3rdnlng Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 18 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Nope, it's just that you are not a serious person and the truth, serious arguments, real facts etc, are wasted on you. You just really suck Tell me Mr. Serious, how will spending more money reduce the deficit?
Tiberius Posted February 11, 2020 Author Posted February 11, 2020 8 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: Tell me Mr. Serious, how will spending more money reduce the deficit? Q-off you moron
3rdnlng Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 26 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Q-off you moron You are the offspring of No Balls and No Brains. You're too chicken to defend your comments about spending more to reduce the deficit and brainless enough to just attack other posters for pointing out your stupidity.
Rob's House Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 Do you guys think we go WR in round 1 or wait until round 2 on account of the depth at the position this year? 1
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 30 minutes ago, Rob's House said: Do you guys think we go WR in round 1 or wait until round 2 on account of the depth at the position this year? Tough to say. I think it really depends on where the most value is at our spot when it’s our turn to pick. This group has shown the willingness to move around to get the guy if they think the value is right, but I don’t see them drafting for need at a fixed spot.
Gary M Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said: I see even you know that your response made no sense and you can't defend it so you just strike out at people. Or he disappears, like over in the global warming thread. 37 minutes ago, Rob's House said: Do you guys think we go WR in round 1 or wait until round 2 on account of the depth at the position this year? Big Bruising RB round 1 I would prefer a free agent WR And a pass rushing DE in the 2nd
Bob in Mich Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 I know about every few weeks or so FoxNews does a piece on welfare fraud or waste. They have the 'food stamps for lobster' story or the 'supposed disabled guy that just won the local ironman contest' story. Perhaps that is why I have found many of my right leaning friends think that at least half of the money spent on safety net programs is fraud. I hear things like, well Bob, I am not talking about you but most of those people on disability are just faking. I think that mindset is why so many want to cut from those types of programs. If you think these people are just stealing from you, why wouldn't you want to cut from them? I don't think that view is based on facts however. If you think these programs are helping those genuinely in need and still see that as the best area for cuts, you may be lacking an empathy gene. To find where I think we need to look to save, I would ask you to examine our annual military spending. If you enjoyed finding the welfare queen's $14K in wasted dollars, I would think examining the military budget for $14 million waste items to cut should make you giddy. Our politicians, D & R's are so bought and paid for by this industry it is disgusting. It should be criminal the percentage of our budget that is spent here. Before you tell me I hate the vets, let me head that off with, a 'bite me'. Support the soldiers, honor all of our commitments to our vets, pay them, but stop spending so much on unnecessary bases and unwanted weapons systems. I would propose a 10 year military spending plan with 5% cuts annually. Put the generals in charge of deciding what they don't actually need and if they can't decide, threaten to let the politicians decide how to cut. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/just-how-wrong-is-conventional-wisdom-about-government-fraud/278690/
Gary M Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: It should be criminal the percentage of our budget that is spent here. I agree waste should be eliminated from all gubmint departments. But let me remind you that national defense is the only thing the fed is constitutionally reguired of the fed. All the other "programs" were invented to buy votes
3rdnlng Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 17 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: I know about every few weeks or so FoxNews does a piece on welfare fraud or waste. They have the 'food stamps for lobster' story or the 'supposed disabled guy that just won the local ironman contest' story. Perhaps that is why I have found many of my right leaning friends think that at least half of the money spent on safety net programs is fraud. I hear things like, well Bob, I am not talking about you but most of those people on disability are just faking. I think that mindset is why so many want to cut from those types of programs. If you think these people are just stealing from you, why wouldn't you want to cut from them? I don't think that view is based on facts however. If you think these programs are helping those genuinely in need and still see that as the best area for cuts, you may be lacking an empathy gene. To find where I think we need to look to save, I would ask you to examine our annual military spending. If you enjoyed finding the welfare queen's $14K in wasted dollars, I would think examining the military budget for $14 million waste items to cut should make you giddy. Our politicians, D & R's are so bought and paid for by this industry it is disgusting. It should be criminal the percentage of our budget that is spent here. Before you tell me I hate the vets, let me head that off with, a 'bite me'. Support the soldiers, honor all of our commitments to our vets, pay them, but stop spending so much on unnecessary bases and unwanted weapons systems. I would propose a 10 year military spending plan with 5% cuts annually. Put the generals in charge of deciding what they don't actually need and if they can't decide, threaten to let the politicians decide how to cut. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/just-how-wrong-is-conventional-wisdom-about-government-fraud/278690/ While the DoD needs to reduce waste and the practice of each entity spending up to their budget each fiscal year we need to avoid the situation that we had with Obama's presidency. His priorities put us in a state of unreadiness. Much of our equipment was out of service and in some areas we were even short on ammunition. Maybe we could have borrowed some from the Dept. of Energy. -)
