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.
Not everyone is afforded the luxury of being able to store away vast sums in the event an unpredictable event occurs. In an ideal world, sure, but first give me this ideal world as I would like to see it.
No, instead we must do the best with what we have. I think we can do a lot better, wouldn't you agree?
organizations which promote illegal immigration
You decided I was "attack-worthy" from our first interaction, and you're the one claiming that I "hate all Republicans". It's ridiculous.
The national spotlight is on Arizona for doing what the Federal government and previous Governor Napolitano refused to do: rein in an invasion of illegal aliens bankrupting our state (Arizona). At an August 2009 healthcare Town Hall in Phoenix, legislators said that more than half of Arizona’s 4 billion dollar budget deficit was the result of paying for three areas of services to illegal immigrants: education, healthcare, and incarceration.
Estimates are that 20-40% of uncompensated (“free”) medical services are provided to people in the US illegally. The actual number may be much higher.
What are consequences to taxpaying citizens?
1. Increased cost and reduced access to trauma care. Tucson has lost all but one Level I Trauma Center to serve all of southern Arizona, in large part due to massive, unsustainable losses from uncompensated care. Auto accidents involving overloaded vans of illegal aliens happen regularly in southern Arizona. Injured are flown by air ambulance to University Medical Center’s Trauma Center and treated with state of the art care….all at taxpayer expense.
2. A registered nurse involved with the Pima County health system since the 1970’s who must remain anonymous because of her role, said she has never seen any staff member at either El Rio Clinic or Pima County Health Department ask for proof of citizenship before providing free medical services (immunizations, Well Baby checks, food stamps, WIC services, birth control, and even elective abortions). Costs are paid by taxpayers. When funds are depleted, low income American citizens have fewer services and longer waits as a result.
3. This same RN also said: “I personally know Mexican men who married 16 year old girls, got them pregnant, brought them to Tucson for the baby to become a US citizen. They live in Mexico but come here for their health care. Taxpayers pay for this medical care many ways, at the Public Health Department, and with school nurses who provide care.”
Government intervention in food and fiber commodity markets began long ago. The classic case of farm subsidy through trade barriers is the English Corn Laws, which for centuries regulated the import and export of grain in Great Britain and Ireland. They were repealed in 1846. Modern agricultural subsidy programs in the United States began with the New Deal and the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933. With trade barriers already in place for agricultural commodities and everything else, this law gave the government the power to set minimum prices and included government stock acquisition, land idling, and schemes to cut supplies by destroying livestock. Land idling and livestock destruction were sometimes mandatory and sometimes induced by compensation (Benedict 1953).
Economists have criticized farm subsidies on several counts. First, farm subsidies typically transfer income from consumers and taxpayers to relatively wealthy farmland owners and farm operators. Second, they impose net losses on society, often called deadweight losses, and have no clear broad social benefit (Alston and James 2002). Third, they impede movements toward more open international trade in commodities and thus impose net costs on the global economy (Johnson 1991; Sumner 2003).
Supporters of farm subsidies have argued that such programs stabilize agricultural commodity markets, aid low-income farmers, raise unduly low returns to farm investments, aid rural development, compensate for monopoly in farm input supply and farm marketing industries, help ensure national food security, offset farm subsidies provided by other countries, and provide various other services. However, economists who have tried to substantiate any of these benefits have been unable to do so (Gardner 1992; Johnson 1991; Wright 1995).
Some subsidy programs, such as import tariffs, actually generate tax revenue for the government but also impose costs on consumers that exceed the government’s revenue gain.
Fincher and his ultra-right-wing friends in the House are furious about the fact that the worst economic crisis in 80 years has resulted in more Americans needing food stamps.
is very angry that the federal government is committed to preventing poor people from starving to death:
Fincher is very angry that the federal government is committed to preventing poor people from starving to death:
The reason this is even more egregious than the usual Republican class warfare is that Fincher himself is a poster boy for government dependency.
For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
The Anointing at Bethany.* 6c Now when Jesus was in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, 7a woman came up to him with an alabaster jar of costly perfumed oil, and poured it on his head while he was reclining at table. 8When the disciples saw this, they were indignant and said, “Why this waste? 9It could have been sold for much, and the money given to the poor.” 10Since Jesus knew this, he said to them, “Why do you make trouble for the woman? She has done a good thing for me. 11d The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have me. 12* In pouring this perfumed oil upon my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. 13Amen, I say to you, wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will be spoken of, in memory of her.”
