• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Border Wall-No Wall-Infrastructure

Wall? Yes Or No

  • Total voters
    48
  • Poll closed .
<alt>doxygen said:
Infrastructure.

I don't care if a "wall" is built or not.
Click to expand...

Our infrastructure is much more efficient when we don't have a ton of illegals using it.
 
phattonez said:
Our infrastructure is much more efficient when we don't have a ton of illegals using it.
Click to expand...

You're right! Many walk here barefoot then proceed to tear up the highways, bridges and tunnels with their calloused feet!:lamo
 
phattonez said:
Your snark is a little perplexing, given that the California DMV gave out 800,000 drivers licenses to illegals.

California driver licenses given to 800,000 undocumented immigrants
Click to expand...

Lighten up, phat, you have made your position(s) crystal clear in my short time here. Every time the words 'multculturalism or diversity' are posted, you are not far behind. I was poking the bear, you might have posted the CA DMV link when you posted about "tons of illegals". I think a sense of humor is crucial in today's world.......
 
OlNate said:
Who's being crude? Or was the Johnson reference a little spicy? I thought I had sufficiently toned that down... Hmm...anyway...

It's not so much about the percentages, but rather what could be done with all that money. 15% (or 16.2%, for a more accurate number, based on 2015 fiscal year) for the military doesn't seem much...until you realize that 3% of the budget is spent on education. As a result:

U.S. academic achievement lags that of many other countries | Pew Research Center

So...given the degree of specialization required for so many of today's jobs, the disappearance of "low skill" jobs due to automation and shipping the jobs to cheaper labor centers like Mexico, China, and India, is it really fiscally responsible to continue to fund the military when clearly education is so lacking in America? If the two were reversed, America could be come a world leader having an educated, highly skilled work force, driving innovation and overall success, while at the same time driving down the budgetary requirements for social programs, because people would be a lot more wealthy.

And as for companies paying their share...lol...I usually post sources, but this one is so universally known to be true that I'll just direct you to Google, and let you start anywhere. Loopholes are just a start... There's always the Walmart / food stamps example... Government subsidization doesn't just come in the form of tax cuts and loopholes, it also comes in the form of deregulation and putting job numbers ahead of ensuring those jobs pay a living wage. How is that fiscally responsible?
Click to expand...

Its quite fiscally responsible for Walmart. But you were talking about the country, not walmart. And spending trillions more on bridges to nowhere and never ending welfare is not responsible, and exactly how we got to where we are. You post about academic achievement, but we spend more per pupil than almost any other country. 3% of the budget is A LOT of money (120 billion), and thats just the federal level. In my state alone its 50%. When will it be enough?
 
We should build the wall as soon as Mexico gives us the money for it.
 
phattonez said:
Our infrastructure is much more efficient when we don't have a ton of illegals using it.
Click to expand...

To elaborate a bit, there are more efficient ways to police the border than building a "wall" stretching its entire length. A wall is fine for some sections. In fact, there are portions that have been approved for building a wall or adding fencing, but congress has not appropriated funds.
 
jonny5 said:
Its quite fiscally responsible for Walmart. But you were talking about the country, not walmart. And spending trillions more on bridges to nowhere and never ending welfare is not responsible, and exactly how we got to where we are. You post about academic achievement, but we spend more per pupil than almost any other country. 3% of the budget is A LOT of money (120 billion), and thats just the federal level. In my state alone its 50%. When will it be enough?
Click to expand...

I guess when the results match the investment? If those statistics are true (I looked it up, I see where it says that, but based on the results, one can only wonder), then either you have a population that has a lower intelligence than all the countries with better educated citizens while spending less per pupil (I personally don't think this is true), or the money that is being spent per student is being mismanaged compared to what other countries are able to achieve. Problematic, no? if the standard is fine, then it doesn't matter what is currently being spent, it's not enough, if your results are so far behind so many other countries, most of who's GDP is a tiny fraction of the US's. If you don't want to fix the process, and you don't want to fall behind the rest of the world, there's a whole bunch of bullet budget that could be reallocated. I think everyone would be happy if you guys spent less on your military...hehe

Bridges to nowhere? No. But I've been in the states, and compared to the roads we have up there, there are a lot of bridges to somewhere that could use some fixing...hehe.... How about: Re-educating people currently in low skilled labor jobs that are disappearing through outsourcing and automation, so they can continue to support themselves and pay into the system? Demanding corporations pay an adequate wage so that governments don't have to subsidize with welfare and food stamps? Incentivizing companies who create jobs with tax breaks that are attractive, but less than the income taxes the jobs generate? Taxing corporations penny for penny for all environmental impacts requiring government expenditure to address? Closing all loopholes, so that corporations cannot continue to make unfathomable profits while not giving their fair share back to the country in which they have become so prosperous? These items don't seem that outrageous to me, and for the most part either cost nothing, or pay for themselves over a short amount of time.

