Free Lunch

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Because a lot of our allies don't have much of a military, so we need a big one. I fear where our country would be if we didn't spend as much on defense and military seeing as so much of the world hates us.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
What the hell are you guys talking about?

HISTORY LESSON: SCHOOLS FUNCTIONED WITHOUT FREE LUNCH BEFORE AND EDUCATION WAS EVEN HIGHER AT THE TIME!

Question: Why should my tax dollars be spent for parents who have children when they can't afford to feed them? How is that my fault?

Question: If these kids are 5 years old at school, they were obviously fed up until then, so why can the parents suddenly not afford to feed them? Oh well, with that extra money in their parents pocket, they can go by some more booze and watch hours of mindless cable television.
Oh good grief. The logic is strong with this one.



NOT.



:roll:
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Oh good grief. The logic is strong with this one.



NOT.



:roll:

Usually when somebody says something like that, they back it up with some facts or some good solid points.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,785
6,345
126
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because a lot of our allies don't have much of a military, so we need a big one. I fear where our country would be if we didn't spend as much on defense and military seeing as so much of the world hates us.

If you didn't have that military, there'd be little to "hate" you for. The military actions and other International events that are the cause of friction between the US and the RoW.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
I disagree. Moreover, our military doubles as a way for lower-class citizens to move up on the social status heirarchy in a very positive way.
 

ZeGermans

Banned
Dec 14, 2004
907
0
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: ZeGermans
Here's the main reason I support school lunches for those that can't afford it:

How is it the child's fault? You conservatives are extremely concerned with the life of a fetus before it leaves the womb... then you just wash your hands of it. Why should the child pay for the unneeded extravagance of the parents? If they want to screw themselves into a grave, that's just fine. But the children will have a chance with free public education, free school lunches, and tons of scholarship oppurtunities. Obviously this path will be tougher for them than it would be for someone that was born rich, but it at least tries to level the playing field. That's why school lunches, public education in general, and scholarships are free.


But the vast majority of these children can get fed by their parents. The poor live pretty damn well in this country. No, I don't want children to go hungry, but really free lunch is just the government being the babysitter and it gives excuses for people to have children when they can't afford to feed them.

The problem there is that we can't hold the children responsible for their parent's free spending. It's a catch-22. If you're conservative, you believe that people are on their own, sink or swim. These people are mostly sinkers, but to hold their children accountable for it is ludicrous. The options are A) cancel the funding and force the poor to give up their extravagensies (is that even a word?) which isn't a conservative ideal in any way or B) keep the lunches and let the parents flounder due to their own inablity to handle money (also not very conservative, but more so than the previous option)

The third is of course, cancel the funding and run away, but this leaves the kids on the short end of the stick moreso than the parents, and that's just no fair not matter what your polical affiliation.

 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
If you didn't have that military, there'd be little to "hate" you for. The military actions and other International events that are the cause of friction between the US and the RoW.

Yep, I can see why since the rest of the world seems to prefer sitting back and watching helplessly when bad things happen - evil Americans stepping in to stop things like ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia can really cause "friction" that way. But thankfully some of those countries have just a large enough army to take on some of the true "threats" in the world, kinda like how France sunk Greenpeace's Rainbow Warrior.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
"The third is of course, cancel the funding and run away, but this leaves the kids on the short end of the stick moreso than the parents, and that's just no fair not matter what your polical affiliation."

Exactly what I mean about the comparison between social programs and drugs. Both are so tough to just quit cold turkey and are often met with some pretty severe consequences.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because a lot of our allies don't have much of a military, so we need a big one. I fear where our country would be if we didn't spend as much on defense and military seeing as so much of the world hates us.
Two points:

1) You continue to avoid the question of why it is reasonable and necessary to spend more than the rest of the world combined. Are you suggesting that there is no waste by the Pentagon, that the only way to have a world-class military is to make it a bottomless pit for spending? If so, how is it that other countries' militaries pose any threat to us since their funding is proportionally a pittance compared to ours?

2) Why does so much of the world "hate" us? Perhaps if the U.S. wasn't such a meddling bully, the rest of the world wouldn't "hate" us so. Think of all the productive ways we could use, say 30% of our military budget, if we worked to get along with the world and didn't need to worry quite so much about them hating us.
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
What the hell are you guys talking about?

HISTORY LESSON: SCHOOLS FUNCTIONED WITHOUT FREE LUNCH BEFORE AND EDUCATION WAS EVEN HIGHER AT THE TIME!

