As for relocating refugees...I'm torn. I really am. The Christian in me wants to see the people who need the help, genuinely need the help, get helped. The Constitutionalist in me wants to see this done in a way that is legal and just.
The problem is, ISIS and other groups will find loopholes, they will sneak people in, they will reach out (as we now see) to women to use their small children to get into the country and then abandon their children to fight. Is it all of the refugees that would need to be stopped? Of course not. But what happens if we let one get through? There ARE radicals living in America, sleepers, etc. All it will take is one ISIS agent getting through and giving them a link.
That is what these leaders have to face. Their primary goal is the American people. They are sworn to protect American citizens. If you have this great of a risk, how do you balance that responsibility with the humanitarian side of all of this?
I understand both sides of the argument and I honestly don't know how to solve the problem.
ISIS is trying to get in one way or the other. Considering they know that we know that they would try to use the refugee system to their advantage, wouldn't that make it a bad way to go for them as they'd be much more likely to be caught than if they tried to circumvent the system another way by, say, sneaking across the border somewhere that we've shown we can't truly control? Seriously. If we're being told it is the single most intensive screening/vetting process of any individuals entering the US in any way (and it takes 18-24 months to complete the process) does that sound like a path someone that doesn't want to get caught coming in would take?
ReignOnU wrote:
- We can go on and on with other broke systems... like how about the fact that over 100m+ are on welfare, basically more than the population of Russia. We spend over $130b on welfare programs each year. You say that we should cut military spending to fund the VA. Why not ration some of the $130b+ to fund it? Considering we have a welfare system that pays more than an $8 hr job in 39 states and more than a $12 hr job in 6 (as of 2012). Here's a fun fact... welfare benefits pay more than the average salary of a teacher in 8 states. Seems to me that we have some excess spending here.
Im sorry but that is untrue based on what I've read. I've read the same articles and researched them more in depth and their "welfare recipient" that they use to get those figures is someone who qualifies for every single government assistance program the state offers and gets the max benefit. The overwhelming majority of people on government assistance do not get anywhere near that much.
While there is excess in government assistance programs have you looked and the waste that gets thrown out in the military budget? Not the money that goes to rank and file military but what goes to contractors. Start with the Trillions that is unaccounted for since the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the 42 million dollar gas station we just built over there that should have cost 500 grand max. I just haven't squared that circle yet to blame the poor people instead of big corporations getting rich off my tax dollars.
I don't disagree that there are major flaws in military spending. We have major flaws in any kind of government spending that involves contract work. Everyone knows this. Just like my point that you quoted started... we can go on and on about other broke systems. The 100m on assistance and $130b in assistance are all within a small percentage of numerous sources. As for the payouts, I didn't vet them. But they aren't even remotely eye-opening to me. The excessive $20hr averages that you see posted are typically including housing subsidy, which less than 35% qualify for. With that said, almost all can qualify for food stamp and Medicaid. Those numbers are a little easier to figure out. Food stamp value is usually between $6k-$8k and health insurance equivalent to Medicaid is between $12k-$16k, all of this varies by state. Taking those figures gives you a range of $8.65 - $11.54 per hour. Our welfare systems are heavily slanted in the wrong direction. Regardless, this was just 1 example of many situations and you brought up another with the military. I'm not very sure what the point of your post was, other than to validate what I was saying.
ReignOnU wrote:
- We can go on and on with other broke systems... like how about the fact that over 100m+ are on welfare, basically more than the population of Russia. We spend over $130b on welfare programs each year. You say that we should cut military spending to fund the VA. Why not ration some of the $130b+ to fund it? Considering we have a welfare system that pays more than an $8 hr job in 39 states and more than a $12 hr job in 6 (as of 2012). Here's a fun fact... welfare benefits pay more than the average salary of a teacher in 8 states. Seems to me that we have some excess spending here.
Im sorry but that is untrue based on what I've read. I've read the same articles and researched them more in depth and their "welfare recipient" that they use to get those figures is someone who qualifies for every single government assistance program the state offers and gets the max benefit. The overwhelming majority of people on government assistance do not get anywhere near that much.
