Hammerstone, you generate some very interesting considerations.
I will only comment on a couple.
When you say
"So they're generating wealth, but it's not passed on to the population," I would agree that is true for the general population, however it is passed on to those within the population who contract (pay) to have them manage their money and invest to increase it.
When I see those digital numbers in my savings and investment accounts increase when I check them online, I feel they have "delivered the goods" they were paid to deliver.
You are correct in what you say about the military.
Liberal San Francisco supervisor Gerardo Sandoval argued on (what was then) Hannity and Colmes that the United States should completely disband our military. Not reduce, disband.
Even Alan Colmes questioned his sanity. When asked who would defend us if we were attacked, be said,
"our police and our coast guard."
http://www.bestandwo...com/v/88401.htm
There is indeed great waste and abuse in the military. I have always advocated addressing that simply because of how great it is.
On the flip side, a strong US military has deterred many a conflict over the last 60 years. A free Europe over the past six decades is proof.
The cost in American lives and finances would have been much greater if a weak military would have not deterred a Soviet invasion of Europe.
Manpower and firepower must be maintained in order to be able to address a threat, often with very little ramp up time.
I would also point out that every single contractor is providing something to defend the U.S. and is employing Americans and providing for their families.
People here that support Welfare for those who can work but don't have no problem with the U.S. getting nothing in return from them.
They seem to miss that military contractors at least give the U.S. something in return for their money, and in the process provide income for millions of their employees and their familites.
Medicare cannot be scrapped. But with Trillions in unfunded liability, it needs to be tweaked, at the minimum.
At least someone is putting ideas forth on how to address it. It is not realistic to simply criticize the plans put forward without presenting a counter-plan.
It is going to have to be fixed, or it will simply end up dying, along with the people on it.
Medicaid and Welfare generate over $100 Billion a year in fraud, waste, and abuse.
Clinton showed that Welfare reform is indeed possible and that those who shouldn't be on the program can be addressed.
Requiring those who are healthy enough, but do not have work to perform other services to justify their checks has been shown to go a long way to convincing those who can work that perhaps entering the workforce is a good idea after all.
If they can't loaf, they figure they might as well find something that they may enjoy, or that gives them potential for growth, promotion and pay raises.
The CBO had a report out a couple of years ago showing that HUGE numbers of medical visits for those on Medicaid were for things that weren't necessary, but that people chose to be seen for anyway since it wasn't going to cost them anything.
The idea was put for that if a simple co-pay of three dollars a visit was implemented, it would greatly reduce frivolous visits and not be an undo burden for the families. Especially since emergency services would have no co-pays.
Other things that have been suggested are now allowing Welfare payments to be used to purchase things such as sodas, candy, steak, shrimp, alcohol, etc. etc. etc.
I was surprised to find that some still still allow using Welfare EBT cards to purchase cigarettes.
It wasn't like that when I lived in MN. I remember when living in our first apartment, our neighbor across the hall offered us a $20 food stamp for $10 in cash so she could buy cigarettes. She was generally upset when my wife told her no.
The US gov't is extremely busy trying to force a healthy diet on school children. The thought is that there is then no reason that families should be able to use gov't money to purchase that wish is not healthy, or can be considered a "luxury" item.
EBT Cards were used to draw cash in Casinos, Strip Clubs and bingo facilities in CA, CO and MI.
http://www.denverpos...ews/ci_20058326
http://www.usatoday....-gambling_N.htm
http://articles.lati...asinos-20100624
How can this possibly happen?
How does this help put food on the tables of "poor" families?
If you can afford to go to casinos, strip clubs and bingo halls and spend gov't money for your entertainment, then perhaps the gov't should investigate just how much money you really should be receiving.
Once these loopholes are gone and these cards can only be used for food (and food that are not luxury foods like steak and shrimp) then the funds will be used for what they were originally designed for.
Also, reduce the amount that can be taken out as straight cash every month.
That will greatly reduce the money being used for things other than food and family needs.
Arrange so that the majority of the funds can only be used in grocery stores or the like.
Since that is mainly what the funds are for, what would be the problem with that?
.