Question: Why should my tax dollars be spent for parents who have children when they can't afford to feed them? How is that my fault?

Question: If these kids are 5 years old at school, they were obviously fed up until then, so why can the parents suddenly not afford to feed them? Oh well, with that extra money in their parents pocket, they can go by some more booze and watch hours of mindless cable television.

Are you an f'ing idiot? My mom raised me and my brother more or less by herself from the time I was 10. (I'm 33 now - So no crap about me being a stupid kid) Child support was spotty at best. We didn't have cable TV. My mom doesn't drink. The free lunch program at school saved her $250/month that she wastfully frittered away on heating oil and grand shopping excursions to the Salvation Army thrift store for clothes for me and my brother.

I've told this story on here a few times. After her divorce, and having no work experience up to that point, it was a rough time. It took her most of two years to get herself to the point that she could support us all but she did it.

I hate idiot people who bag on welfare and try to make it look like anyone who needs some assistance is a deadbeat. I honestly believe that most of the people on assistance are working their butts off to get off of it. There will always be people who try to game the system and others who commit outright fraud. That is no reason to lump every person who is on assistance into the 'drunk, incompetent, loser' camp.

Grow up.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Oh good grief. The logic is strong with this one.



NOT.



:roll:
Usually when somebody says something like that, they back it up with some facts or some good solid points.
You're new here so I guess I'll have to explain it:


I respond in kind.


Post something idiotic and useless, you won't get a well thought-out response from me.

Post something that shows you know how to engage more than two brain cells and I'll give you an honest, thoughtful response.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
What the hell are you guys talking about?

HISTORY LESSON: SCHOOLS FUNCTIONED WITHOUT FREE LUNCH BEFORE AND EDUCATION WAS EVEN HIGHER AT THE TIME!

Question: Why should my tax dollars be spent for parents who have children when they can't afford to feed them? How is that my fault?

Question: If these kids are 5 years old at school, they were obviously fed up until then, so why can the parents suddenly not afford to feed them? Oh well, with that extra money in their parents pocket, they can go by some more booze and watch hours of mindless cable television.

Are you an f'ing idiot? My mom raised me and my brother more or less by herself from the time I was 10. (I'm 33 now - So no crap about me being a stupid kid) Child support was spotty at best. We didn't have cable TV. My mom doesn't drink. The free lunch program at school saved her $250/month that she wastfully frittered away on heating oil and grand shopping excursions to the Salvation Army thrift store for clothes for me and my brother.

I've told this story on here a few times. After her divorce, and having no work experience up to that point, it was a rough time. It took her most of two years to get herself to the point that she could support us all but she did it.

I hate idiot people who bag on welfare and try to make it look like anyone who needs some assistance is a deadbeat. I honestly believe that most of the people on assistance are working their butts off to get off of it. There will always be people who try to game the system and others who commit outright fraud. That is no reason to lump every person who is on assistance into the 'drunk, incompetent, loser' camp.

Grow up.
Well said. It's a shame so many will refuse to accept this, either due to ingrained ignorance or to their compulsion to rationalize their greed. One of the things I liked least about Ronald Reagan is he demonized welfare recipients. Sure, as you point out, there are some who abuse the system. I agree they are a tiny minority, however.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
As for our military spending being far greater than all the countries together, keep in mind that we have, by far, the highest population of a nation that isn't 3rd world or doesn't have a military. The United States' population is equal to roughly 40% of ALL OF EUROPE, and a lot of European countries don't have a military. So it's easy to see why our military is so vast.

Whoozyerdaddy, the fact that stories like yours are so rare is really why I am against government help. I think private charities and helping eachother out without the government slamming it's big, ugly, giant fist into your mouth while using the other to pull money out of your pocket is much more efficient and it makes the person who made the donation feel better knowing he did it on his own free will and knowing that it's going to somebody who actually needs it.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Wow. Again with the complete and utter lack of use of logic when posting.


Do you actually stop and try to think or is this some stream-of-consciousness posting that is channeling Limbaugh and Hannity?
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
As for our military spending being far greater than all the countries together, keep in mind that we have, by far, the highest population of a nation that isn't 3rd world or doesn't have a military. The United States' population is equal to roughly 40% of ALL OF EUROPE, and a lot of European countries don't have a military. So it's easy to see why our military is so vast.
Complete nonsense, factually untrue, and totally missing the point. Try again.


