"face It! We Do Not Take Care Of Each Other" Keith Olbermann Special Comment


swc75
 Share

Recommended Posts

He spoke the truth in that piece. But the scary part is that they will not listen and that goes for both sides. But I do hope I am wrong and they do listen and take it to heart, and that will make there decision easy in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill just say it. I don't give two shits if they nix medicare AND social security tomorrow. He started out so good. We protect ourselves and the people in our small unit. If you want protections, join a unit.

come on chuck, we need to tax you at 99 percent, b/c you make so much, just to keep things even. Helping others is the right thing to do, think about it... why you should have more than any other person in this world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why you should have more than any other person in this world?

WTF?!?!

How about because I have worked 40+ a week since I was 16. How about because my family planned ahead and taught me how to manage my life. How about because I am not some crackhead on the street popping out babies like pez between robbing liquor stores. I have a cousin who is basically a waste and a drain. After close to ten years of trying to help I have written her off as has 99% of the family. It sounds harsh but its the exact reason if I ever have kids they will be fine. You cannot let 5% drag down the 95%. I mean it sounds cruel but with 40k VS members, I would probably let 1000 of you live here if you needed, and the other 39k I would not give a dollar unless they wanted to wash my windshield or something. I donate 10-20k a year, but its to people trying to better themselves. Not just any random person. Blanket social security makes zero sense. You want social security? Get paid in guns, ammo, and gold. Thats social security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

using chuck as the example.

((stealth edit) using the 60 year low current tax levels, chuck you will not hire one extra person. YOu are a private business owner, ent. and man of leisure. :lol::P

the BS about taxes, in higher ranges and hireing are total shit.

fast forward to 2:50. if this doesn't make you nuts, nothing will. stick with it until the subject changes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/43720311#43720166

""house keeping"" 7 times, my ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want social security? Get paid in guns, ammo ,and gold. Thats social security.

Don't forget US treasury bonds, as that's been as good as gold for the rest of the world's economy to invest in.

Unless we do indeed begin to default, and the latest recession will be a walk-in-the-park compared to what would follow.

I'm like you in the sense where SS and MC disappearing wouldn't do a damn thing to my family's lifestyle, but there is always the other shoe, and unless you've worn it, its hard to relate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm like you in the sense where SS and MC disappearing wouldn't do a damn thing to my family's lifestyle

It would probably influence everybody's lifestyle as society would be considerably different from what it is now. There's a reason that prosperous developed nations all have some kind of social security. The alternative isn't very pretty.

Also it wouldn't do the economy any good with people defaulting on loans left right and center as soon as they lost their job for whatever reason.

There is always the bigger picture that most prefer to ignore.

Edited by JCviggen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would probably influence everybody's lifestyle as society would be considerably different from what it is now. There's a reason that prosperous developed nations all have some kind of social security. The alternative isn't very pretty.

Also it wouldn't do the economy any good with people defaulting on loans left right and center as soon as they lost their job for whatever reason.

There is always the bigger picture that most prefer to ignore.

Town I am in is over 70% military. They will all retire and have full medical and retirement. Don't get me wrong. I would probably have to shoot the other 25% and wear their skin for warmth, but he it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short sighted perspective but I can understand why you would see it that way. At some point the purview is going to turn from teachers and public workers to the military retirees as well. Everyone sucking at the public teat that's funded from taxes is going to feel the axe at some point.

From "War Without Humans: Modern Blood Rites Revisited" by Barbara Ehrenreich in the magazine Guernica. I don't agree with many of her conclusions and whimsy fantasy but she does hit home with this one:

Ultimately, the mass militaries of the modern era, augmented by ever-more expensive weapons systems, place an unacceptable economic burden on the nation-states that support them—a burden that eventually may undermine the militaries themselves. Consider what has been happening to the world’s sole military superpower, the United States. The latest estimate for the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is, at this moment, at least $3.2 trillion, while total U.S. military spending equals that of the next 15 countries combined, and adds up to approximately 47 percent of all global military spending.

To this must be added the cost of caring for wounded and otherwise damaged veterans, which has been mounting precipitously as medical advances allow more of the injured to survive. The U.S. military has been sheltered from the consequences of its own profligacy by a level of bipartisan political support that has kept it almost magically immune to budget cuts, even as the national debt balloons to levels widely judged to be unsustainable.

The hard right, in particular, has campaigned relentlessly against “big government,” apparently not noticing that the military is a sizable chunk of this behemoth. In December 2010, for example, a Republican senator from Oklahoma railed against the national debt with this statement: “We’re really at war. We’re on three fronts now: Iraq, Afghanistan, and the financial tsunami [arising from the debt] that is facing us.” Only in recent months have some Tea Party-affiliated legislators broken with tradition by declaring their willingness to cut military spending.

If military spending is still for the most part sacrosanct, ever more spending cuts are required to shrink “big government.” Then what remains is the cutting of domestic spending, especially social programs for the poor, who lack the means to finance politicians, and all too often the incentive to vote as well. From the Reagan years on, the U.S. government has chipped away at dozens of programs that had helped sustain people who are underpaid or unemployed, including housing subsidies, state-supplied health insurance, public transportation, welfare for single parents, college tuition aid, and inner-city economic development projects.

Even the physical infrastructure—bridges, airports, roads, and tunnels—used by people of all classes has been left at dangerous levels of disrepair. Antiwar protestors wistfully point out, year after year, what the cost of our high-tech weapon systems, our global network of more than 1,000 military bases, and our various “interventions” could buy if applied to meeting domestic human needs. But to no effect.

This ongoing sacrifice of domestic welfare for military “readiness” represents the reversal of a historic trend. Ever since the introduction of mass armies in Europe in the seventeenth century, governments have generally understood that to underpay and underfeed one’s troops—and the class of people that supplies them—is to risk having the guns pointed in the opposite direction from that which the officers recommend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short sighted perspective but I can understand why you would see it that way. At some point the purview is going to turn from teachers and public workers to the military retirees as well. Everyone sucking at the public teat that's funded from taxes is going to feel the axe at some point.

From "War Without Humans: Modern Blood Rites Revisited" by Barbara Ehrenreich in the magazine Guernica. I don't agree with many of her conclusions and whimsy fantasy but she does hit home with this one:

Other than crime going up, no effect on me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wore them when I took them from the lazy bum who didn't fight hard enough to keep it. Then I pissed in it and gave it to the guy asking for a hand out.

Ok, but what do you do when they were never given a shoe to begin with?

It would probably influence everybody's lifestyle as society would be considerably different from what it is now. There's a reason that prosperous developed nations all have some kind of social security. The alternative isn't very pretty.

Also it wouldn't do the economy any good with people defaulting on loans left right and center as soon as they lost their job for whatever reason.

There is always the bigger picture that most prefer to ignore.

Agreed, but it's the reliance on a shared vested interest, where your contributions over the long term are not sometimes needed for the individual, and in the end not guaranteed.

That screws both ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share