I was in Arizona for a dealer meeting two years ago. Phoenix to Tuscon. I was very surprised by how much military I saw there alongside the touristy routes and remember thinking what a big impact it must have on the general economy.
It is crazy inefficent that the US Post office has to deliver on Saturdays. In rural Canada, a lot of people do not get mail delivery to their homes, they must go to a super mailbox with 20-50 individual mail boxes.
quote:
It is crazy inefficent that the US Post office has to deliver on Saturdays. In rural Canada, a lot of people do not get mail delivery to their homes, they must go to a super mailbox with 20-50 individual mail boxes.
Not only that, but when I go the post office, I guess they put all of their intelligent people on the routes, cause most (not all there are some good ones) of the people inside are really really dumb and slow.
Art, dig a little deeper in your research of the USPS and you'll find that they DO NOT receive taxpayer money. The only reason they are financially in trouble is because Congress in 2006 required them to PAY FORWARD 75 years worth of Retirement and Medical benefits for future retirees to the tune of $5.5 BILLION per year for the next ten years (ending in 2016). Now I ask are FedEx or UPS or your dealership's Principals ORDERED to pay forward future retiree benefits for 75 years? Operationally the USPS turns a profit every year. Is there waste - sure there is but Congress is the problem. We call them lawmakers but what we need are fewer laws (take a year off WITH PAY, we'll even save money).
As for the Military Spending waste - how can we support the F-35 when the hours of maintenance vs. minutes of flight are calculated at present rates and we know the costs will go up - how can we support cost-plus contracts - where's the incentive to keep costs down? The F-35 is envisioned to replace MOST of the airframes we currently use (fixed wing) from the flying tank, the Warthog, to the F-22 Strike Fighter - just think about that for a moment - the F-35 is a failure now just like the F-22 was a failure when it went into production - pilots black out in the damn thing now.
We don't need more aircraft carriers and battle-groups to support them. We have over 550 foreign bases - Lets close them all down and bring our troops home - we don't need 10,000 troops in Afghanistan in 2014 - hell, they can't do anything now. How many thousands are there in Korea and Japan and Germany. Will employment be hurt?Not is we start rebuilding our infrastructure starting in Sandy's wake in NJ, NY and the NE. We can start repairing the railroad bridges and the old roadway bridges which keep falling down at regular intervals. We've got serious problems and absolutely NO LEADERSHIP in the Executive nor the Congress and now the damn Supreme Court is wasting time on immigration - who the hell cares - if we can just get the able bodied back to work in good paying jobs the the illegals can go back to being food service workers, vegtable pickers, hotel/motel maids and landscapers, like they've always been 'cause no one else wants those jobs. End of rant. Promise to not post on this subject again but don't tempt me. ;-)
As for the Military Spending waste - how can we support the F-35 when the hours of maintenance vs. minutes of flight are calculated at present rates and we know the costs will go up - how can we support cost-plus contracts - where's the incentive to keep costs down? The F-35 is envisioned to replace MOST of the airframes we currently use (fixed wing) from the flying tank, the Warthog, to the F-22 Strike Fighter - just think about that for a moment - the F-35 is a failure now just like the F-22 was a failure when it went into production - pilots black out in the damn thing now.
We don't need more aircraft carriers and battle-groups to support them. We have over 550 foreign bases - Lets close them all down and bring our troops home - we don't need 10,000 troops in Afghanistan in 2014 - hell, they can't do anything now. How many thousands are there in Korea and Japan and Germany. Will employment be hurt?Not is we start rebuilding our infrastructure starting in Sandy's wake in NJ, NY and the NE. We can start repairing the railroad bridges and the old roadway bridges which keep falling down at regular intervals. We've got serious problems and absolutely NO LEADERSHIP in the Executive nor the Congress and now the damn Supreme Court is wasting time on immigration - who the hell cares - if we can just get the able bodied back to work in good paying jobs the the illegals can go back to being food service workers, vegtable pickers, hotel/motel maids and landscapers, like they've always been 'cause no one else wants those jobs. End of rant. Promise to not post on this subject again but don't tempt me. ;-)
Chuck:
I agree with the 550 foreign bases, there is no need for that many. My son is to be deployed to Afganistan in June of 2013. Not one country has ever won in Afganistan, it is what is is a tribal nation that relies on growing poppy for revenue. It will be probably be the same in 100 years from now. There's not much we can do there, and the "mayor of kabul" does not have influence beyond the city limit.
