It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's America is this what you really want?

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The federal government should not be managing Meals on Wheels, nor taxing its citizens to pay for those programs.

States should manage their own citizens and the needs of those citizens not the federal government which always ties a political agenda to those grants by requiring conformity to A, B, and C in order for states to get the handout.

Less power and money and control over us by the feds equates to less waste, less fraud, less cronyism, and more efficiency at the state level.

Our country is one of the most generous on Earth both with charitable giving and volunteerism. Less federal government creates a vacuum that states and NGOs will fill.

If given a choice between having my federal income tax go down $1000/year and my state income tax go up $1000/year, it is a no-brainer choice for me.




posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Social Darwinism.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.


No, I was referring to your hyperbolic sky is falling excuse of an OP.

But I'll totally give you a participation star for using the "I am rubber you are glue" defense in debate. Never let an opportunity to trot that line out go to waste.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I think your OP is a bit hyperbolic. Funding for Meals on Wheels isn't being completely cut. So odds are no one will starve to death. They'll be busy freezing to death because the budget proposal does completely eliminate LIHEAP.


I think labeling the post hyperbole is missing the point. Changing public policies around the safety net has consequences.

Many Republicans want to get rid of social security based on philosophical grounds. But they are too scared to admit it because it's political death. Apparently, cutting or getting rid of meals on wheels is not political death.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Exaggerate much did you?

Almost half of those savings will come by eliminating the $3 billion Community Development Block Grant, which provides money for a variety of community development and anti-poverty programs, including Meals on Wheels.
How much it would affect the organization is unknown, but Meals on Wheels says 84% of its money comes from individual contributions and grants from corporations and foundations. About 3% comes from government grants, it says.
edit on 2017-03-16T12:36:22-05:0012pmThu, 16 Mar 2017 12:36:22 -0500ThursdayAmerica/Chicago2231 by CharlesT because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: dfnj2015

While there are some things I disagree with in the budget, there are also things I do agree with.

Not a fan of it in it's entirety, but it's not a trainwreck, as far as I can tell.


Some people do not like government money going to fund abortion. Some people don't like government money going to bombing and killing brown people. There's always money going to be used in ways some people find immoral.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.


No, I was referring to your hyperbolic sky is falling excuse of an OP.

But I'll totally give you a participation star for using the "I am rubber you are glue" defense in debate. Never let an opportunity to trot that line out go to waste.


I never said the sky was falling. I was just pointing out people may die. I never said it was important that they did not.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

I get it that people make bad choices and should suffer for it. It just seems to me this country is only as great as the weakest people living among us.



The Clinton's need to go to jail, Obama should be deported.

So far Trump is doing well as straightening out the mess the DNC created but the real problem is the devisiviness the left created in the country over the last 8 years.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

originally posted by: dfnj2015

I get it that people make bad choices and should suffer for it. It just seems to me this country is only as great as the weakest people living among us.



The Clinton's need to go to jail, Obama should be deported.

So far Trump is doing well as straightening out the mess the DNC created but the real problem is the devisiviness the left created in the country over the last 8 years.


I'm not sure Clinton needs to go to jail and Obama needs to be deported are real problems.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.


No, I was referring to your hyperbolic sky is falling excuse of an OP.

But I'll totally give you a participation star for using the "I am rubber you are glue" defense in debate. Never let an opportunity to trot that line out go to waste.


I never said the sky was falling. I was just pointing out people may die. I never said it was important that they did not.




The new Trump budget has eliminated all funding for the Meals on Wheels program in favor of increase defense spending.


That's a flat out lie. Everything else is downhill from there. You attempting to argue semantics doesn't change that.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlesT
Exaggerate much did you?

Almost half of those savings will come by eliminating the $3 billion Community Development Block Grant, which provides money for a variety of community development and anti-poverty programs, including Meals on Wheels.
How much it would affect the organization is unknown, but Meals on Wheels says 84% of its money comes from individual contributions and grants from corporations and foundations. About 3% comes from government grants, it says.


I think the bigger question is not whether I got the number right. The question I was really asking is does government have any role at all outside of defense spending. It seems the answer is a resounding no. I don't think I was making a judgment on it either way unless you argue the way I stated it was like I was supporting the liberal position. I guess I could have said changing public policies do not have any consequences we should care about would be more in line with the Republican way of thinking.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.


No, I was referring to your hyperbolic sky is falling excuse of an OP.

But I'll totally give you a participation star for using the "I am rubber you are glue" defense in debate. Never let an opportunity to trot that line out go to waste.


I never said the sky was falling. I was just pointing out people may die. I never said it was important that they did not.




The new Trump budget has eliminated all funding for the Meals on Wheels program in favor of increase defense spending.


