Something wrong ?

[Champane Flight]

I have been following the giveaway plan by our goverment. Nobody is addressing the fact that our goverment is going to give appox 1. 5 million to each family (all depending on income of deceased spouse) effected by the Sept11th tragedy. Is this just OK with everyone here?



I believe it is a slap in the face to every man and woman who have ever died in service of our country and another hand out to the rich. This handout depends on the income,life insurance,and moneys of the deceased spouse. So the janitors family will get $200,000. 00 and the rich execs family gets 1-2 million. This is not the Red Cross money everyone was so angry about,this is our tax money!



On the other hand I believe the people effected by this tragedy do need help to get back on their feet. Education,jobs,and housing. But to hand out 1. 5 million dollars to some widow living in a $700,000. 00 home with rocks on her hands and a Lexus in the garage is ludicrist. The goverment hands $10,000. 00 and a flag to the spouse of a military man or woman killed. We all have loses,but we pull OURSELVES up and continue to live. We have all had to make some sacrifices in losing a loved one.



Now there are people effected in the Oklahoma City bombing making noises too.

 

[The patriot]

I think they should use the siezed assets from the bin laden/al kayta(sp?) bank accounts and distribute it EVENLY among the survivors familys. my . 02

Eric

 

[Power Wagon]

Well... I've tried to follow it somewhat, but been rather busy of late.



As near as I can figure it, this is how it goes...



The benefits will be taxable: 35% minimum

There will be a federal agency created to administer it: 22%

The states will get their "fair" share: 15%

"Targeted" spending not controlled by recipient: 21%

Fees, charges, and assessments for participation in the program: 4. 3%



This leaves a little over $40,000 given to each participant...



Now HOW can you gripe about that? I mean, after all they've been through... Deny them a measly 40K? That will hardly cover the costs incurred since Sept 11 to now.



The program has recieved high praise from various Senate leaders, such as Tom Daschle and Ted Kennedy, both praising it for it's exceptional thrift and efficiency in federal spending.



With this new level of efficiency, socialized medicine will only cost $11,000 for a complete physical. Not a problem, since the money will only come from Employers, Investors and Retirees.

 

[bigkid59]

Another thing to think about with this proposal is that the people who receive this money waive their right to sue for damages.

This amounts to another taxpayer funded bonanza for the airlines and insurance companies. It is like telling them to collect their fees for covering losses, but then just telling them to keep their money, that the taxpayers will cover their losses.



As it now stands, this is another hand out of taxpayer money to the big corporations in that we will be paying instead of them.

 

[Power Wagon]

Don't forget, BigKid...



This is how Democrats "help" people.



God forbid someone who has demonstrated an ability to get, create, and manage wealth get to keep and it spend it using their best judgement. Better we give it to the big spenders of all time in DC and let them waste it all buying the votes of the weak minded.

 

[chuck3]

This is a rich mans country, allways has allways will be, Don't see any poor people running for office do you, why, they can't afford too. As long as the rich run it they will look out for their own. Sorry but welcome to America.

 

[Power Wagon]

Originally posted by chuck3

This is a rich mans country, allways has allways will be, Don't see any poor people running for office do you, why, they can't afford too. As long as the rich run it they will look out for their own. Sorry but welcome to America.

Actually, this is the poor man's country. Where else, can someone who's considered too poor to survive still afford to drive a car, own his own home, take vacations to Disneyland or some other spot, and enjoy cable TV?



"Who" you ask, "do you mean"? I mean people living below the "poverty" index. The majority of people living below the poverty line own one or more vehicles, own or are buying their own home, and take vacations regularly.



Of course, if you want to argue with me... Please name for me any nation on earth where it is the norm for the impoverished to run for and get elected to office? Somalia? Afghanistan? France? You know, I just can't think of one, but since you made the argument, I'm sure you've got a list of these places of paradise.

 

[bigkid59]

Originally posted by chuck3

This is a rich mans country, allways has allways will be, Don't see any poor people running for office do you, why, they can't afford too. As long as the rich run it they will look out for their own. Sorry but welcome to America.

You are so right chuck3. I seem to remember reading recently that the new mayor of New York, Bloomberg, spent something like $92. 00 for each vote he received in the election.

 

[chuck3]

Power Wagon I guess I should have added that this is still the best country in the world and your right a lot of the very poor are somewhat takeing care of. I didn't mean for this to be a be littling of the country I love and fought for, so please don't take it that way.

 

[Power Wagon]

Politics is the same the world over. It may not be pretty, nice, or virtuous. Politics isn't. Never will be.



Gripe about it all you want - just don't claim it's a fault with our country - because it's nothing more than the nature of politics. I have to laugh at the people who gripe about Bloomberg's spending in NY. Bloomberg miraculously changed political parties in a hurry a short time ago, so he could run against whoever the nobody was he ran against. In a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans roughly 10 to 1, a Democrat running as a Republican won. Are you going to tell me that 50% of Democrats merely vote for whoever spends the most money? Are you going to tell me that the people of NYC are prone to elect rich Republicans? Neither makes any sense.



None of this is the case... Bloomberg had to spend a huge amount of money, because the Republican Party had virtually no organization to speak of in NYC. Basically, to be competitive, he had to directly reach every person. With only the endorsement of Giuliani (hardly a rich guy), and lacking almost any party support, he did what he had to do to reach the voters. He won. Get over it. You can't get votes if people don't want what you say, no matter how much you spend.