While there is excess in government assistance programs have you looked and the waste that gets thrown out in the military budget? Not the money that goes to rank and file military but what goes to contractors. Start with the Trillions that is unaccounted for since the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the 42 million dollar gas station we just built over there that should have cost 500 grand max. I just haven't squared that circle yet to blame the poor people instead of big corporations getting rich off my tax dollars.
I don't disagree that there are major flaws in military spending. We have major flaws in any kind of government spending that involves contract work. Everyone knows this. Just like my point that you quoted started... we can go on and on about other broke systems. The 100m on assistance and $130b in assistance are all within a small percentage of numerous sources. As for the payouts, I didn't vet them. But they aren't even remotely eye-opening to me. The excessive $20hr averages that you see posted are typically including housing subsidy, which less than 35% qualify for. With that said, almost all can qualify for food stamp and Medicaid. Those numbers are a little easier to figure out. Food stamp value is usually between $6k-$8k and health insurance equivalent to Medicaid is between $12k-$16k, all of this varies by state. Taking those figures gives you a range of $8.65 - $11.54 per hour. Our welfare systems are heavily slanted in the wrong direction. Regardless, this was just 1 example of many situations and you brought up another with the military. I'm not very sure what the point of your post was, other than to validate what I was saying.
My point was the average person on welfare gets nowhere hear the equivalent of $12hr job or $8hr. 24,960 ,which is what a $12hr job would pay, times 100,000,000 on welfare is nowhere near 130b. So using those number to describe everyone on welfare is misleading. Maybe I took you the wrong way but thats what I got from your post.
ReignOnU wrote:
- We can go on and on with other broke systems... like how about the fact that over 100m+ are on welfare, basically more than the population of Russia. We spend over $130b on welfare programs each year. You say that we should cut military spending to fund the VA. Why not ration some of the $130b+ to fund it? Considering we have a welfare system that pays more than an $8 hr job in 39 states and more than a $12 hr job in 6 (as of 2012). Here's a fun fact... welfare benefits pay more than the average salary of a teacher in 8 states. Seems to me that we have some excess spending here.
Im sorry but that is untrue based on what I've read. I've read the same articles and researched them more in depth and their "welfare recipient" that they use to get those figures is someone who qualifies for every single government assistance program the state offers and gets the max benefit. The overwhelming majority of people on government assistance do not get anywhere near that much.
While there is excess in government assistance programs have you looked and the waste that gets thrown out in the military budget? Not the money that goes to rank and file military but what goes to contractors. Start with the Trillions that is unaccounted for since the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the 42 million dollar gas station we just built over there that should have cost 500 grand max. I just haven't squared that circle yet to blame the poor people instead of big corporations getting rich off my tax dollars.
I don't disagree that there are major flaws in military spending. We have major flaws in any kind of government spending that involves contract work. Everyone knows this. Just like my point that you quoted started... we can go on and on about other broke systems. The 100m on assistance and $130b in assistance are all within a small percentage of numerous sources. As for the payouts, I didn't vet them. But they aren't even remotely eye-opening to me. The excessive $20hr averages that you see posted are typically including housing subsidy, which less than 35% qualify for. With that said, almost all can qualify for food stamp and Medicaid. Those numbers are a little easier to figure out. Food stamp value is usually between $6k-$8k and health insurance equivalent to Medicaid is between $12k-$16k, all of this varies by state. Taking those figures gives you a range of $8.65 - $11.54 per hour. Our welfare systems are heavily slanted in the wrong direction. Regardless, this was just 1 example of many situations and you brought up another with the military. I'm not very sure what the point of your post was, other than to validate what I was saying.
My point was the average person on welfare gets nowhere hear the equivalent of $12hr job or $8hr. 24,960 ,which is what a $12hr job would pay, times 100,000,000 on welfare is nowhere near 130b. So using those number to describe everyone on welfare is misleading. Maybe I took you the wrong way but thats what I got from your post.
The numbers are independent of each other. You can't simply divide $130b by 100m to get the exact figure. As for a relative amount per hour, I laid out the simple math for you based on what the majority of people are eligible for. $8.65 - $11.54. If a person works 20 hours per week at $10, it offsets part of the assistance they are eligible for. Hence why the $130b divided by 100m doesn't work, among many other reasons.
