Hmmmm...I heard he actually stepped behind wife number.....errr....not sure, but it must be somewhere between 1 and 20.Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
That's what I heard and I'm sticking to it. :p:p
Printable View
Hmmmm...I heard he actually stepped behind wife number.....errr....not sure, but it must be somewhere between 1 and 20.Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
That's what I heard and I'm sticking to it. :p:p
I think this is a wise decision, too. Potentially more harm might have come from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
I heard on news radio that bin Laden's sister had been treated for cancer in the U.S. and the government was able to get a sample of her brain tissue for DNA comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Growing up with the threat of Communism & Nikita Kruschev threatening to bury us was a very real thing back in the 1950's & 1960's with the cold war is what they called it. If was a relief when the Berlin Wall finally fell. That is what I got to grow up with at the time the threat of Nuclear bombs & the threat of Nuclear War.
I can see why youth & adults celebrated the death of bin laden. It is a weight off of their shoulders. A good 23 years of al Qaeda terrorizing the world has been enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonny
Do you really think it's over and done with??? IMO - not a chance. :mad: Just because one man has been eliminated, doesn't eliminate the problem.
Well it is a darn good start! You can run but you can not hide because eventually you will get caught up with.Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
We can only hope that any other Binny's out there will think twice before they act.
You can cut off the head of the snake, but it will live - for a while anyway. There are many more of his wannabe honchos out there, ready and willing to carry on in his name and for his "cause". And they will act, as they have no regard for life - even their own. I think it will be a long time before they can be stopped.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonny
Bush didnt have a chance, he was out of office while they where still gathering intel. Bush also would not have taken credit for a successful operation and would have kept the specifics from the public for the safety of the military members and their families.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marigold2
Obama is putting his ego ahead of the safety of others.
You're kidding, right? Mr. Mission Accomplished televised from an aircraft carrier? He "took credit" for finishing a war that still isn't even finished today!Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
This is what scares me. I wonder if al Qaida will ever be completely stopped.
I also heard that the government of Pakistan was not notified in advance that this would be taking place and some people who live in the area felt that the U.S. forces involved should not have done what they did in a country that was not their own.
No Im not kidding. Bush didnt take credit for anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
The "Mission Accomplished" banner had nothing to do with claiming that the war in Iraq was over. It was stating that major ground combat had ended with the removal of Saddam Hussein's government from power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen
Trust me, we were still training troops at the time, and the emphasis in training was shifting from conventional to unconventional warfare.
Was the banner a mistake? Probably, but the Abraham Lincoln's mission had, in fact, been accomplished.
I really have no cares one way or another whether President Obama "takes credit" for the actions of the military or not. What I care about is the horrendous breaches in operational security which have occurred at the hands of politicians rushing to make political hay out of the operation.
Yeah, but sadly, I think that's another impact of the current 24/7 news hype cycle. Anything happens and it is discussed in minute detail ad nauseum - consequences be darned. I, for one, could do without most of what comes out of the major news stations, and the obsessive nature of talk radio and TV hosts. This is fed by politicians believing that any press mention means votes, and makes many telegenic "sound bite" generators much more famous than they have any right to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
Fair enough. If that's the way they feel then they can put their hand out for foreign aid from some other country, and the next time there is a flood and all of their little straw houses get washed away, they can ask for money from somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by cassiesmom
You got it mate!!!! That's exactly what I think. How many billions of $$$ in aid does the U.S. provide to Pakistan???? - and now we're on the top of their doo-doo list! How about spreading some of that money around at home first - to our own people that need aid. I still believe in the old saying that "charity begins at home"!Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2u2004
Our Giving to Pakistan goes way back. I was a part of a task force back in the late 50's/early 60's where the US government had given Pakistan several of our older destroyers. We were there to train them on those ships so they could defend themselves from the ENEMY OY THE DAY. I was aboard a Carrier so I wasn't directly involved with the actial training. I was just there trapped in Hell (Karachi) for a very long time. It may not be common knowledge that most of the piping for everything onboard ships is made of brass. In the months I was there the ships finally were not sea worthy because the Pakistani's had stripped the ship of all piping, including those necessary to run their engines. Those ships became floating blobs. I'm sure any aid sent there today, 50 years later, is still going down the same rat hole.
Okay - I'm not the sharpest when it comes to politics and government, but how do we do what we (U.S.) do?? Our own government is working in the red - a big deficit - so how can we provide any aid to anybody when we don't have it to give???? The U.S. wants to cut funding for projects and programs here in our own country to help "balance the budget", and at the expense of deserving people and programs, but the handouts continue to everybody and his brother outside of the country. There is the on-going aid (such as to Pakistan), and the emergency aid to countries that fall victim to natural disasters such as tsunamis, earthquakes, and the like. If we don't have - how can we give? Maybe there's someone a lot wiser than I am that can explain it to me,, cause I don't get it!!! :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by kokopup
Let's put the total foreign aid budget in perspective:
It was roughly $32 billion last year.