Keukasmallies Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, LSHMEAB said: Logic dictates that this particular miscreant is either in prison or will soon find his way there. If you think treating freedom like a pawn shop is a good idea, fair enough. Reducing my response to you to a slang phrase: If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. (Please accept my apologies if you don't subscribe to the notion that one should be responsible for one's actions.) Edited February 11, 2020 by Keukasmallies
Bob in Mich Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 1 minute ago, Gary M said: I agree waste should be eliminated from all gubmint departments. But let me remind you that national defense is the only thing the fed is constitutionally reguired of the fed. All the other "programs" were invented to buy votes Buy votes? I guess that is one way to look at safety net programs. Personally, I wouldn't want to live in a place without decent netting. I hate walking by beggars on the street. One never knows are they truly needy or are they scamming. Either way I typically walk away feeling bad for the person and the situation. Now, imagine beggars everywhere around you every day. Imagine grilling a steak while the poor neighbor's kids are looking at you through your fence, or watching people go through your trash bins. I think it is wrong to assume poor people must deserve their fate out of laziness or bad life choices. I support helping the needy. I could never enjoy my own life if so many around me had to beg to survive. Of course we need a strong military....but we have one. Unless several existing countries simultaneously declared war on us, we are not really in danger militarily, even if we stopped military spending completely for the next 10 years. It is a myth that we need to spend this much to compete. It is perpetuated by those profiting off of the myth - politicians and military industry.
Tiberius Posted February 11, 2020 Author Posted February 11, 2020 47 minutes ago, Gary M said: Or he disappears, like over in the global warming thread. What more was there to say? You were saying the its cool to let everything go to sh it because the earth had been different before. See you over there
Gary M Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: What more was there to say? You were saying the its cool to let everything go to sh it because the earth had been different before. See you over there I never said that. I pointed out that the people screaming climate disaster is around the corner don't live like they believe it.
Cinga Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 I'll just leave this right here: https://www.cagw.org/media/press-releases/citizens-against-government-waste-proposals-included-trump-fy-2021-budget
Bob in Mich Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 33 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: While the DoD needs to reduce waste and the practice of each entity spending up to their budget each fiscal year we need to avoid the situation that we had with Obama's presidency. His priorities put us in a state of unreadiness. Much of our equipment was out of service and in some areas we were even short on ammunition. Maybe we could have borrowed some from the Dept. of Energy. -) Just curious, what did you find the most tasty, was it the hook, the line, or the sinker? The implication that we need continue to spend at this level, is the myth. We have been plenty ready for war for about 75 years. If we happened to be short on a particular ammo type, it was likely an ordering screw up and a temporary shortage....or did you feel vulnerable then?
Rob's House Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Tough to say. I think it really depends on where the most value is at our spot when it’s our turn to pick. This group has shown the willingness to move around to get the guy if they think the value is right, but I don’t see them drafting for need at a fixed spot. I hope you're right. Picking for need is how you end up with Aaron Maybin and EJ Manwell. 1
Rob's House Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Gary M said: Big Bruising RB round 1 I would prefer a free agent WR And a pass rushing DE in the 2nd I could go for that. I'm not usually a fan of taking a RB in the first, but it's a late first, and if the talent level is there, go for it. A big bruiser to complement Singletary would make for a dangerous backfield. And you can never have too many good DEs.
IDBillzFan Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 Does anyone here follow the Sabres? I'm not a hockey guy, but I keep seeing comments on Twitter about Eichel's career being wasted in Buffalo. Can someone give me the TV Guide version of why the Sabres suck? GM? Coaches? Bad drafts?
Kevbeau Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 10 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said: Can someone give me the TV Guide version of why the Sabres suck? GM? Coaches? Bad drafts? D.) All of the Above 1
IDBillzFan Posted February 11, 2020 Posted February 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, Kevbeau said: D.) All of the Above Is Eichel starting to be publicly pissed?
Recommended Posts