As far as military, CHINA is building and will continue to build as long as they have revenue. We need to have strong deterrent to make sure that China does not want to dominate the world. History repeats it self and one day there will be another napoleon, hitler and mussolini along with the various other crackpots that have come and gone. I'm all for giving the military what it needs to maintain our way of life and yes we could have more money to sustain our advanced military technology if we closed half of the bases.
If we don't have strong military then someone else will and that someone else is CHINA. It may not happen in our lifetime but I'm sure one day it will. In 50 years China has doubled their population to almost 1.4 billion chinese, in another 50 years they could reach 2.8 billion that's a lot of people to feed and they as others will set their sites to maintain their way of life.
When it comes to illegals, the US turned a blind eye and let them come in for years without doing anything to stop the problem until it was too late. I've read some articles that stated that the US needed a cheap labor force and thus the reason for turning a blind eye. Now the problem is out of control.
Whatever way you slice it, the people in Congress, the Senate and the President all need to be locked in a building and not be allowed to take leave until they have solutions to the nations problems. If this were to happen I'm sure we would have a solution rather quickly.
Too many people want their piece of the pie in government and we as citizens let this happen for many decades because most of our countries population does not bother to vote except in a Presidential Election.
There needs to be a strong third party however neither the democrats nor the republicans will allow that to happen. Laws are made for the rich by the rich, because we don't hold them accountable. When was the last time an average joe made it to the whitehouse?
That's my rant for the night!
I agree with the 550 foreign bases, there is no need for that many. My son is to be deployed to Afganistan in June of 2013. Not one country has ever won in Afganistan, it is what is is a tribal nation that relies on growing poppy for revenue. It will be probably be the same in 100 years from now. There's not much we can do there, and the "mayor of kabul" does not have influence beyond the city limit.
As far as military, CHINA is building and will continue to build as long as they have revenue. We need to have strong deterrent to make sure that China does not want to dominate the world. History repeats it self and one day there will be another napoleon, hitler and mussolini along with the various other crackpots that have come and gone. I'm all for giving the military what it needs to maintain our way of life and yes we could have more money to sustain our advanced military technology if we closed half of the bases.
If we don't have strong military then someone else will and that someone else is CHINA. It may not happen in our lifetime but I'm sure one day it will. In 50 years China has doubled their population to almost 1.4 billion chinese, in another 50 years they could reach 2.8 billion that's a lot of people to feed and they as others will set their sites to maintain their way of life.
When it comes to illegals, the US turned a blind eye and let them come in for years without doing anything to stop the problem until it was too late. I've read some articles that stated that the US needed a cheap labor force and thus the reason for turning a blind eye. Now the problem is out of control.
Whatever way you slice it, the people in Congress, the Senate and the President all need to be locked in a building and not be allowed to take leave until they have solutions to the nations problems. If this were to happen I'm sure we would have a solution rather quickly.
Too many people want their piece of the pie in government and we as citizens let this happen for many decades because most of our countries population does not bother to vote except in a Presidential Election.
There needs to be a strong third party however neither the democrats nor the republicans will allow that to happen. Laws are made for the rich by the rich, because we don't hold them accountable. When was the last time an average joe made it to the whitehouse?
That's my rant for the night!
Art, I am a veteran of Vietnam conflict (USMC) and a member of Veterans for Peace. I've had three bumperstickers on my car since 2004, "Bring them home NOW", "...and this time take care of 'em when they get here" (custom made) and "Another Veteran against War in Afghanistan" - I wish your son well and hope he takes his glove (and a spare) and a bat and ball with him - that's diplomacy. Don't worry about China they've tried to get into Vietnam twice in recent years, they can't . . . it is not the same China army MacArthur fought.
My hat's off to you for serving, I was a few years to young for the draft.
I also served in the Army (but was never deployed) and am for a sensible cut in the military budget.
Heck, even the Defense department is for a cut in defense spending (they self-identified $136B of cuts that congress then failed to cut).
Seems those most eager to not appear "soft on defense" are those against the cuts.
