Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size),
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't your facts about 10 years old. Social Security spending is now more than defense spending. Unemployment/Welfare Spending is same as defense now. Combine medicare/medicade and that budget item well exceeds military. So not quite tracking your argument here.
Every american wants a safety net, but take a look at that entitlement budget. It' spooky. At this rate defense spending will become 2% of budget in 20 years.
I also predict that iPhone4-journalists will soon be in higher demand than Iphone3-journalists. so all the universities better get their programs prepared for that.
Assuming you're referring to corporate welfare, which has been advanced by Republicans and Democrats over many decades, there's something corrupt and dangerous about propping up for-profit businesses with policies that ultimately cost Americans their jobs by outsourcing to China/India, vs. regular welfare, or unemployment insurance, which temporarily keep people from becoming destitute (and a much greater burden to society, long-term) when the corporations restructure their jobs out of existence and/or outsource them to India/China. Just who are these people who have "no desire to work"? I've never met one. Unemployment is not enough to live on long term and it stops cold after 6 months in flush economic times, 2 years in times like these. Welfare is also temporary and only helps people with dependent children who would become wards of the state otherwise. These pennies that our bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government throws at the debris left behind by post-industrial capitalism account for a very tiny percentage of the federal budget, compared to the military's share. Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size), and that is for _everyone_ when we retire from working, even the wealthy, and has nothing to do with "desire to work" - if you didn't work your adult life, you'd get no Social Security retirement, end of story.
I agree with most of your statement but you are wrong if you thing every person in America has a desire to work. There are plenty of people in this country that become so use to federal support that they feel entitled to it. That bothers me. When they do get jobs, they lose them because they show up late, and/or don't work very hard. This is a very hard argument because there are plenty of people in this country that really need support (ie. young, single moms). But what bothers me is many people have seemed to lose self pride that I feel previous generations benefited from. When I hear a young man bragging that he does not have to do anything because he's collecting unemployment it really bothers me. I definitely see both arguments and there is no perfect answer to welfare.(done rambling)
Back to topic. I don't want to see every newspaper/ magazine with it's own app. I will hold out till apple has its own magazine/newspaper store and delivers one polished ui. I hope this happens soon rather than later because I fear once these news companies spend all this money developing apps they will be less likely to give in to apple. I think the compromise is that the news companies get my zip code, age, and sex that's it. I am fine with this because the worst they can do is try to target ads at me (ouch). As long as I don't start getting emails, phone calls or mail from advertisers I am ok. I know others disagree but this is where I stand on my privacy. ps. they only get this info if I subscribe, they get no info if I buy one at a time.
I would never give money to a corporation whos sole objective is to demonize Democrats.
Fox actually has two objectives. The first is to make money. Imagine that, a corp that wants to make money. Heavens to Murgatroid! Whereas the NY Times and MSNBC - *whose* sole objective IS to demonize conservatives are purer as they continue to lose and lose and lose it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye in Fla
His [Murdoch's] publications pander to the lowest common denominator and bring the level of discourse into the mud.
The clearest, most trustworthy journalism I find is often in the WSJ (I don't like ALL the changes, but on balance I'm not freaked out) and the Times of London. While over at the NY Times Op-Ed section it's all mud, all the time, and the editorial policy bleeds buckets of bias into virtually every news story.
He also hasn't mucked up Barron's or the National Geo Channel too badly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by resnyc
Just who are these people who have "no desire to work"? I've never met one. Unemployment is not enough to live on long term and it stops cold after 6 months in flush economic times, 2 years in times like these.
I guess I hang out in "worser" neighborhoods than you do. As a performing artist, I know many other performers who keep jobs just long enough to qualify for their next round of unemployment as long as they can finagle their leaving to be a "reduction in force," so they can quality. As a landlord (ooo, I'm an evil landlord, so you can disregard me entirely!), one of my tenants tells me about how she does the same thing.
