New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Politically speaking

B

Brian Masters

Council Member
Wouldn't it be better politically to take care of your own at home, rather than send you tax dollars out of country to people who don't even really like your country?
 
I will address it.
I would prefer that we keep our money at home. However, it seems we "buy" the peace from some countries and although it seems like a bad thing to do, it might be, in the long run, a good thing. Pakistan for example. We know that they are a bunch of hooligans who back stab us any chance they get. But they have nukes. We pay them to not use those nukes and they understand on some level that if they do use the nukes, we could bomb them into a glass parking lot and then they wouldn't get our money. Of course, we're such putzes that even if we did bomb them to smitherines, we'd pay to fix them back up. But they can't be sure. So...........we buy the peace or as much of it as they are willing to give.

I suspect there are numerous countries where the same basic thing is going on.

When you figure that only 1% of our tax money goes international, it's not a heavy price to pay. LINK
 
Brian Masters said:
Wouldn't it be better politically to take care of your own at home, rather than send you tax dollars out of country to people who don't even really like your country?
Click to expand...

Sometimes sending tax dollars go other countries does help take care of our own at home. We are a global community and have to interact. What specifically are you talking about - it would be easier to respond if you were more specific with your question.
 
Jen said:
I will address it.
I would prefer that we keep our money at home. However, it seems we "buy" the peace from some countries and although it seems like a bad thing to do, it might be, in the long run, a good thing. Pakistan for example. We know that they are a bunch of hooligans who back stab us any chance they get. But they have nukes. We pay them to not use those nukes and they understand on some level that if they do use the nukes, we could bomb them into a glass parking lot and then they wouldn't get our money. Of course, we're such putzes that even if we did bomb them to smitherines, we'd pay to fix them back up. But they can't be sure. So...........we buy the peace or as much of it as they are willing to give.

I suspect there are numerous countries where the same basic thing is going on.

When you figure that only 1% of our tax money goes international, it's not a heavy price to pay. LINK
Click to expand...

First we shouldn't be paying them not to use their nukes & if they do use them well....They know the results that will bring.

Second that 1% is a false number, there are dollars that are in the black (Secret) budget so really we have no idea how much of our money we give away.
 
"Sometimes sending tax dollars go other countries does help take care of our own at home."

Do you have any examples of that?

As far as specifically what I'm talking about, Nothing specifically. I am making a blanket statement.

That it would be better to spend our tax dollars on us here at home, rather than give them away to countries like Afghanistan or Iraq, or Saudi Arabia or even Israel.
 
Brian Masters said:
"Sometimes sending tax dollars go other countries does help take care of our own at home."

Do you have any examples of that?

As far as specifically what I'm talking about, Nothing specifically. I am making a blanket statement.

That it would be better to spend our tax dollars on us here at home, rather than give them away to countries like Afghanistan or Iraq, or Saudi Arabia or even Israel.
Click to expand...

Or any other country? No matter how it impacts us at home? No matter how many people in other countries are suffering? No matter what positive impact down the road could happen as a result of our investment? I think most black and white answers (e.g., we should never invest our money in any other country no matter what) are foolish and short sighted. I also believe that people (yes, even people who don't live in the US) are valuable. So is preservation of species and natural resources, even if those species and natural resources are not indiginous to the US. Do you think the world should have just left the people devestated by the massive tsunami to die? Do I necessarily agree with all foreign investments by the US? No. Do I think they should be shut off completely? Absolutely not.
 
BobbyT said:
Or any other country? No matter how it impacts us at home? No matter how many people in other countries are suffering? No matter what positive impact down the road could happen as a result of our investment? I think most black and white answers (e.g., we should never invest our money in any other country no matter what) are foolish and short sighted. I also believe that people (yes, even people who don't live in the US) are valuable. So is preservation of species and natural resources, even if those species and natural resources are not indiginous to the US. Do you think the world should have just left the people devestated by the massive tsunami to die? Do I necessarily agree with all foreign investments by the US? No. Do I think they should be shut off completely? Absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Now you're just trying to put words into my mouth.

So again I ask you for examples???? Got any?
 
Brian Masters said:
Now you're just trying to put words into my mouth.

So again I ask you for examples???? Got any?
Click to expand...

You said you were making a blanket statement. I responded to a blanket statement. I asked you for specifics and you had none so I had to go with my assumption that your blanket statement applied to any funding sent overseas for any reason.

I gave you an example - humanitarian aid.
 
BobbyT said:
You said you were making a blanket statement. I responded to a blanket statement. I asked you for specifics and you had none so I had to go with my assumption that your blanket statement applied to any funding sent overseas for any reason.

I gave you an example - humanitarian aid.
Click to expand...

here is what you said:


Or any other country? No matter how it impacts us at home? No matter how many people in other countries are suffering? No matter what positive impact down the road could happen as a result of our investment? I think most black and white answers (e.g., we should never invest our money in any other country no matter what) are foolish and short sighted. I also believe that people (yes, even people who don't live in the US) are valuable. So is preservation of species and natural resources, even if those species and natural resources are not indiginous to the US. Do you think the world should have just left the people devestated by the massive tsunami to die? Do I necessarily agree with all foreign investments by the US? No. Do I think they should be shut off completely? Absolutely not.



Can you underline the words "humanitarian aid. " in that paragraph?


I would have been willing to discuss it with you, but first you try & put words in my mouth, then you blatently lie & try to say you said something which clearly you did not say.


Dismissed.
 
Can you underline the words "humanitarian aid. " in that paragraph?
Click to expand...

You don't consider this (below) "humanitarian aid"?

Do you think the world should have just left the people devestated by the massive tsunami to die? ~BobbyT
Click to expand...

If you just "dismiss" everyone here as beneath your notice, you will have no one to debate/converse with. I assure you that you are not qualified to "dismiss" BobbyT.
 
Friday13 said:
You don't consider this (below) "humanitarian aid"?



If you just "dismiss" everyone here as beneath your notice, you will have no one to debate/converse with. I assure you that you are not qualified to "dismiss" BobbyT.
Click to expand...

Then maybe bobby t shouldn't try putting words into my mouth & should say what he means, rather than hope for others to infer what he tries to imply.

I
 
Brian Masters said:
Then maybe bobby t shouldn't try putting words into my mouth & should say what he means, rather than hope for others to infer what he tries to imply.

I
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure what you're trying to accomplish here. I asked you to specify what you meant by your original statement. You replied that it was a blanket statement. Since your original statement was about whether the US should send any tax dollars to other countries, and you declined to specify in what respect you meant US dollars (stating it was a "blanket statement") I took that to mean all US dollars to any foreign nation for whatever reason. My example was humanitarian aid (hint: that means when we send money to help with national disasters of other nations, which would include humanitarian aid to countries affected by the massive tsunami). If that's not what you mean, and you insist I am putting words in your mouth, please specify what exactly I am saying about your position that is incorrect. I'm not trying to be obstructive here or provocative, or to put words in your mouth. I am happy to discuss with you whatever it is that you mean, if you will just specify what it is. If your answer is to "dismiss" me, then nevermind and I won't bother replying to you again.
 
You were tripped up by your own TP and have been backpedaling on it throughout the thread. "I didn't mean what I wrote" is about as weak as it gets. Both sides called you on it. Take your spanking and try again.
 
zzigzzag said:
You were tripped up by your own TP and have been backpedaling on it throughout the thread. "I didn't mean what I wrote" is about as weak as it gets. Both sides called you on it. Take your spanking and try again.
Click to expand...


Brian Masters must be a pseudonym for Mitt Romney? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top