Much of that comes back to the US through the countries spending it on materials from US corporations, especially the foreign military aid.
While Pakistan is an arguably undeserving recipient of US foreign aid, they receive a pittance compared to others (and I doubt they're going to get much down the road). Without what foreign aid they are given, chances are we wouldn't be able to resupply troops in Afghanistan without invading another impossible country, and UBL would still be alive, as they would have had no reason to allow us to operate anywhere near their boarders.
The deficit for FY 2010 was $1.2 trillion dollars. That foreign aid is a drop in the bucket.
But we're still spending money that we don't have - right??? - be it at home or abroad. Wish I knew how to do that - other than with a credit card - which has to be paid back. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
No one wants their pet project cut.
No one wants to touch Medicaid and Medicare.
No one wants to touch Social Security.
Discretionary and defense spending only account for 39% of the budget. That leaves 61% of the budget as sacred cows. Time to slaughter a few. We're beyond the point of being able to please everyone.
There's no need to slash funds from SS and Medicare. If anything
needs triming back they can start with foreign aid. Did you know we give
aid to adout 153 countries? Current figures are hard to come by as they
are not published every year. Here's just a hint at some past figures.
http://www.vaughns-1-pagers.com/politics/
I think if everything gets looked at, there are likely many people's "pet projects" that could get cut without causing hardship anywhere but that one district or state. Let a politician or two take it on the chin for once, and take some responsibility for the overall deficit.
There is so much we don't know about foreign aid, finance, the stock market what goes on behind closed doors at government meetings.
We all live on this one planet. And what effects one country will effect others.
Yes we give a lot of foreign aid. But being poor in America is different then being poor in other parts of the world.
Being poor in America means you might have to take the bus, rent instead of own a home, shop at Goodwill or Walmart for most things.
It most likely means you are recieving food stamps, Medicaid for Wellcare, Caresource, Buckeye or another insurance.
You get cheaper housing, you might get you gas or electric paid for, you have dental insurance and eye insurance for free. Not all but many poor have these programs.
Being poor in India or Pakistian means not having clean water, not having shoes, a toothbush, cloths, a bowl, a glass. Not having a bed or medicine for vaccines for kids. It means no heat, no electic. No nothing. Maybe you have one blanket to share with three peope. You might never have a pair of shoes in your life time. Watching your child or your brothers and sisters starving to death. That is poor.
Their poor and our poor and a world apart.
Many days MANY when I am tired or sore and I get in the shower I thank God for that shower. I think it just goes back to my mom and her time in the concentration camp but I know that I am TRULY BLESSED, for how many millions of people have never had the simple joy of a warm shower?
I remember my mom thanking God for the food, just simple food, for she remembered a time when she starved and saw others die from lack of food.
A warm shower. Just think of what a blessing that would be to a poor women who has just given birth to have a warm shower, or a man, comimg home dirty and tired how has never bathed in his life or a child just to be clean and go to bed on something soft and comfy and cozy.
Anyway...............
Liz, look at my post above. Our foreign aid budget is about $32 Billion.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizbud
Our deficit for FY 2010 is 1.2 TRILLION.
We could eliminate foreign aid entirely and not even touch the deficit, never mind the debt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I never said it would eliminate the deficit, it is just a good place as any
to START to cut down on spending. Next place we could look is the huge
subsidies given to American "farmers', Oil Companies,,Energy industries,etc,etc.
Okay, so now we're up to 50 billion..........
The Deficit is NOT going to get fixed without doing something about SS, Medicaid and Medicare.
It's simple math, guys, you can't leave 61% of the budget untouched and expect to fix the problems.
And why is that in this day and age ????Quote:
Originally Posted by Marigold2
What "something" would that be? I depend on SS for my existence and am barely scraping by. Medicare is fine if you don't have to use it, but if you have only minor health issues even, the amount you have to put out in co-pay and deductibles could sink you in no time flat. So you then really need to purchase a supplemental plan to cover these expenses, so that's more money to put out from that big :rolleyes: SS check that you receive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
If the government makes cuts in these programs, then I do believe that they will see a MAJOR increase of people filing for welfare and food stamps. What else can they do???? They worked all their lives, paid into the system, expecting to get some of it back when they retired, and now they might be told "sorry about your luck"??? Gives you a real warm and fuzzy feeling, doesn't it??? :rolleyes::mad:
I've been paying into SS and medicare for my working life, and frankly I don't expect to see a single dime of it, which is why I'm making other plans.
Ponzi schemes eventually fail, even if they're sponsored by the government.