These folks are only taking lessons, though, from the Euros who've consented to support millions of layabouts, "artists" or otherwise for years on end, and, who, with their free schedule reliably turn out in the streets to peacefully or violently protest any attempts to cut any benefit ever conceived, no matter how draining to society as a whole.
Also, who says two years is the end of UI extensions? (*UI refers to Unemployment Insurance, not User Interface and extensions refers to time, not a FireFox plug in.* ;-p ) The Dems, unfettered, will continue to extend them ad infinitum (with borrowed money of course).
Finally, studies show that job-seeking activity increases markedly as someone's UI benefits are about to run out, and that most who get jobs get 'em around that time. Co-inky-dink? Ha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by resnyc
Welfare is also temporary and only helps people with dependent children who would become wards of the state otherwise.
What planet are you on? Being on welfare is the DEFINITION of being a ward of the state.
And the goal of mega-gov't types is to make sure that every citizen is more and more one of 'em via dependency on gov't-run "entitlements."
Quote:
Originally Posted by resnyc
These pennies that our bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government throws at the debris left behind by post-industrial capitalism account for a very tiny percentage of the federal budget, compared to the military's share. Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size)
Bizarre non-stats! Even with two active wars, entitlements dwarf all national security activities (even the dubious ones like hapless TSA screenings), and their unfunded liabilities - which will ultimately collapse our currency - loom over the future like a debt Tsunami.
And I wonder if you can even define your word salad cliches of "bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government" and "post-industrial capitalism." I mean those SOUND scary, all right - but what, e.g., makes "post-industrial capitalism" worse than its industrial predecessor? At least it's environmentally friendlier. And where's the real "bloat"? I say it's in all the nanny state programs and policies that are adding superstructure to gov't faster than they can put up buildings in Beijing - many of which will be as empty as our Treasury when the dreams of statist bureaucrats and politicians bring us down.
Ohh, and since this is AppleInsider, I will keep sending money to Apple, even tho' I believe Steve Jobs tends to vote a straight Dem ticket.
Comments
Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size),
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't your facts about 10 years old. Social Security spending is now more than defense spending. Unemployment/Welfare Spending is same as defense now. Combine medicare/medicade and that budget item well exceeds military. So not quite tracking your argument here.
Every american wants a safety net, but take a look at that entitlement budget. It' spooky. At this rate defense spending will become 2% of budget in 20 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fy...y_category.jpg
thats when OLED-publishing will really take off.
I also predict that iPhone4-journalists will soon be in higher demand than Iphone3-journalists. so all the universities better get their programs prepared for that.
Assuming you're referring to corporate welfare, which has been advanced by Republicans and Democrats over many decades, there's something corrupt and dangerous about propping up for-profit businesses with policies that ultimately cost Americans their jobs by outsourcing to China/India, vs. regular welfare, or unemployment insurance, which temporarily keep people from becoming destitute (and a much greater burden to society, long-term) when the corporations restructure their jobs out of existence and/or outsource them to India/China. Just who are these people who have "no desire to work"? I've never met one. Unemployment is not enough to live on long term and it stops cold after 6 months in flush economic times, 2 years in times like these. Welfare is also temporary and only helps people with dependent children who would become wards of the state otherwise. These pennies that our bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government throws at the debris left behind by post-industrial capitalism account for a very tiny percentage of the federal budget, compared to the military's share. Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size), and that is for _everyone_ when we retire from working, even the wealthy, and has nothing to do with "desire to work" - if you didn't work your adult life, you'd get no Social Security retirement, end of story.
