I've been an Electrical Engineer for 30 years now. Previously I've designed everything in computers from the old days of mainframes, to workstations, to PC's, then in the field of medical electronics I've designed ultrasound, MRI and CT systems and most recently in the communication field designing ATM (that's Asynchronous Transfer Mode, not your local ATM machine) network processors, hardware TCP/IP termination equipment and currently design high speed encrypted communications systems. I've also designed both visible and infrared satellite CCD camera systems. I have a PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Electrical Engineering which was also where I did my undergraduate work. I currently earn $180,000 per year which is more than sufficient to support my modest lifestyle.

Your biases are so apparent simply from the way you ask the question.

The way I would phrase this is that I do not begrudge the fact that some portion of the taxes I pay goes to help those that need help.

No.

Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon are some of the biggest recipients of government handouts and they are most assuredly not liberal.

And that is a problem because you expected me not to have an opinion?

 

That is great.

In other words, YOU are not actually being forced to PAY money to people whom you do not want to give that money?

Anyway, maybe you are rich. But I am not and I move in circles where a work permit in America is what people want. What you consider "those that need help" is from my point of view "those that I want to be".

The people "who need help", for me, are not people with the legal right to work in the US but people who are starving in Africa.

Your people "who need help" are not people who need help. They are people who can help themselves. That is why so many in the world wish that they would be them.

 

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough. My bad.

By "handouts" I meant payments done not in exchange for goods and services.

 

Actually I AM since I'm forced to pay for a totally unnecessary war in Iraq.

That's fine. I'm more concerned about people that already are American citizens.

In other words you don't live in the US or pay US taxes. So what precisely gives you the right to complain about US tax structure? To quote a phrase "you have no skin in the game."

It can be argued that some portion represents exchange for goods and services but a large percentage is handout.

But OK then, how about Israel, is Israel liberal?

Because they seem to have no problem cashing their yearly welfare check thanks to the US taxpayer.

You can have any opinion you want.

You're also free to express your opinion.

However since you are neither a US citizen nor a US taxpayer your opinion has precisely zero weight.

If our roles were reversed and I was criticizing how the UK does it's business (it is the UK isn't it) then it would be my opinion that would be meaningless. But we're not talking about the UK, we're talking about the US (though how precisely this relates to the thread's topic is beyond me).

But that's something your country does. It's not simply giving money to people. Draginol has explained the difference between government handouts and other government expenses before.

Either way, the people who were constantly persecuted by Saddam "needed help" a lot more then the people you propose to help.

And to top it off, YOU are already free to help the poor in America without the need for a government to tax you and send the money to the "needy". But you can hardly demand that the majority of Americans who wanted to get rid of Saddam try so without government supervision.

 

So you do not help the needy but instead you help a certain nationality? Is that what social welfare is about? Not the needy?

 

We have that system in Europe too. Should I not have an opinion because I talk about something that also happens in America?

 

That is arguably true but it's not meant to be that way.

You are talking about corruption in one system and compare it to how another system is supposed to work.

If both programs were handled in an ideal way, there would be no handouts to companies. But there is no way, apart from abolishing social welfare, to run the social welfare office without handouts.

I am against handouts in both programs.

 

Yes.

 

They do have a great problem with doing so. But they need the money to defend themselves against the very enemy that the US also arms (for example Saudi-Arabia).

Israel is not sitting there with a chance to live a normal life, like your "needy" in America. Israel is constantly facing another Holocaust. It's not the same situation.

Now, if the US and Europe were to stop demanding that Israel give money and power to terrorist groups who allegedly represent the Arab population of the disputed territories, there would be less need for such money. But if you want to be involved, you better buy your ticket.

If it were up to me, Israel would not get a cent from the US tax payers and neither would the Arabs (or Iran) try to kill all the Jews. But as it stands, I'd rather take than the money than die.

My apologies to the US tax payer for taking the money. It's not the right thing to do. It is merely necessary. We (Israel and her supporters) do not want to be an American colony and would prefer a situation in which nobody would want to kill us all and we wouldn't need US tax payer money to stay alive.

TECHNICALLY, we don't need the money. It only helps avoiding greater wars. And for the US it's a good extra line of defence. In fact, if the US had listened to Israel, 911 could have been avoided. Can you do the maths? Would it have been worth the money given to Israel over the years?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x9847

(I assume this is a credible enough source for you?)

 

There we go again. For you it's not facts or knowledge that count, but only whether one is American or not. Why can I not be right about something, even something American, without being American? I don't get it.

 

I live in Ireland and I don't care who criticises our government system. If you have something to say about Irish social welfare (or how the system of taxing some and giving the money to others is either right or wrong), you are welcome to say it and I don't care whether you are an Irish or EU citizen or an American citizen or chocolate-covered.

Some things are simply irrelevant in a discussion, for example the nationality or citizenship of the person arguing.

 

 

Interesting. I'd rather you do the opposite.

You mean like your thread jacking of this thread which is ostensibly about the CRU email hack specifically and global warming in general?

 

I tire of this. I really have wasted far more effort on this topic than it's worth. I'll leave you with my attempt to bring the thread back to its original topic, however once I leave there won't be any controversy left in the thread and it will quickly die out anyway. C'est la vie.

 

I know. You have made that  clear about both Jews and Arabs in the comments to one of my posts. That's why you are one of two people on my blacklist (and the other is there for technical reasons because his comments screw up the formatting).

 

Why don't you ask Island Dog if he has a problem with my responding to off-topic subjects introduced by others?

My point was that nationality and citizenship are not reasons to assume that somebody cannot participate in a discussion about whether certain policies make sense or not.

It seems to me, what with your attitude towards Jews and Arabs and foreigners in general, you must feel a bit out of place in America. I hope you realise that your American citizenship, if obtained by birth, is an accident of history, not some sort of destiny that makes you better than others. Some people never get that.

 

Israel is constantly facing another holocaust? Hahahahahaha.

 

I am glad this amuses people.

I take it your joy about the possible deaths of several million Jews is not Anti-Semitism but "legitimate criticism of Israel's policies"?

 

As soon as people start to state that “the debate is over”, beware, because the fundamental basis of all sciences is that debate is NEVER over, that questions must be asked and answered and issues raised in order for the science to be accurate.

Gore said the "science is settled" Pah!

Some "scientist", that Al Gore! HAH!

All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA’s GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

Meteorologist Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

 

 

Just as I post a new article, you have to come out with the truth!

I guess this thread didn't die out as predicted. I sure many people in the North East are "global warming" their tails off this week.

Gives new meaning to the rap - Shake your Booty.

want a bet on that? I worked for lockheed Martan and i hnever met a larger bunch of liberals in my life. the execs are for green peace, pro abourtin ant the like on their bumper stickers. the company bought a butt load of hybrid cars. I don't see much in the way of hard core conservatism there. And just for the record they don't get handouts they get business contracts. they have to provide a product for the money they receive.

 

many people assume, incorrectly, that big business has to be conservative.  Based on old outdated misguided misconceptions.  The truth of the matter is that while small business usually is (going directly to the ideal of keeping what they work for), BIG business is apolitical, and very pro-power.  They give equally to democrats and republicans - whomever they see as holding the upper hand.  Why?  They seek to maintain and grow their power not through the market place (a hard task), but through legislation (easy when you grease the right palms).  They will sell their granny to the most powerful person, irregardless of the letter behind their name.