GOP Farm Bill Would Slash Funds for Hungry Americans and Organic Farmers
House Republicans are also taking aim at programs designed to help organic farmers cope with the increased costs of complying with regulations.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) is an alliance of grassroots organizations that advocates for federal policy reform to advance the sustainability of agriculture, food systems, natural resources, and rural communities.
This is an anti-reform bill — bad for family farmers, rural communities, and the environment," said Ferd Hoefner, the Policy Director of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. "It will need to be reworked very substantially to gain the support of our coalition of farm and rural groups as the process moves forward.”
Originally posted by KyrieEleison
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
I think the point here is that ANYONE receiving a government handout based on questionable need should probably shut their yap about others receiving the same.
Barack Hussein Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. On the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within. Barack Hussein Obama was my college classmate.(Columbia University, class of '83)
As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Barack Hussein Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University... they outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. - See more at: henrymakow.com...
I don't have to prove my character to you any more than you have to prove yours. But I see through the veneer of Progressive conditioning and I can tell a hit piece when I see one.
Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, the top Republican on the committee in the last session of Congress, criticized the higher subsidies for Southern farmers, which are essentially a lower threshold for rice and peanut subsidies to kick in.
Here is what Huffpo, one of your fav sites says
Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
You and your "Agenda 21" and accusing everyone who's not 'Republican' of being "COMMUNISTS."
It's really sad.
Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
Here is what Huffpo, one of your fav sites says
What?
I'm pretty sure in my tenure here I have posted maybe ONE extext to Huffington Post.
"One of my fav sites"???
Um, no. I think Huffington Post is VERY left-wing radical, and I don't pay them much attention (kind of like I pay Glenn Beck very little attention). Projection much??????
Holy cow, ThirdEye.
However, as public awareness of the plan has grown in recent years, opposition to the whole scheme has been steadily increasing as well. Numerous states and local governments, for example, have adopted bi-partisan resolutions condemning UN Agenda 21 as a “socialist” and “communist” plot completely at odds with the U.S. Constitution, American traditions of self-government, and even fundamental liberties. That trend of resistance is accelerating.
While the U.S. Senate never ratified the UN scheme, both Democrat and Republican administrations, working with state and local officials, have been busy implementing it across the United States for decades
Despite the widespread suspicion and criticism plaguing both Monsanto and the global Big Business alliance pushing the UN’s Agenda 21, the company and the coalition celebrated the move in a recent press release. According to the announcement late last month, the biotech behemoth will be rolling out a “sustainability” course for its employees all over the world. Chairman and CEO Hugh Grant will represent the GMO company as a “Council Member” in the global “sustainable development” coalition.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
So that's about it now. Monsanto in bed with Sustainable Agenda 21 NGO's in bed with the Obama admin in bed with farm subsidies in bed with Cloward/Piven strategy for breaking the government and bringing in the Totalitarian global socialist/communist rulership.edit on 26-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)edit on 26-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by LightOrange
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
So that's about it now. Monsanto in bed with Sustainable Agenda 21 NGO's in bed with the Obama admin in bed with farm subsidies in bed with Cloward/Piven strategy for breaking the government and bringing in the Totalitarian global socialist/communist rulership.edit on 26-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)edit on 26-5-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
Oh yea, your math is sound there
Just more nutjobs trying to redflag and re-route everything they possibly can to an alleged "immminent totalitarian communist global assimilation".
Honestly I don't know how you can be taken seriously. Let's see what we've learned from the crowd of communism alarmists:
Human rights = bad = communism
Social security = bad = communism
The Fed = bad = communism
Atheism = bad = communism
Abortions = bad = communism
Healthcare = bad = communism
Gays = bad = communism
I think you should probably start taking your medication before you end up downtown, screaming warnings of a bloody apocalypse and waving a cardboard sign around trying to sell toejam from a pickle jar. Get it together.
Second, the right to Income must be guaranteed, or
If you did even the most remote research on Agenda 21 you would see that I am correct. Even the OP hasn't yet disputed me on Monsanto riding the "sustainable development' wave even while poisoning us with their "seeds of death".
I'm done talking to you. You seem to me to be irrational