ReignOnU wrote:
- We can go on and on with other broke systems... like how about the fact that over 100m+ are on welfare, basically more than the population of Russia. We spend over $130b on welfare programs each year. You say that we should cut military spending to fund the VA. Why not ration some of the $130b+ to fund it? Considering we have a welfare system that pays more than an $8 hr job in 39 states and more than a $12 hr job in 6 (as of 2012). Here's a fun fact... welfare benefits pay more than the average salary of a teacher in 8 states. Seems to me that we have some excess spending here.
Im sorry but that is untrue based on what I've read. I've read the same articles and researched them more in depth and their "welfare recipient" that they use to get those figures is someone who qualifies for every single government assistance program the state offers and gets the max benefit. The overwhelming majority of people on government assistance do not get anywhere near that much.
While there is excess in government assistance programs have you looked and the waste that gets thrown out in the military budget? Not the money that goes to rank and file military but what goes to contractors. Start with the Trillions that is unaccounted for since the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the 42 million dollar gas station we just built over there that should have cost 500 grand max. I just haven't squared that circle yet to blame the poor people instead of big corporations getting rich off my tax dollars.
I don't disagree that there are major flaws in military spending. We have major flaws in any kind of government spending that involves contract work. Everyone knows this. Just like my point that you quoted started... we can go on and on about other broke systems. The 100m on assistance and $130b in assistance are all within a small percentage of numerous sources. As for the payouts, I didn't vet them. But they aren't even remotely eye-opening to me. The excessive $20hr averages that you see posted are typically including housing subsidy, which less than 35% qualify for. With that said, almost all can qualify for food stamp and Medicaid. Those numbers are a little easier to figure out. Food stamp value is usually between $6k-$8k and health insurance equivalent to Medicaid is between $12k-$16k, all of this varies by state. Taking those figures gives you a range of $8.65 - $11.54 per hour. Our welfare systems are heavily slanted in the wrong direction. Regardless, this was just 1 example of many situations and you brought up another with the military. I'm not very sure what the point of your post was, other than to validate what I was saying.
My point was the average person on welfare gets nowhere hear the equivalent of $12hr job or $8hr. 24,960 ,which is what a $12hr job would pay, times 100,000,000 on welfare is nowhere near 130b. So using those number to describe everyone on welfare is misleading. Maybe I took you the wrong way but thats what I got from your post.
The numbers are independent of each other. You can't simply divide $130b by 100m to get the exact figure. As for a relative amount per hour, I laid out the simple math for you based on what the majority of people are eligible for. $8.65 - $11.54. If a person works 20 hours per week at $10, it offsets part of the assistance they are eligible for. Hence why the $130b divided by 100m doesn't work, among many other reasons.
But what the max benefit is isn't what the overwhelming majority of people receive so using those figures are wrong and misleading for the average person so agree to disagree I guess. The numbers I found are the average person getting SNAP in the US gets $125 per month with the average household with 2.1 people. Which again doesn't add up to 6-8k but oh well.
Good read to go with others already posted to put some clarity on the situation. It is highly unlikely and just not practical that they are gonna try and slip in with refugees when they can just get a passport from a European county and come here on "vacation" instead of trying to slip through all the steps one must go through to come here as a refugee. Its just doesn't pass the common sense test for me to want to turn away a fellow human seeking help from our country.
You're absolutely right. The 10k Syrians coming are not a direct threat. Very unrealistic to be concerned about them individually. The only threat would be there if a plan was put in place the compromised the current process in an effort to move them in at a faster pace. My personal problem with it is economic with a very tiny hint of giving ISIS another excuse to do something on our turf (not that they really need it).
So it turns out a paramedic tried to save the suicide bomber at the cafe, thinking it was a gas explosion. He opened up the man's shirt as he did CPR and discovered the bomb.
The bomb had not fully detonated. It was a miracle, both because the bomber was the ONLY person to die at the cafe--and because the man doing CPR somehow did not trigger a secondary explosion.
S14: N Texas 7-1
S15: Wake 8-5
S16-21: Washington 9-4, 10-3, 8-5, 9-4, 7-6, 6-7
S22: Ohio 8-5
S23: ECU 12-2
S24-26: Kentucky 8-5, 5-7, 5-7
Career: 102-61
