|
- - - CNBC Special Report - - - California in Crisis tonight @ 9:00pm ET/6:00pm PT (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Are you joking? |
No I literally did not get the sentence, are you trying to say we do get it or dont get it or what? |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
No I literally did not get the sentence, are you trying to say we do get it or dont get it or what? |
NY state gets a ton of Homeland Security money to protect all the attractions so that the tourists don't get killed by terrorists, which is a big chunk of the federal benefits that the state receives. Spending money on security systems created in other states, OT for police, etc. isn't like the infrastructure spending that other states get. Other states get things that benefit the citizenry, we just waste money trying to "prevent" attacks.
As an example, NY received $283 million for this stuff (http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0618091.html). Washington state got $30 million (http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...ashington-state). But then again, what does Washington state have to protect, the Space Needle? |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
Try 1,685 thermonuclear warheads? Not to mention our entire pacific boomer fleet... :rolleyes: Thats not including the warheads that are at base when those boomers are in port, thats 192 warheads a boat btw. ;)
Washington State has more nuclear weapons than all the other nuclear weapons nation states in the world combined except for Russia.
So yea, maybe we should get a little more, cause frankly I don't give a if someone wants to smash a couple buildings in NYC, but I sure do give a massive if someone wants to steal a ton of nuclear warheads.
Also forgot Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Eastern Washington, there is some seriously toxic laying out in the desert there... :nervous: |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
As long as you agree to keep Nancy and her silly methods of funding healthcare
Out of curiousity, what "federal bull from the rest of the US" are you talking about? |
The amount of federal tax money that, if we were separate, would go to just what is now California. The innumerable amount of wealth that could be generated for us as a people in this place to provide things like universal healthcare, better roads, much better education, etc.
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
NY state gets a ton of Homeland Security money to protect all the attractions so that the tourists don't get killed by terrorists, which is a big chunk of the federal benefits that the state receives. Spending money on security systems created in other states, OT for police, etc. isn't like the infrastructure spending that other states get. Other states get things that benefit the citizenry, we just waste money trying to "prevent" attacks.
As an example, NY received $283 million for this stuff (http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0618091.html). Washington state got $30 million (http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...ashington-state). But then again, what does Washington state have to protect, the Space Needle? |
But would you agree that a smaller federal government could easily create a better reacting security personnel than the whole of the US Federal system? |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Try 1,685 thermonuclear warheads? Not to mention our entire pacific boomer fleet... :rolleyes: Thats not including the warheads that are at base when those boomers are in port, thats 192 warheads a boat btw. ;)
Washington State has more nuclear weapons than all the other nuclear weapons nation states in the world combined except for Russia.
So yea, maybe we should get a little more, cause frankly I don't give a if someone wants to smash a couple buildings in NYC, but I sure do give a massive if someone wants to steal a ton of nuclear warheads.
Also forgot Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Eastern Washington, there is some seriously toxic laying out in the desert there... :nervous: |
You guys have such security that people could actually steal those things? If so, then I guess I should give a , but I really don't. It's a hell of a lot easier to bomb a site than steal something from it.
Secondly, do you think that you're entitled to those weapons if you seceded? I'm sure you don't believe that you'd have the activation codes for such weapons. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
You guys have such security that people could actually steal those things? If so, then I guess I should give a , but I really don't. It's a hell of a lot easier to bomb a site than steal something from it.
Secondly, do you think that you're entitled to those weapons if you seceded? I'm sure you don't believe that you'd have the activation codes for such weapons. |
Wouldn't want them.
Right now WA would be hotter than the sun for many minutes in a nuclear war... :p
On the other hand I don't really want my federal tax dollars to go to protecting something I don't care about, like NYC, so I wouldn't expect you guys to want federal money coming out here either. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
The amount of federal tax money that, if we were separate, would go to just what is now California. The innumerable amount of wealth that could be generated for us as a people in this place to provide things like universal healthcare, better roads, much better education, etc.
But would you agree that a smaller federal government could easily create a better reacting security personnel than the whole of the US Federal system? |
Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars?
The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th.
And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars?
The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th.
And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally. |
You do realize that if California was its own country they'd basically be guaranteed those trade deals... how else is good from China and Asia going to get into the US? |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Wouldn't want them.
Right now WA would be hotter than the sun for many minutes in a nuclear war... :p
On the other hand I don't really want my federal tax dollars to go to protecting something I don't care about, like NYC, so I wouldn't expect you guys to want federal money coming out here either. |
I think we can both agree that we don't want our money going to the top 5 beneficiaries - New Mexico (#1 since 1981, no joke, with the lowest tax vs. benefit in all 25 years at $1.78 benefit vs. $1 taxed), Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana, and West Virginia.
Especially a ing natural resources cartel like Alaska that takes our money and pays its citizens subsidies for gas/oil sales. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Do you think you'd be given the same trade arrangements to generate that sort of wealth? Do you think that if people needed a passport to visit you, you'd take in as much tourist dollars?
The fact is that many states, like my own, NJ, CT, etc. lose as much or more as a percentage of federal tax dollars paid vs. federal benefits reaped. For some reason, you guys are the worst off financially. NY isn't paying IOUs yet. NJ isn't, either, and they're 50th.
And no, I don't think that smaller federal government would create a better system. Regardless of who funded it, the systems are set up locally. |
Have you ever worked for a large corporation? If you have, you would know that is a half truth. The federal government is managed like the worst corporation in the world in the sense of bureaucratic nonsense. They are even more out of touch with local needs than a large corporation like GM. If having it setup (jsut started, but not ultimately managed) locally does anything, then why is it still ? |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
You do realize that if California was its own country they'd basically be guaranteed those trade deals... how else is good from China and Asia going to get into the US? |
Panama Canal? |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Have you ever worked for a large corporation? If you have, you would know that is a half truth. The federal government is managed like the worst corporation in the world in the sense of bureaucratic nonsense. They are even more out of touch with local needs than a large corporation like GM. If having it setup (jsut started, but not ultimately managed) locally does anything, then why is it still ? |
I just don't think you'd be able to fund it. Coastal states and more highly developed states (like Illinois) do reap higher homeland security benefits because they've got more to hit.
Secondly, you make it sound like the use of the funding is entirely dictated by the federal government. |
|
|
|
|