So, when is enough...that's a good question, honestly, and one I find myself asking as a progressive who used to be a conservative. :) On the surface it seems like a never ending proposition, but there was a time when being the best was the golden standard, and countries competed to get there. As records were set, records were broken, and out of that came so many innovations, up to and including putting a human being on the moon. So, I guess I have to ask...why should it ever be "enough"? I can't think of any reason why we, as a species, should ever stop trying to do better, and look for better ways to remove hurdles to that endeavor. Reducing prioritization on military strength in favor of education and "welfare" (not hand outs, but the overall welfare of the citizenry, perhaps better said by standard of living), and demanding corporations live up to the same standards of good citizenship as the rest of your citizenry (pay your taxes, don't litter, obey the laws, be accountable, don't steal) are all ways of removing hurdles, and in my mind are the right things to do...and has a far favorable economic outlook than the current stagnation, and indeed regression, going on in the states.
 
OlNate said:
I guess when the results match the investment? If those statistics are true (I looked it up, I see where it says that, but based on the results, one can only wonder), then either you have a population that has a lower intelligence than all the countries with better educated citizens while spending less per pupil (I personally don't think this is true), or the money that is being spent per student is being mismanaged compared to what other countries are able to achieve. Problematic, no? if the standard is fine, then it doesn't matter what is currently being spent, it's not enough, if your results are so far behind so many other countries, most of who's GDP is a tiny fraction of the US's. If you don't want to fix the process, and you don't want to fall behind the rest of the world, there's a whole bunch of bullet budget that could be reallocated. I think everyone would be happy if you guys spent less on your military...hehe

Bridges to nowhere? No. But I've been in the states, and compared to the roads we have up there, there are a lot of bridges to somewhere that could use some fixing...hehe.... How about: Re-educating people currently in low skilled labor jobs that are disappearing through outsourcing and automation, so they can continue to support themselves and pay into the system? Demanding corporations pay an adequate wage so that governments don't have to subsidize with welfare and food stamps? Incentivizing companies who create jobs with tax breaks that are attractive, but less than the income taxes the jobs generate? Taxing corporations penny for penny for all environmental impacts requiring government expenditure to address? Closing all loopholes, so that corporations cannot continue to make unfathomable profits while not giving their fair share back to the country in which they have become so prosperous? These items don't seem that outrageous to me, and for the most part either cost nothing, or pay for themselves over a short amount of time.

So, when is enough...that's a good question, honestly, and one I find myself asking as a progressive who used to be a conservative. :) On the surface it seems like a never ending proposition, but there was a time when being the best was the golden standard, and countries competed to get there. As records were set, records were broken, and out of that came so many innovations, up to and including putting a human being on the moon. So, I guess I have to ask...why should it ever be "enough"? I can't think of any reason why we, as a species, should ever stop trying to do better, and look for better ways to remove hurdles to that endeavor. Reducing prioritization on military strength in favor of education and "welfare" (not hand outs, but the overall welfare of the citizenry, perhaps better said by standard of living), and demanding corporations live up to the same standards of good citizenship as the rest of your citizenry (pay your taxes, don't litter, obey the laws, be accountable, don't steal) are all ways of removing hurdles, and in my mind are the right things to do...and has a far favorable economic outlook than the current stagnation, and indeed regression, going on in the states.
Click to expand...

Seems like you agree with my point then. We dont need more spending. We need BETTER spending.
 
jonny5 said:
Seems like you agree with my point then. We dont need more spending. We need BETTER spending.
Click to expand...

Mmm...no, not saying that. I think it's both. Basically, if you have money, to the tune of 15% of your yearly budget, to spend on destroying lives, I think that's a lot of opportunity to improve lives. So, sure, as a first step ensure the money is being spent better, ensure that all the money that is due is being collected, and take the standard of living as far as you can with that...but then after that, see what else can be done. If only we were as passionate in our race to improve the overall standard of living for everyone as we are in our race to demonstrate our ability to destroy everyone, imagine what could be accomplished.
 
jamesrage said:
Again no actual evidence exists of Trump or his minions colluding with Putin, so your claims are false.
Click to expand...

And so.....it appears....that despite your denials, you hero has a special liking for the flavor of Russian testicles.
 
OlNate said:
Mmm...no, not saying that. I think it's both. Basically, if you have money, to the tune of 15% of your yearly budget, to spend on destroying lives, I think that's a lot of opportunity to improve lives. So, sure, as a first step ensure the money is being spent better, ensure that all the money that is due is being collected, and take the standard of living as far as you can with that...but then after that, see what else can be done. If only we were as passionate in our race to improve the overall standard of living for everyone as we are in our race to demonstrate our ability to destroy everyone, imagine what could be accomplished.
Click to expand...

You say destroying, I say saving. Defense spending really isnt worth debating over since its the highest priority of govt and relativly small compared to what we spend on 'improving lives'. Even then, you arent saying, hey, spend less on killing, and give that money back to the people. Rather, youre saying take that money and waste it on more social programs or turtle tunnels.

But hey, I agree on FIRST ensure money is being spent better. Tell me when we do that, and then we can talk about spending MORE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom