English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

But turn around and try to justify spending billions on another country's welfare? ( Iraq) Is this war really about helping the Iraqi people, and if so, why is it O.K to help them, but we need to cut our own social programs to free up the funds?

2006-07-05 02:28:57 · 21 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government Politics

Nicki121, I will not give him a break. I have been fired from jobs for way less.

2006-07-05 02:46:32 · update #1

matt, I don't have the numbers on that, but I'd love to see them. With all of the foreign aid that goes out to ALL countries...I really doubt we spend as much at home. Now, I'm not saying that our social programs here are directly funding the war, But realistically, when spending needs to be cut, Republicans turn to our social programs, education, etc...to make it look like they are fiscally responsible. And every dollar you spend on the war, cannot be spent anywhere else. And every one of my future children's dollars that you spend (defecit) is 2 more they will have to earn

2006-07-05 02:50:32 · update #2

Macdaddybos, that goes both ways (vote Haliburton!)

2006-07-05 02:51:39 · update #3

um, leogirl? Who said anything about immigrants? You can't even hear the question, before spouting off some crap you were spoon-fed by the administration! Think for yourself!

2006-07-05 02:56:36 · update #4

deana jo, you can't spend welfare dollars at the mall. Nice try.

2006-07-05 02:57:51 · update #5

yes, deanajo, welfare has been reformed several times since 15 years ago. Funny that you met one person one time 15 years ago who abused the system, and that is your basis for how you view welfare recipients. sad...

2006-07-06 02:41:03 · update #6

irishharpist, Lawrens Auster was right! We should NOT supply the needs of people, like those in Iraq, then the whole world wants us to come and spend our money to fix their problems! I totally agree!!!!!

2006-07-06 02:43:27 · update #7

21 answers

Because Halliburton doesn't do social programs in the US.

2006-07-05 02:30:56 · answer #1 · answered by J C 3 · 4 4

The republican party has, and have always had, one basic premise. