nationalising. It'll involve building new systems where the actors involved in various decision have a personal incentive to drive down costs.

Until we get a handle on all this kind of stuff and figure out how it all contributes to the growing cost of healthcare in the USA, fiddling with who's pocket the payments come from is, frankly, a waste of time.

Every country in the world has similar processes. Yet we spend about half the money per capita, and deliver results that are better.

Ugh give me a 100% working government with no loss, infighting and lack of progress and I'll grant you three wishes...