Unit2Sucks;842850230 said:

---

It was responsive to your comment about taxing the rich more for something they won't benefit from.

How are children supposed to contribute to their healthcare? I think Reagan talked about protecting "Those who, through no fault of their own, must depend on the rest of us”.

As for the people people risking their lives, I think the answer is quite obvious. I would prefer they don't risk their lives when it is unnecessary and I think it is for the most part unnecessary. I don't think we should abandon veterans or everyone in our military but that doesn't mean I support spending so much on something I don't consider to be of comparable value. I don't think we would be less safe with a much smaller military and in fact may actually be safer because we may be less of a target.

EDIT: I will also add that it's a shame you don't value the men, women and children who can't afford healthcare without the help of others.

---

What are you babbling about? Because I want Medicare expanded under the same terms (where everyone pays the same percentage of their wages) so that everyone has insurance, I don't value people who can't afford healthcare?

Why do you even bother responding to my posts if you are not even going to take the time to read what I actually wrote? Seriously. What is the point? I really hope you are a better listener than you are a reader. All I know is that you come across as a complete idiot when you say I wrote something the opposite of what I wrote. You do that so often, I can't help but conclude that you actually don't read. Sycasey got what I wrote and agreed with my hope that we eventually adopt a single payer system that covers everyone for the basic services. You just assume what I write and discuss something completely irrelevant. You really do come across to me as an idiot. Sorry.

And it really is unfortunate that the world doesn't recognize your military genius. Spend less and have a weak military and we will be safer. Great. You could have saved us so much money.

sycasey;842850166 said:

---

Sometimes when a majority of intelligent people disagree with you . . . it means you're wrong about something.

---

Identify the majority please. I have certainly been wrong many times, but the majority I see here is "a yoke".

Cb93 - I will ignore the fake outrage because it's boring and no one cares.

But do you really think we need this large a military to be safe? The one benefit from having 300 million plus guns in this country is that we are more or less immune to invasion by foreign power. I will concede that we have some risk of WMDs and shouldn't be entirely military free, but I do think a number below two percent would be more than sufficient given the size of our economy. We are also geographically quite isolated from our enemies.

So yeah, I don't think you need to be a genius military strategist to realize we are over defended. You just have to have an interest in fiscal responsibility. You guys are always saying you can't just throw money at a problem in hopes of solving it but somehow the military is a black hole where we simply can't spend too much. I'm not buying it.

Unit2Sucks;842850245 said:

---

Cb93 - I will ignore the fake outrage because it's boring and no one cares.

But do you really think we need this large a military to be safe? The one benefit from having 300 million plus guns in this country is that we are more or less immune to invasion by foreign power. I will concede that we have some risk of WMDs and shouldn't be entirely military free, but I do think a number below two percent would be more than sufficient given the size of our economy. We are also geographically quite isolated from our enemies.

So yeah, I don't think you need to be a genius military strategist to realize we are over defended. You just have to have an interest in fiscal responsibility. You guys are always saying you can't just throw money at a problem in hopes of solving it but somehow the military is a black hole where we simply can't spend too much. I'm not buying it.

---

Nice way to change the topic. It went from - you don't care about the uninsured - to - you want to overspend on military - when you were caught in a lie about what I wrote and when you are the only one who brought up military for no apparent reason. I wrote about healthcare and you respond in a nonsensical manner that military provides no value to you. I expressed no opinion whatsoever about our military spending but you can go ahead and blabber on about this nonsense. You seem like the kind of person who never listens but just talks to hear himself talk. What was it that you were saying about Odonto moving the target? Talk about boring.

LOL. I narrowly quoted you in the first post in this exchange. I explained it. It's pretty obvious I'm turning your arguments around. You don't see it. I'm okay with that.

Unit2Sucks;842850253 said:

---

LOL. I narrowly quoted you in the first post in this exchange. I explained it. It's pretty obvious I'm turning your arguments around. You don't see it. I'm okay with that.

---

You truly are not as clever as you think you are. It's like someone who tells a stupid joke that only he thinks is funny, then has to explain the joke, and people still don't get it because it is too idiotic. But of course you are not a bore.

OdontoBear66;842850239 said:

---

Identify the majority please. I have certainly been wrong many times, but the majority I see here is "a yoke".

---

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/28/health-care-polls-republicans-240062

http://www.texomashomepage.com/news/health-news/ama-joins-other-groups-in-opposing-senate-health-bill/751774301

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/27/aarp-slams-senate-gop-health-care-proposal.html

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/06/27/nobel-laureates-voice-opposition-to-senate-health-care-bill/23003392/

Unit2Sucks;842850245 said:

---

Cb93 - I will ignore the fake outrage because it's boring and no one cares.

But do you really think we need this large a military to be safe? The one benefit from having 300 million plus guns in this country is that we are more or less immune to invasion by foreign power. I will concede that we have some risk of WMDs and shouldn't be entirely military free, but I do think a number below two percent would be more than sufficient given the size of our economy. We are also geographically quite isolated from our enemies.

So yeah, I don't think you need to be a genius military strategist to realize we are over defended. You just have to have an interest in fiscal responsibility. You guys are always saying you can't just throw money at a problem in hopes of solving it but somehow the military is a black hole where we simply can't spend too much. I'm not buying it.

---

The military certainly protects us by its presence alone, but in my lifetime the only major military operation that I feel has ever protected me was Tora Bora - and it was bungled.

dajo9;842850329 said:

---

The military certainly protects us by its presence alone, but in my lifetime the only major military operation that I feel has ever protected me was Tora Bora - and it was bungled.

---

Yes, we should have a military but do we need a military of the size and scope we currently have to defend our country? Congress is proposing a $705B military budget (not including veterans affairs, etc.) but including a $65B war budget. Amazing that for the $640B base military budget, you still have to pay extra for wards. The base budget is $37B larger than what Trump proposed which itself was $18B than what Obama proposed.

China spends just over $200B per year on their military. Russia $70B. But somehow we aren't safe without a $700B budget and an annual "war budget" that exceeds the annual military spend of all but one other country in the world. Somehow that sounds fiscally responsible to conservatives.

Unit2Sucks;842850350 said:

---

Yes, we should have a military but do we need a military of the size and scope we currently have to defend our country? Congress is proposing a $705B military budget (not including veterans affairs, etc.) but including a $65B war budget. Amazing that for the $640B base military budget, you still have to pay extra for wards. The base budget is $37B larger than what Trump proposed which itself was $18B than what Obama proposed.

China spends just over $200B per year on their military. Russia $70B. But somehow we aren't safe without a $700B budget and an annual "war budget" that exceeds the annual military spend of all but one other country in the world. Somehow that sounds fiscally responsible to conservatives.

---

Follow the $. Defense contractors, location of large military bases, etc.

NYCGOBEARS;842850351 said:

---

Follow the $. Defense contractors, location of large military bases, etc.

---

Exactly. It's turned into republican welfare not national defense.

I missed this news in the midst of Grump Twitter Tweets:

ISIS Captures Tora Bora, Once Bin Laden's Afghan Fortress (6-14-2017)
Still feel protected???

dajo9;842850329 said:

---

The military certainly protects us by its presence alone, but in my lifetime the only major military operation that I feel has ever protected me was Tora Bora - and it was bungled.

---

sp4149;842850499 said:

---

I missed this news in the midst of Grump Twitter Tweets:

ISIS Captures Tora Bora, Once Bin Laden's Afghan Fortress (6-14-2017)
Still feel protected???

---

Well, I said it was bungled