Site

Categories

Discover and discuss the manliest content on the Web

YOUR money...well spent?

14 comments

  • jordan

    jordan 6 years, 3 months ago

    It's never considered well spent until you or your loved ones legitimately need a piece of it.

    Reply

    • Bradleyd16

      Bradleyd16 6 years, 3 months ago

      Completely agree. But is it government's responsibility to provide in those circumstances?

      Reply

      • Nickolas

        Nickolas 6 years, 3 months ago

        Agreed. How much fraud and waste is in the system? Time and time, and countless research states that Gov Co. does not use money wisely or provide it to those that are truly in need.

        Reply

      • jordan

        jordan 6 years, 3 months ago

        No one else seems to be stepping up to the plate currently. Helping people (be it heath or national defense) is naturally a money sucking activity, not one that generates profit. I won't argue there is plenty of waste, but there is waste everywhere. What percentage of religious tithes go directly to helping the needy?

        Reply

        • Chet_Manly

          Chet_Manly 6 years, 2 months ago

          Why do you think that is, that no one else is stepping up to the plate on financial assistance towards social issues?

          Reply

          • jordan

            jordan 6 years, 2 months ago

            Financial assistance for social issues, military included, doesn't generate direct profit in return, so those activities are not a desirable venture for businesses or organizations.

            Reply

            • Chet_Manly

              Chet_Manly 6 years, 2 months ago

              Anything can be profitable with enough barriers removed, even healthcare. I see government as a barrier to effectively dealing with health care because the government is in the business of staying in power by maintaining control over healthcare competition, regulations, & and redistribution of assets. The government (and large monetary interests involved at the federal level: those who can pay to play) has an interest in healthcare NOT being marketable in the smaller private sector. Remove the federal barriers and you will immediately have a more competitive market, lower costs, and more players wanting to be involved. The downside being people will be on their own to decide for themselves what is in their best interests. The poor and the stupid will be adversely affected. I'm all for helping the poor on the local/family level. My question was actually regarding why no one seems to be stepping up to the plate to assist.

              Military spending is a separate topic. It, providing for the common defense, is one of the few things upon which our taxes are actually supposed to be spent. I believe there are some serious problems with our DoD spending but more as a result of government contracts on various platforms and supplier/contractors milking these flaws. The problem is NOT with the amount of spent on the average military personnel.

              Reply

              • geekmonkeyblake 6 years, 2 months ago

                The problem with applying market capitalism to such things as services is the inability for the purchaser to compare products and shop around for the biggest bang for the buck. It's often "take what you can get."

                Reply

            • Chet_Manly

              Chet_Manly 6 years, 2 months ago

              Please don't take this the wrong way. It's only a little impassioned, not angry at all. If you disagree with anything, I'd love to hear what you have to say on the topic since due to your first comment above, you have obviously spent time thinking about this as well.

              Reply

              • jordan

                jordan 6 years, 2 months ago

                It's a big issue, that's for sure! My premise is that the feds ended up handling the funding because no one else would, regardless of how it *should* be. Yes, ideally, things *should* be handled at the family, local, & private industry level, but duties get shoved up to the feds when those entities aren't cutting the mustard. I totally agree that things should be handled differently, but 50+ years of US Medicare history doesn't say much for American personal responsibility.

                Reply

                • Chet_Manly

                  Chet_Manly 6 years, 2 months ago

                  Is there evidence things weren't being handled well before the government programs came along, or were things just different and he handled according to technology avaliable at the time? I believe social programs may have been well intended but weren't filling a large void. Designed to help a very small group, (those with absolutely no other options) they have been grown abused, & deincentivize assistance from other areas.
                  I do not know, but if they were phased out, I believe the American people would step back up and meet the needs of their friends and neighbors....but perhaps that is only my naïveté.

                  Reply

          • Bradleyd16

            Bradleyd16 6 years, 2 months ago

            In my opinion, help needs to come first from family, then friends/community, then local gov't. The federal gov't should be the very last place that people go to get help, and certainly they should not be receiving the amount of help that they are. Obama phones!?...just an example. And I do not think that the military should be lumped into the same group as the social issues. Military expenditure truly is the government's responsibility.

            Reply

            • Chet_Manly

              Chet_Manly 6 years, 2 months ago

              Right on! Keep both government and financial assistance as local and near to the family/friends level social circles as possible.
              (But these ideas are just crazy talk, I know...)

              Reply

  • Scott88

    Scott88 6 years, 2 months ago

    Social Security and Medicare are not "Entitlements" We pay into those for our selves, at least it's suposed to be.
    People that paid into them should be the only ones to benefit.
    They should have set up another program years ago if they had to have money's for their entitlements and fund rais for it.
    I mean look how much money they can rais for campains!
    Oh, but that would be too much work for the government to fund raise constantly! Or better yet learn how to make some freekin money and stop taking what they didn't earn!
    Ok, that's the end of my rant. lol

    Reply