What interest does private enterprise have in any of those things? Who's going to pay private insurance to repair roads and bridges on public highways and interstates? Unless you want to pay for it every time you drive it.
Private enterprise does have a hand in education and tuition assistance, however the publicly funded alternatives are usually cheaper.
There are a couple companies getting into space exploration, but that is far from the only thing NASA does.
Oh and private companies that spend their own money doing research are the reason everything in the medical field is extremely, sometimes prohibitively, expensive.
Personally, I'd do what we have historically done with returning soldiers. Turn them loose in the free market and let them find their own way to success or failure on their own. History shows that military members are suited to many fields of endeavour, not just cops or border guards. Why do you limit them and slot them into so few careers? They're not idiots that can only do things with guns. The guys who returned from WW2 shaped our economy for decades and very few of them decided they were only good enough to be cops or border guards. Our economy could stand a boost and getting these guys off the government teat wouldn't be a bad thing. Welfare, in many forms is bad for the country and its recipients.What would you do with the vast number of military personnel removed from the military? Police departments are short on numbers, but most of them won't take a person straight out of the military right now. Our borders are defensless. Would you recommend these personnel be used in some way to defend our borders from illegal crossings from Mexico and Canada? If not, what would you do with them?
What would you do with the vast number of military personnel removed from the military? Police departments are short on numbers, but most of them won't take a person straight out of the military right now. Our borders are defensless. Would you recommend these personnel be used in some way to defend our borders from illegal crossings from Mexico and Canada? If not, what would you do with them?
Personally, I'd do what we have historically done with returning soldiers. Turn them loose in the free market and let them find their own way to success or failure on their own. History shows that military members are suited to many fields of endeavour, not just cops or border guards. Why do you limit them and slot them into so few careers? They're not idiots that can only do things with guns. The guys who returned from WW2 shaped our economy for decades and very few of them decided they were only good enough to be cops or border guards. Our economy could stand a boost and getting these guys off the government teat wouldn't be a bad thing. Welfare, in many forms is bad for the country and its recipients.
Nearly everyone is going to be on gov. assistance through the ACA so I don't see those programs getting cut. Cuts in education spending would be beneficial. What more is a person going to gain education wise by throwing more money into that system. Pouring more money on it doesn't make a particular degree any better.
It's not peace time I'm worried about. When we really need one, there won't be enough time to grow the military to a point where it can ward off a real threat. Of all the things we spend money on in this country, the military is one I don't bat an eye at. Not to say that all military dollars are good expenditures. Which brings up my next point. You are equating the size of the military with military spending. While there is usually a correlation, it is not necessarily true that you have to decrease the size of the military to decrease the spending.I agree that armies have a purpose, but do we really need one as big as ours even in peace time?
That's a good question. But if your answer to it is 'no' just because you don't want to spend money on it, I would argue that's a very poor reason to diminish the size of the military.The US has the world's first AND second largest Air Forces. We have, what, seven aircraft carriers? Is all that really necessary?
Yes, it would be so bad, because ultimately, every dollar of money spent by the federal government was taken from the people of this country for the benefit of a select few. Wealth redistribution by force is slavery. Can you honestly get behind that?Also, would it be so bad if some of the money spend on these wars would have been spent on medical research or tuition assistance or infrastructure or NASA? The bill for the Iraq War alone is around $1.2 trillion. If you add in estimations for long term veteran care, I've seen estimations of $6 trillion. Surely that money could be better spent elsewhere. Or better yet for fiscal conservatives, wouldn't it be nice to have a surplus for a change?
Now you're changing the argument. It would seem that it's only "excessive" if it's for a cause that you don't (fully) support based on the comments you've made in this thread. It's not really the amount of money that bothers you, is it? Just what the money is being spent on. FYI: social welfare programs are #1 and 2 in the federal budget. And all social welfare spending accounts for about 60% of the total. I am not a Republican, but I can tell you THAT is excessive.I agree but at what point is the spending considered excessive for Republicans?
Let's just look at that...
I don't see the phrase "...some of the money that has been spent on these wars..."
So what is your limit?
That was but one example. Have you looked at the number of unemployed vets? I'm not talking about retirees who have something coming in every month and can go to the VA when they are sick. I'm talking about those who are RIFed do to a reduction in force. I understand they aren't dumb, I'm one of them. I fully agree that people should be taken off of the government's teat, but lets start with those who are unproductive because it's their personal choice. Military personnel are workers and should not be numbered among those on the social programs.
Still waiting... At what dollar amount would you set your limit on all those social/entitlement programs, Pooty?
There's no reason we cannot take the military off the teat as well as the non-productive. Both are a drain on our resources. We need to downsize the military, as well as the social programs. People who view the military as a jobs program are a serious part of the problem. Everyone has their pet projects they want preserved. Well, the sad fact is we can no longer afford them. We cannot be the worlds policeman, spending our treasure and blood for political whims. Nor can we afford the welfare state. Everyone who thinks we can and should support either is just happy with the status quo and the continuing involuntary servitude of our children. No thanks. Plenty of room for cuts all across the board. Welfare is too big and so is our military. We're way past the time where they need to be cut. My children were not born to be slaves to anyone.That was but one example. Have you looked at the number of unemployed vets? I'm not talking about retirees who have something coming in every month and can go to the VA when they are sick. I'm talking about those who are RIFed do to a reduction in force. I understand they aren't dumb, I'm one of them. I fully agree that people should be taken off of the government's teat, but lets start with those who are unproductive because it's their personal choice. Military personnel are workers and should not be numbered among those on the social programs.
I strongly disagree with this statement. I know several people who got married while they were in the military just so they could get the BAH and family separation pay. They would make an agreement with a female friend from back home to get married for as long as they were in the military, then divorce when they got out.
You asked a legitimate question about the military and its associated spending...now to democrats: Where in the Constitution can you point to where spending on virtually all that stuff is a power delegated to the federal government?
Still waiting... At what dollar amount would you set your limit on all those social/entitlement programs, Pooty?
Sorry I didn't word some of my replies to your liking. After all, I'm just a socialist who wants all of your money so it can be evenly distributed to everyone. Except Obama. He deserves more money than anyone else.
Sorry I didn't word some of my replies to your liking. After all, I'm just a socialist who wants all of your money so it can be evenly distributed to everyone. Except Obama. He deserves more money than anyone else.
If two universities have the same degree but one is $1000's higher, it must be better.That's kind of funny. With tuition prices rising every year, it would seem that colleges and universities believe that the more money you put into your education the better it is.
It's not peace time I'm worried about. When we really need one, there won't be enough time to grow the military to a point where it can ward off a real threat. Of all the things we spend money on in this country, the military is one I don't bat an eye at. Not to say that all military dollars are good expenditures. Which brings up my next point. You are equating the size of the military with military spending. While there is usually a correlation, it is not necessarily true that you have to decrease the size of the military to decrease the spending.