OT: Veteran's Day (OT in this case = On Topic)

[Joe]

So I say if you see a vet

Will do.

jc

[Joe]

So I say if you see a vet

Will do.

jc

[mac davis]

We'd also have a much better equipped military, though I'm strongly against any draft that resembled the one we had..

You have to consider that it's been maybe 30 years since we had a draft... which means that we're hoping that skilled folks like doctors and lawyers will give up well paying practices for 4 years to serve their country.. right..

I am, however in favor of "mac's draft plan", which would require all teens, of both sexes, to spend 2 years in service, be it military, peace core, teaching kids in high poverty areas, etc.. just some kind of public service.. Then, give them some sort of "GI BILL" for education, after they'd seem a bit of life..

I went to school on the GI bill, and the first thing that you notice is that the vets were older, more serious about learning and motivated... YMWV

To those who served... Thank you for your service and welcome home..

mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

[mac davis]

I wasn't planning to do much replying, but So many good points here...

I was drafted and went to Nam.. I wasn't brave, or patriotic, or noble.. just too unaware of word events and passive to think of alternatives...

I have no bad feelings for those who refused the draft or went to another country to avoid it... we all have to make choices and live with them..

However, I do have bad feelings about the people that didn't have to make choices but made careers out of protesting.... IMO, it took guts to give up a life in the States and go to Canada or wherever.. but no guys at all to be safe and warm and call those who did make choices cowards or baby killers..

It's been almost 40 years and I still won't watch anything with Jane Fonda in it.. She should have been shot for treason..

mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

[J. Clarke]

Is there in fact a shortage of physicians in the military? As for lawyers, the fewer of them second-guessing the guys on the sharp end the better.

So what are you going to find for them all to do and what programs are you going to cancel to get the money to pay them? Or are you just going to raise taxes?

Again where does the money come from?

[J. Clarke]

Don't get me started on Jane.

[Dave In Houston]

Why do you think it is that you don't see prisoners working in road gangs and other public works projects? Because it takes the public tax dollars away from contractors/big political contributors.

Dave in Houston

[Dave In Houston]

Where are we getting it now? Last I looked we've been spending $12B/month that we don't have. I read today that the U.S. has spent $1.5 trillion on Afghanistan and Iraq. Aren't the Chinese holding our note(s) ?

[Robatoy]

Whoa, dude...we all know that the draft doesn't make everyone eligible. Cheney got 5 deferrals. Bush got to play with planes (when he showed up) at the Texas National Guard...shall I go on? Or didn't you give that any thought?

[Robatoy]

Unfortunately, too many people already don't care if they vote or not.

r

[Doug Winterburn]

Three times that much is added to the national debt every month because of the social security trust fund and the other 150 or so other federal trust funds. In fact, even with a balanced budget, we add 300-400 billion to the national debt each year. It's the law - the federal government takes the trust fund cash, counts it as federal income, but doesn't count the IOU it puts in the trust fund against the current year budget. Enron would be proud!

We add three times the cost of the war to the debt each year because of trust funds. 4 trillion of our 9 trillion national debt is because of the above mentioned trust funds. It's estimated to reach over 40 trillion of unfunded debt before the payback has to start using higher income taxes on future generations. But not to worry - the liberals are going to fix it by increasing the SS tax rates thereby increasing the debt even faster!

Not to worry - our kids and grandkids will have to repay them with an estimated 85% tax rate, the increases ramping up in ten years or so when SS current expenses exceed revenues.

[Lew Hodgett]

Come to California.

During recent fires, lots of inmate crews were used.

There are lots of ways to feed the political coffers and reward those who feed them.

Lew

[J. Clarke]

And the ones who don't care wouldn't have any right to complain when they didn't like what the government did.

People don't vote these days because the feel that no matter who they vote for it's not going to make their lives better. And there's merit to that view--nobody is running on the platform of cutting government services back to the 1907 level for example and short of doing that we're just going to pay more taxes and have more bureaucrats on our backs no matter who we vote for.

[dpb]

J. Clarke wrote: ...

And if they were to do so, they would get about 0.1% of the vote...

--

[Digger]

Amen brother! And put term limits on these ner do well rich boys in congress so we might have a hope of functioning goverment down the road. (instead of a playpen for people that have never lived in a real world) Kenneth

[Mark & Juanita]

OK, how exactly is that completely voluntary? Sounds kind of on the order of the "voluntary" income tax.

[J. Clarke]

You might be surprised. Everybody doesn't want the huge government we have now.

[J. Clarke]

If I were serving right now I'd be very angry with the characterization of the current makeup of the US armed forces as "category IV types who would not be eligible for the draft". In case you haven't noticed, those "category IV types" are doing a Hell of a job--they've carried out every mission they've been assigned with surprisingly low losses and collateral damage. They are, in fact, doing far better in both regards than the draftees did in Viet Nam. Further, since officers other than medical doctors are not in general draftees, I don't see how a draft would have a significant effect on the composition of the officer corps.

[Dave]

The federal goverment did not give out deferals from the draft in those days. It was the draft boards made up of people in your own home town that gave them out. So again it boiled down to who you know. That's the ones you should bitch to.

[Renata]

An "alternate" perspective:

SS takes in more than it pays out.

The government then "borrows" that excess to pay for its wars and the $700B (this year) military budget (among more minor expenses). Oh, and let's not forget those tax cuts. Did you enjoy your couple hundred? Use it to put gas in the car a for couple/three weeks?

This excess in the SS "trust" has increased from ~20B/yr in Clinton's time to ~$200+B/yr in the early years of W.

The government DOES NOT want to pay those "borrowed" funds back. After all, it ain't very good at living within its means. BTW, ole W has said it ain't gonna happen.

Unfortunately, the time is approaching where SS won't be taking in an excess (for a LIMITED period of time) and the government will not be able to "borrow" from the "trust", and should, indeed, have to pay it back.

Again - the government does not want to do this. So it tells y'all how 'broke' SS is.

The SS tax was increased during Reagan's time, as a long term fix for SS (to, like, 2070 or some such). A tax on the backs of the middle class. It fixed it all right. For tax cuts (etc.). (did you know hedge fund managers pay only 15% on their incomes? did you know that the ultra rich have had their taxes cut ~50% in W's reign? Sure hope you're in one of those groups).

The corporate media machine blathers on and on about how "broke" SS is and pretty soon, told enough times, it's believed. [who said that?]

I realize we all have VERY busy lives, maybe even working a second (or third) job now that food and fuel costs have skyrocketed, are gonna affect the cost of just about every necessity, and no longer can tap our home equity ('cause that's tanking as well) to defray (well, postpone) those costs (much less buy that new Bimmer (Louis Vuiton and BMW stocks fell sharply last week in anticipation of much slower sales in the USA)). But perhaps you could take a short moment to do a teeny bit of research before regurgitating the corporate media's talking points. I mean, internet is likely an easily accessible source, no?

BTW, I don't understand why you think it's all right to spend $ on killing people and enriching "death star" developers but not on (for example) taking care of the country's infrastructure (of various sorts) or it's people (not welfare!, BTW).

So, to summarize. SS takes in plenty of $ to handle it's obligations, but the government's been "borrowing" that $ 'cause there's been a wee bit extra. The time's a commin' where the note comes due, but the ole guv ain't inclined to pay it back, 'cause it sorta can't handle it's "household" finances as is and sure don't have any extra to be payin' back no debt for sumtin' as stupid as an old people's fall back.

Renata [who will strenuously attempt to refrain from additional comment]