Heck, even the Defense department is for a cut in defense spending (they self-identified $136B of cuts that congress then failed to cut).
Seems those most eager to not appear "soft on defense" are those against the cuts.
In June 2016, it must be embarrassing to be personally associated as a Republican. Donald Trump is so associated with vague taking points and un-veted out political positions that he cannot possibly win the general election regardless of how dumb his "favorite" Americans are.
I understand that American politics is based upon tribes that will always vote for their political affiliation but this election season will feature the permanent demise of the last eight years of the obstructionist Republican party.
Who could possibly vote for a party that knowingly and permanently damaged the credit worthiness of the USA?
Donald Trump's unfavorability level is at 70%, the highest since announcing his presidential campaign, according to a new poll out Tuesday.
According to the new Washington Post/ABC News survey, 7 out of 10 American adults have an unfavorable opinion of the Republican presumptive presidential nominee. That's a significant reversal from a few weeks ago when Trump's polling seemed to be trending upward. Just 29% reported having a favorable opinion of Trump in the new poll. Among Hispanic respondents, that number is 89% unfavorable.
The fact that the democrat and republican parties are essentially the same these days are an incentive to shake things up with Trump. The latest congress was elected to stop Obamas shredding of the Constitution, and they have done nothing. Might be time for a businessman to eliminate some of these massive federal agencies and put us on a more fiscally responsible track. Trump has stirred up a hornets nest with immigration, we cant continue to have open borders. The media propaganda machine and foreign donors will fight hard for their bought and paid for candidate Hillary.
Are you implying that the for the first time in many election cycles that the Republican/ NRA party will have less money to spend on media than the Democrats?
Fox, CNN, CBC, BBC, Reuters, CNBC, TSN
The world press is reporting great concern over the possibility that Trump could become President.
I checked Snopes.com on 7/6/2016. They have nothing on this but they are decidedly left leaning so they may never verify it. Here is where a large part of the National Debt is.
We all know this but need to be reminded! It's your and my dollar.
Just Perks?
Salaries for Personal Secretaries for the U.S.A. President's wives
This will get your blood circulating! Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary from her husband's salary.
Total Personal Staff members for other first ladies paid by taxpayers:
Mamie Eisenhower:--- One-- paid for personally out of President's salary.
Total number of Personal Staff Members paid by Tax Payers.
Jackie Kennedy: -------One
Lady Bird Johnson-----One
Pat Nixon ----------------One
Betty Ford----------------One
Rosaline Carter: --------One
Barbara Bush: ----------One
Hilary Clinton: ----------Seven
Laura Bush: --------------One
Michele Obama: --------Twenty-two
Michele Obama's personal staff:
One.. $192,200 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
Two.. $160,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady)
Three..$133,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (White House Social Secretary for Mrs. Obama)
Four.. $122,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Director of Communications for the First Lady)
Five.. $120,000 - Winter, Melissa (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Six.... $110,000 Medina , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Seven.. $104,000 - Lilyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
Eight.. $95,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
Nine.. $90,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Project for the First Lady)
Ten.. $85,000 - Burnough, Erinn (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Eleven.. $84,000 - Reinstein, Joseph B.(Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Twelve.. $82,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First Lady)
Thirteen.. $80,000 Fitz, Alan O.(Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
Fourteen.. $77,500 - Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
Fifteen.. $72,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary To The First Lady)
Sixteen.. $70,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide To The First Lady)
Seventeen.. $65,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)
Eighteen.. $63,000 - Tubman, Samantha a (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
Nineteen.. $60,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Twenty.. $56,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)
Twenty-One.. $55,000 - Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)
Twenty-Two.. $55,000 - Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
Total $2,075,200 in annual salaries -
all for someone we did not vote for and apparently have no control over.
5 are Muslim and 13 are African-American that's 18 out of twenty two .
There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created
such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life.
This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One on all ALL Trips, Europe included.
As of 11/15/2015 the Obama Family has spent over 1.3 Billion dollars on personal family trips.
They were personal not political or Government related.
Copyright Canada Free Press:
Yes. The Canadian Free Press had to publish this, perhaps because America
no longer has a free press and the USA media is too scared that they might
be considered racist or suffer at the hands of Obama if any of them
published this