That's a flat out lie. Everything else is downhill from there. You attempting to argue semantics doesn't change that.


I don't understand why you are claiming it is a flat out lie. People may die as a result of these budget cuts. Are you saying these budget cuts have no consequences to the people who depend on these programs?



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

While I agree that contractors are part of the problem (Congress doesn't help either) it's still the brass at the Pentagon that's accepting the bids. If these people are willing to accept offers that are charging $75,000 for a simple ladder than they are either inept, playing favorites, or looking for a cushy post-retirement gig. Regardless of the reasoning they should be removed from their duties for gross misspending.

At the the end of the day Lockheed needs contracts with the government to survive. The government doesn't need contracts with Lockheed to survive. So why are we letting them set the terms of the agreement and f*** us over when we should be the one in the driver's seat?

The simple truth is that the Pentagon has wasted and misspent money for decades. If they had been fiscally responsible in the first place they wouldn't be in the situation they are in now.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: dfnj2015

Why don't you be charitable instead of forcing the government and tax-payers to be charitable for you?


Why?

Why is it that when it comes to things like "defense," everyone is supposed to pony up for bombs and drones? And when it comes to infrastructure, tax payers don't get a worksheet where they specify how much they want to pay for which line items do they?

Yet it's a common argument among right-wingers that charities are somehow a better way of dealing with social welfare than government programs. Would we have a military that relied on voluntary donations? How about something like road construction?

So what is it about social welfare issues that makes them unique? Why are we as a society expected to be all in it together except when it comes to addressing the issues of poverty and infirmity?

Could it be that among a certain group of people, generations of political programming have instilled a belief that free market capitalism is a perfect economic system and that poor people are either poor because they are lazy, made bad decisions are are so horribly unfit that they should probably be left to die — unless some charity takes pity on them.

Mankind has entered an era where the old Randian anti-egalitarian law of the jungle programming will no longer suffice — where an ever larger number of people will find themselves lacking the economic mobility they've always believed to be their birthright. People who in the pre-industrial economy would have sustained on farming or trades that no longer exist. People who only a couple generations ago could have looked forward to a reasonable opportunity at a decent living working in manufacturing.

Where do these people fit into the economy in a world where robots make everything and AIs can write news stories?

Enjoy those platitudes while they still resonate with enough people to be somewhat viable. At some point, as history has repeatedly demonstrated, the have nots will reach a critical mass and then all the bulls# ideological propositions in the world won't stop the meltdown.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: EightAhoy

And what happens if a state refuses to fund any welfare programs? What if people start dying as a result?



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
It just seems to me this country is only as great as the weakest people living among us.


If that was true, then it really shines a huge spotlight on the absolute lunacy of allowing more refugees and "tired poor masses" into the US, doesn't it?

Meals on Wheels will be fine, they will just need individuals to up their charitable giving. We need to move entirely away from the present model which is illogical and wasteful. Charities which take federal dollars don't make sense... you tax someone on the federal level to redistribute the money to a non profit, that's several layers of administrative fees, program costs, and salaries that come out of that money versus the earner saying "ooh, I feel like donating money today. I will cut a $100 check to meals on wheels!" In that scenario, MOW relieves $100 and the earner loses $100. In the forced charity taxation system, MOW either sees only $20-$30 of the $100 or the tax payers is taxed $170-$180 to see to it that MOW gets their hundred while also covering the payouts to all the extra hands the money passes through.

Oh, and not forcing people to take responsibility for a bunch of strangers isn't "forcing them to live in poverty and squalor." It's may be ALLOWING them to do so, but you can't force something to exist in its natural state... that just happens naturally.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: dfnj2015

Well. This is the most hyperbole laden, sky is falling post of the day.

So far anyway.


By "this" you were making a reference to your own post. Nicely done.


No, I was referring to your hyperbolic sky is falling excuse of an OP.

But I'll totally give you a participation star for using the "I am rubber you are glue" defense in debate. Never let an opportunity to trot that line out go to waste.


I never said the sky was falling. I was just pointing out people may die. I never said it was important that they did not.




The new Trump budget has eliminated all funding for the Meals on Wheels program in favor of increase defense spending.


That's a flat out lie. Everything else is downhill from there. You attempting to argue semantics doesn't change that.


I don't understand why you are claiming it is a flat out lie. People may die as a result of these budget cuts. Are you saying these budget cuts have no consequences to the people who depend on these programs?


Try reading what I actually said, including the quote of your own post, and debating that. I know it's harder than debating whatever it is you've made up and are pretending that I said, but try.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

The F-35 is not a failure of a project. It is king.



posted on Mar, 16 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Arnie123

At least $200 billion over budget and five years (or is it six now?) overdue. Even if it were ready to go tomorrow and did what it said on the tin that would still be a failed project.




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join