I agree with most of your statement but you are wrong if you thing every person in America has a desire to work. There are plenty of people in this country that become so use to federal support that they feel entitled to it. That bothers me. When they do get jobs, they lose them because they show up late, and/or don't work very hard. This is a very hard argument because there are plenty of people in this country that really need support (ie. young, single moms). But what bothers me is many people have seemed to lose self pride that I feel previous generations benefited from. When I hear a young man bragging that he does not have to do anything because he's collecting unemployment it really bothers me. I definitely see both arguments and there is no perfect answer to welfare.(done rambling)
Back to topic. I don't want to see every newspaper/ magazine with it's own app. I will hold out till apple has its own magazine/newspaper store and delivers one polished ui. I hope this happens soon rather than later because I fear once these news companies spend all this money developing apps they will be less likely to give in to apple. I think the compromise is that the news companies get my zip code, age, and sex that's it. I am fine with this because the worst they can do is try to target ads at me (ouch). As long as I don't start getting emails, phone calls or mail from advertisers I am ok. I know others disagree but this is where I stand on my privacy. ps. they only get this info if I subscribe, they get no info if I buy one at a time.
I would never give money to a corporation whos sole objective is to demonize Democrats.
Fox actually has two objectives. The first is to make money. Imagine that, a corp that wants to make money. Heavens to Murgatroid! Whereas the NY Times and MSNBC - *whose* sole objective IS to demonize conservatives are purer as they continue to lose and lose and lose it.
His [Murdoch's] publications pander to the lowest common denominator and bring the level of discourse into the mud.
The clearest, most trustworthy journalism I find is often in the WSJ (I don't like ALL the changes, but on balance I'm not freaked out) and the Times of London. While over at the NY Times Op-Ed section it's all mud, all the time, and the editorial policy bleeds buckets of bias into virtually every news story.
He also hasn't mucked up Barron's or the National Geo Channel too badly.
Just who are these people who have "no desire to work"? I've never met one. Unemployment is not enough to live on long term and it stops cold after 6 months in flush economic times, 2 years in times like these.
I guess I hang out in "worser" neighborhoods than you do. As a performing artist, I know many other performers who keep jobs just long enough to qualify for their next round of unemployment as long as they can finagle their leaving to be a "reduction in force," so they can quality. As a landlord (ooo, I'm an evil landlord, so you can disregard me entirely!), one of my tenants tells me about how she does the same thing.
These folks are only taking lessons, though, from the Euros who've consented to support millions of layabouts, "artists" or otherwise for years on end, and, who, with their free schedule reliably turn out in the streets to peacefully or violently protest any attempts to cut any benefit ever conceived, no matter how draining to society as a whole.
Also, who says two years is the end of UI extensions? (*UI refers to Unemployment Insurance, not User Interface and extensions refers to time, not a FireFox plug in.* ;-p ) The Dems, unfettered, will continue to extend them ad infinitum (with borrowed money of course).
Finally, studies show that job-seeking activity increases markedly as someone's UI benefits are about to run out, and that most who get jobs get 'em around that time. Co-inky-dink? Ha.
Welfare is also temporary and only helps people with dependent children who would become wards of the state otherwise.
What planet are you on? Being on welfare is the DEFINITION of being a ward of the state.
And the goal of mega-gov't types is to make sure that every citizen is more and more one of 'em via dependency on gov't-run "entitlements."
These pennies that our bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government throws at the debris left behind by post-industrial capitalism account for a very tiny percentage of the federal budget, compared to the military's share. Only Social Security compares in scale to the military (still only about half its size)
Bizarre non-stats! Even with two active wars, entitlements dwarf all national security activities (even the dubious ones like hapless TSA screenings), and their unfunded liabilities - which will ultimately collapse our currency - loom over the future like a debt Tsunami.
And I wonder if you can even define your word salad cliches of "bloated military-industrial-complex corporate-government" and "post-industrial capitalism." I mean those SOUND scary, all right - but what, e.g., makes "post-industrial capitalism" worse than its industrial predecessor? At least it's environmentally friendlier. And where's the real "bloat"? I say it's in all the nanny state programs and policies that are adding superstructure to gov't faster than they can put up buildings in Beijing - many of which will be as empty as our Treasury when the dreams of statist bureaucrats and politicians bring us down.
Ohh, and since this is AppleInsider, I will keep sending money to Apple, even tho' I believe Steve Jobs tends to vote a straight Dem ticket.