In what way do you mean "expecting to get some it back" ?? You mean by Aged or Disability SS ???Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
Well - if the retired and soon to be retired had any inkling that they wouldn't have what they were paying for, I'm pretty certain that most would have made other plans/arrangements too. Too late now to be worrying about we coulda/shulda done, as we didn't expect to be in this boat. However, I believe I did hear that any cuts wouldn't affect anyone already over the age of 55. I just feel sorry for my kids and grandkids.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
You weren't paying anything for yourself. What you paid into SS while you were working was tabbed to pay someone else who was already retired. Of course none of the cuts would affect anyone under 55, why would the congresscritters upset a solid voting bloc?
Craven fools.
SS - retirement - my reward for having worked for 45 years and never having collected anything other than 1 week of unemployment the whole time. Yes - I did have to retire on disability 2 years before what I normally would have at 65, but since I was under 65 I could not get Medicare and I did have to pay for my own private healthcare insurance to the tune of over $500 each month, or do without. At least I qualified for SS tho. Medicare kicked in when I turned 65, but between that and my supplemental health insurance, I still pay about $250 each month out of that big SS check. And I don't even carry prescription coverage, which is more big bucks than I care to dish out, but I take next to no meds - fortunately!Quote:
Originally Posted by wombat2u2004
ETA: We certainly did get off topic here. Sorry.........:(
Yeah. Well I suppose one of the big problems is how the country is going to sustain an ageing population. I believe people of our age group are sort of at the crossroads. I assume the USA and Australia are sort of similar in the way things are run, and how they can approach a problem like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by pomtzu
Compulsory superannuation was introduced here in Australia about 18 years ago, before that, some people had superannuation, but most didn't, because most people believed that when they reached 65 for men or 60 for women, they would get their old aged pension. It's always been that way, so you can't blame people for not providing for their own retirement. Yes, they thought as you do, you work hard all of your life, and you pay into the system, and in turn the system will provide for you when you retire, and that is fair enough.
Why I believe we are at a crossroad, is because everyone now is providing for their own retirement, so the direction has changed, and now the question is.... why they should subsidise someone elses retirement ? ie: The aged population.
I believe that aged and disability pensions should continue to be paid as they always have. There should be no cuts, and the sum of money payable should be adjusted regularly to account for changes in the CPI and inflation etc, so that those people receiving such pensions, can live comfortably. (That happens here in Australia.) And that the govt. shouldn't even consider reducing the lifestyle of those folks.
I also believe that people who have superannuation be allowed a part pension to "make up" any shortfall, so that they would receive the sum equal to the aged pension. (That also happens here in Australia)
And I also believe that the people who disagree with this should take a real long look at themselves, and start to realise a few truths.
Well Said! WombatQuote:
Originally Posted by wombat2u2004
A lot of people in the U.S. live beyond their means & the rest of us end up paying for it. Not everyone is collecting S.S. & a lot of so called baby boomers are out their trying to help the so called X generation from going under. They put in a lot of hours volunteering in schools, rest homes, hospitals, etc., but I guess that doesn't count? We are just a bunch of leeches sucking THEIR got to have it now system dry.
Wom - SS recipients here have not had a cost of living raise in 2 years. The powers that be decided that inflation wasn't all that bad :rolleyes:, and we didn't need any raise. Oh yeah - let's see the powers that be, try to live on what I do each month! :mad:
I wish I had the benefit of a 401K retirement plan all the years I worked, but I didn't. It wasn't until about 10 years before I retired, that the company I had been with already for over 10 years, implemented one. I paid in the max allowable that was met by company funds, but 10 years didn't amount to much. Had I had such a plan all my working years, I would have had a nice nest egg. Again - too little/too late. :(
I worked for over 25 years and paid into social security all that time. I don't feel a bit guilty over drawing it now. I did have a bit of a retirement fund, unfortunately, I had to live on it while I went from doctor to doctor while the government decided on my disability.
Believe me it is no fun living solely on disability. I'd go back to work in a second if I could.
All I can say is for all of you lucky enough to still work, save every cent you can and buy your own home. When you get on limited income there is no money for rent or mortgauge payments. At least not on my budget.
I'm sure all us oldsters will die as soon as we possibly can and get out of the way. :love:
As someone who is sandwiched between the baby boomers and generation X-ers, I have been told since I was a kid that give the economics, not to count on Social Security existing by the time I am able to retire. I fully expect to be working until I am at least 80. I started paying into the system when I began working at 17, but have never regarded it is something I can count on.
Am I glad it exists for those who need it? Of course! That's entirely separate from expecting it to be available for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
There's that pessimist side of you talking again. As a Postal Worker you
will have SS and a Government pension that you'll draw from, right?
And it only makes sense for everyone to also save, invest, and take other
measures to help themselves before they get to retirement.
As a FERS retiree, i will have a small (damned small) annuity payment, SS (yeah, right) and my 401-k equivalent.
I will also (as military retiree) be collecting a military pension at 60.
The only portions I actually count on are the military pension and the TSP.