Medicare, Defense or Social Security?

[Shell B]

You may change your mind if you need it.

I would agree with you, except it is not going to be there when I need it. Besides, the only people I know collecting social security are people who easily could work. I also know people who need it desperately who are having to jump through fucking hoops to get it. Social security is a fucking joke.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

You may change your mind if you need it.

I would agree with you, except it is not going to be there when I need it. Besides, the only people I know collecting social security are people who easily could work. I also know people who need it desperately who are having to jump through fucking hoops to get it. Social security is a fucking joke.

Interesting view, but not one I'm able to share.

First ,because I live in Australia,not the US. We have a comprehensive and equitable federal Social Security system which words very well.

Mainly though because I worked for Social Security for over 25 years. I dealt with: the unemployed,sick, homeless youth, single parents, refugees and newly released felons.

I've heard probably all of the cliches and stereotypes. I've yet to come across one broad generalisation supported by evidence.

OF course I'm talking about Australian welfare recipients. American recipients are no doubt ignorant, lazy, feckless, stupid and undeserving.

[Shell B]

Haha, I am sure there are many people who get Social Security here who deserve it, but I guarantee our system is not as "flawless" as yours. I'm not making broad generalizations, I assure you.

[ib.me.ub]

I voted for defence. How could you possibly justify having such a large offence force.

[Minimalist]

Defense.

Reason why?

Right here.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...penditures

[reverendjeremiah]

You did that mate,not me. I said "The US has not been attacked directly by another country since Pear Harbour" .That is a bald statement of fact.

Then you used a statement of fact to change the topic..LMFAO..and I made it worse. Dont make this all out to be my fault.

You may change your mind if you need it.

I appreciate that you can see the civility of such a program. That you are willing to see beyond your own economic situation. I give this a thumbs up.

[KichigaiNeko]

Our Social Security system isn't THAT "flawless" but as padraic has stated ...the many who are in need DO get help. (There are many who are rorting the system and eventually get caught out)

How much of that 600billion could be better spent?? And still leave the USA in the secure position of the best defended country on the planet?? 120billion as orogenicman has suggested would go a bloody long way towards social security and medicare/aid.

[Violet]

Don't cut the defense budget: use it. Effectively, if you would please. American wars of ideology are beyond sickening to me (found the word finally: pragmatist). Sadly, throwing money at the defense budget due to cuts in Social Security and Medicare (both of which are relatively minor concerns compared to defense) won't solve the problem of poorly spent resources.

However, our spending a resource poorly does not mean we need to cut the size of said resource. Hence why I am the single vote so far in cutting the other two (much less important to the function of state) categories.

---

I voted for defence. How could you possibly justify having such a large offence force.

1: Kill your enemies. Dead enemies don't come back. Unless it was just a setback (ergo: you didn't really kill them).
2: Resources. If you kill them, you get their stuff. If you only kill some of them: you still get their stuff.
3: Nobody wants to declare war on you, because it will ensure their destruction by a third party, if not by you.
4: You can keep wars off of your own turf. Ensure that if you will not take a land: you still do damage to it. Ensure that you weaken your enemy more than yourself in the war.
5: A concentrated force of that size could easily exterminate countries which could then be populated. Open immigration right on up, and work the new refugees in your new territory.
6: Additional use for babies, anti-abortionists would love this.
7: A people that are largely militarily adept. Not only field more troops faster, but ensure that those who are not in the field have at least a basic understanding of military tactics, and can hopefully use a weapon to moderate effect.
8: Less focus on the country's internal 'problems': your people are swarmed in nationalism.
9: Exponentially growing power. Exponentially weakening enemies.
10: I said it was a good plan, so you should do it

---

How much of that 600billion could be better spent?? And still leave the USA in the secure position of the best defended country on the planet?? 120billion as orogenicman has suggested would go a bloody long way towards social security and medicare/aid.

Almost all of it could be better spent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't spend a great deal on defense (and especially offense).

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Haha, I am sure there are many people who get Social Security here who deserve it, but I guarantee our system is not as "flawless" as yours. I'm not making broad generalizations, I assure you.

Please do not misunderstand. I did not mean to imply our system is flawless,only that it works.


Perhaps you aren't making a broad generalisation.However,your comments seem typically judgmental and ignorant based on facile observation rather than evidence.

As for jumping through hoops. Here Welfare payments are made under the terms set by the Social Security Act (1947). The rationale is " welfare is for the needy,not the greedy"

The applicant must prove: citizenship and proof of age. Details about last job and reasons for leaving. (which had better be good) Full details of all assets and income from any source,including cash in hand.

The unemployed are given diaries,and are obliged to approach a set number of employers each week,who need to sign the diary. Failure to comply results in suspension of benefits . This is a small part of what is called "the works test". Penalties can be severe.


Single parents are paid a pension until the youngest child is 8. A that time the pension ceases. They must apply for unemployment and undertake training.

Oh, average time for a person to be in receipt of the single parent pension here is 18 months

IF you are going to make claims about welfare recipients, I suggest you you make very sure of your facts.

[orogenicman]

Almost all of it could be better spent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't spend a great deal on defense (and especially offense).

How much is enough? How many nukes do we need to ensure our safety? From my perspective, even one is one too many. How many tens of millions do we need to spend on each aircraft while our foot soldeirs don't have enough basic equipment? Now, imagine spending those 100s of billions of dollars on efforts to bring peace. Would that not also make us more safe?

---

Almost all of it could be better spent. That doesn't mean we shouldn't spend a great deal on defense (and especially offense).

How much is enough? How many nukes do we need to ensure our safety? From my perspective, even one is one too many. How many tens of millions do we need to spend on each aircraft while our foot soldeirs don't have enough basic equipment? Now, imagine spending those 100s of billions of dollars on efforts to bring peace. Would that not also make us more safe?