Whoozyerdaddy, the fact that stories like yours are so rare is really why I am against government help. I think private charities and helping eachother out without the government slamming it's big, ugly, giant fist into your mouth while using the other to pull money out of your pocket is much more efficient and it makes the person who made the donation feel better knowing he did it on his own free will and knowing that it's going to somebody who actually needs it.
Such stories aren't rare at all, that's the point. It's the "welfare queen" instances that are extremely rare.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Complete nonsense, factually untrue, and totally missing the point. Try again.

I do not understand what you are asking then because I have made every point possible about why our country spends as much as it does on military. Size of country and the fact that there are still threats out in the world pretty much sum it up. And since these threats can result in mass destructive attacks killing millions of people, there is no reason to not spend a lot of money on a military.

Such stories aren't rare at all, that's the point. It's the "welfare queen" instances that are extremely rare

I don't hear a lot of them, but the ones I do hear I have to wonder if they are really telling the truth. My opinion on charity vs government aid still stands.

 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Wow. Again with the complete and utter lack of use of logic when posting.


Do you actually stop and try to think or is this some stream-of-consciousness posting that is channeling Limbaugh and Hannity?

That the only thing you can come up with when you disagree? Please stop posting on this thread as we are trying to actually have a real discussion. Bowfinger, Glenn, Zegermans, etc are all making good points and trying to have a civil discussion and it's going well so please don't be a troll.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Because a lot of our allies don't have much of a military, so we need a big one. I fear where our country would be if we didn't spend as much on defense and military seeing as so much of the world hates us.
Two points:

1) You continue to avoid the question of why it is reasonable and necessary to spend more than the rest of the world combined. Are you suggesting that there is no waste by the Pentagon, that the only way to have a world-class military is to make it a bottomless pit for spending? If so, how is it that other countries' militaries pose any threat to us since their funding is proportionally a pittance compared to ours?

2) Why does so much of the world "hate" us? Perhaps if the U.S. wasn't such a meddling bully, the rest of the world wouldn't "hate" us so. Think of all the productive ways we could use, say 30% of our military budget, if we worked to get along with the world and didn't need to worry quite so much about them hating us.
Start here.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Disagree with what? You're posting complete and utter nonsense that simply cannot be backed up with anything resembling a fact.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Bowfinger, I don't think we need to downsize our military at all. Did the cold war end when the military was downsized during the Carter administration? Do you think Radical Muslim terrorists will hestitate to attack us if we dramatically downsize our military? The rest of the world doesn't hate us because of our military.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
What the hell are you guys talking about?

HISTORY LESSON: SCHOOLS FUNCTIONED WITHOUT FREE LUNCH BEFORE AND EDUCATION WAS EVEN HIGHER AT THE TIME!

Question: Why should my tax dollars be spent for parents who have children when they can't afford to feed them? How is that my fault?

Question: If these kids are 5 years old at school, they were obviously fed up until then, so why can the parents suddenly not afford to feed them? Oh well, with that extra money in their parents pocket, they can go by some more booze and watch hours of mindless cable television.

Are you an f'ing idiot? My mom raised me and my brother more or less by herself from the time I was 10. (I'm 33 now - So no crap about me being a stupid kid) Child support was spotty at best. We didn't have cable TV. My mom doesn't drink. The free lunch program at school saved her $250/month that she wastfully frittered away on heating oil and grand shopping excursions to the Salvation Army thrift store for clothes for me and my brother.

I've told this story on here a few times. After her divorce, and having no work experience up to that point, it was a rough time. It took her most of two years to get herself to the point that she could support us all but she did it.

I hate idiot people who bag on welfare and try to make it look like anyone who needs some assistance is a deadbeat. I honestly believe that most of the people on assistance are working their butts off to get off of it. There will always be people who try to game the system and others who commit outright fraud. That is no reason to lump every person who is on assistance into the 'drunk, incompetent, loser' camp.

Grow up.

:thumbsup:

That's pretty much what I said in one of my opening posts.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,785
6,345
126
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Bowfinger, I don't think we need to downsize our military at all. Did the cold war end when the military was downsized during the Carter administration? Do you think Radical Muslim terrorists will hestitate to attack us if we dramatically downsize our military? The rest of the world doesn't hate us because of our military.

It's the useage.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
It's the useage.
of course countries that we use our military on hate us but why do others hate us? Jealous?
If I attacked you, would your neighbors be jealous of my strength?


Seriously, stop for a moment and actually try to think before posting.