|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
 Posted - 06/01/2001 : 13:23:28
|
I received this interesting link today about the Federal budget:
http://www.warresisters.org/piechart.htm
Anyone agree, disagree or have comments.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2001 : 20:20:29 [Permalink]
|
Regardless of their point on military past/present they've over simplified their charts. Even the gov chart is fairly simplified.
As for me and former military, I have medical coverage while unemployed through VA. I'm on lifetime meds, I would slowly spiral down to where I was too tired to move without them, then I where would I be? Not productive or even capable of being close to productive.
I guess that would then put me under social (whatever it was) and on welfare, foodstamp etc. Gee, so we go from buying my meds every month and blood test twice a year to paying my rent, buying my food, paying my power...
Um, still think they aren't seeing the entire picture if they are complaining about the funding of the budget. Just wish they'd dump the 'star wars' money into Mars!
Spinnin' my wheels and gettin' no where - fast |
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2001 : 20:44:53 [Permalink]
|
The only part of that chart that really bugs me(and has for some time) is the interest payment on the debt thanks to the voodoo economics of the 80s. There are a few other things too, but I don't think anyone is for doing away with or cutting VA funding.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2001 : 23:10:21 [Permalink]
|
I guess it appears that way to me since they choose to dump VA under Military, many complaints were in regards to military spending. Granted we don't need to dump so much into every new weapon system, but we do need to support those in the military. Especially when in comes to getting the majority of our military personnel off foodstamps and welfare to support their families. (Sorry, my personal greivance with military spending)
Unfortunately, interest is interest, and with that large amount of money the payments are outrageous. As to the creative financing from the eighties, was young enough that I didn't pay much atten to gov finances. (more the fool I)
Spinnin' my wheels and gettin' no where - fast |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/04/2001 : 21:53:40 [Permalink]
|
I did not see any listing for science funding in my hasty scanning of that site. Perhaps "science" is sprinkled into the other topics and is not considered to have any value of its own.
Usually there is a clear line separating the Republicans (low end of funding) from the Democrats (high end of funding) of Science through their votes.
ljbrs
If you KNEW better, you'd DO better!
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2001 : 01:09:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Perhaps "science" is sprinkled into the other topics and is not considered to have any value of its own.
I believe that is the case. Science funding, when compared to many other government expenses, is actually quite low. I think, however, these charts include science in "Physical Resources" or "Physical & Community Development." I know military money pays for a lot of science.
|
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/06/2001 : 20:52:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I know military money pays for a lot of science.
You are absolutely right!
If it were not for science, war machines would have never existed. The incomparable artist, Leonardo (often misnamed "Da Vinci", which referred to the city where he lived), was an important designer of military weaponry.
Nobody seems to be able to get the public excited about science, except for a brief instant, now and then. The public is very fickle.
ljbrs
If you KNEW better, you'd DO better!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