 

[Lurch]

Actually the tax exemption for the victims struck me the same way. Generally speaking only the wealthier actually have to pay at tax time, the lower income groups get refunds from what they've already paid. So I see this as the rich don't pay this year and the"poor" get no refund because they're exempt from filing.

I could be wrong.



Lurch

 

[illflem]

Originally posted by Power Wagon





... Please name for me any nation on earth where it is the norm for the impoverished to run for and get elected to office?

The poor ones aren't elected, they just take over when they are finally fed up with it, Castro is good example. Maybe that's what it will take here...

 

[Power Wagon]

Castro became rich and powerful on the backs of the poor becoming the big cheese down there.



He certainly has not brought about any paradise, nor did he bring about virtue in politics nor has he brought justice.



What can I say? Government by the incompetent has never appealed to me.

 

[rrausch]

There needs to be a revolution against the MEDIA in this country. Whatever the media focuses on is what people will do, and lets face it, most people are sheep. Just look how many idiots buy DuraMax's, Nissans, Peugot's and Hyundia's!



The Big-3 media bias works like this: They will give 2-3 minutes to Liberal viewpoints and 10 seconds to Conservative viewpoints. (Maybe 10 secs. )

For 6 months before the 1994 election I did not see A SINGLE picture of then Sen. Dole smiling--they always pictured him scowling, while every picture of Clinton was showing pearly whites.



I get my news from Drudge and the Wash. Times off the Internet. I always know what is happening a day before the lazy #&*@ on the nightly news do.



Not that Conservatives are going to save America, but at least they might not give it away to China, Mexico and the 3rd world as fast as the horrible Democrats.



Truthfully I am very despondant about the future of the U. S. I believe we are exhibiting SO MANY of the symptoms every other great civilization exhibited in the years before it fell to barbarians. Somebody cheer me up.

 

[Champane Flight]

Excuse me?

Excuse me,but I was under the impression that the terrorism aid bill was put forth by Bush,isn't he a republican?



Even if they did get only $40,000. 00 that is a damn site more than our boys familys will get when they are KIAed in Afganastan. And I think your math is wrong PW. I have not heard of any assesment put on this money except taxes. I have heard of some which are not going to even file for it. And I have heard some say its not near enough,however it is hard to take some well healed widow in her Lexus serious.



I do not like dashel or kennedy,however I am sick of hearing Republicans whine and gripe about thier every word. I do not see much positive coverage of any striking workers from the big three either. But I would not whine about it. Even if the republicans had everyone in goverment in thier party,they would still be whinning about something not being thier fault... ... . It must be a conservative trait. Waaahhhh... ...

 

[LarryB]

Greed, pure and simple, built this country and makes it the most powerful and richest in the world today.



Love it or leave.

 

[Power Wagon]

CF... Please, understand, my post was sarcasm... But it's grounded in a pretty solid reflection of why federal assistance to people is a horrible idea - all the way around.



There is a reason why the feds are contemplating paying up and letting insurance and whatnot off the hook... And that is becuase we are SO sue-happy that we'll destroy ourselves with lawsuits if things are not reigned in.



We desperately need some kind of tort reform, something where we make those who are guilty of some serious offense suffer tne results of it. But it's not that way, and if the feds let every lawsuit go on, we wo8uld find that the economic damage would be FAR worse than the damage from the actual physical destruction.



But, since the DNC is nothing other than a political arm of the trial lawyers, no reform will EVER happen if we have even one branch of the federal government controlled by them. Not even a whole lot of republicans are interested... . but this proposal is a recognition of the possible disaster looming in the distance, and an effort to try to divert at least some of the lawsuits that would go on otherwise. The thousands of lawsuits clogging the court systems, the endless parade of juries handing out unlimited millions and billions of other people's money is an economic hit we may not be able to recover from.



No, I'm not a big fan of the feds giving people money... In this case, it's a bribery to stay out of court - and probably there's not much of any other choices to be had by Congress. Not to mention, everyone wants to get on the "I voted to help the victims" bandwagon.



My sarcasm was aimed at you, for your persistent demands that congress spend like the world was ending tomorrow, in an effort to buy your vote with government provided health care - a truly disastrous idea, and yet, when congress votes a much smaller, and closed ended spending package that's at least an effort to diffuse something deadly serious( though certainly not the fix, mind you), you get all hot under the collar. Health care is unlimited... it's a blank check. There's no end, no recovery, no retreat from a budget that cannot be controlled by anything other than the desires of people who then believe it's all "free" - which means the cost will escalate faster than the testosterone level of a highschool group of guys watching Brittney Spears shake her stuff. AT least this stupid little effort has a finite list of beneficiaries and when they are all paid out, they are all paid out and it's over. At least until the next time Congress decides to be extremely generous with our money.

 

[merryman]

Come on guys; what this country needs is about an 80% tax on all the non-poor. That would get rid of all those rich leaches and we all know its only the lovely poor and the Daschels (sp) of the world who create jobs and employ people.

Why if we would just get tough on all the Bill Gates of the world we could have utopia--- and all live in mud huts, lke the afgans.



Vaughn

 

[baby.driver]

Plug nickel

Republicans and Democrats are only the opposite sides of the same plug nickel. One side supposedly more conservative, the other supposedly more liberal.

Their only real purpose is to sow discord among the people.

They seem to do a pretty good job of it too!



Jay

 

[Bill Lins]

You know, families lose their breadwinners every day. How are those in New York any different? Why should they get Federal assistance when others don't?



And why, if you believe they should receive this money, should those who were responsible enough to purchase their own life insurance and/or contribute to their own retirement now be penalized?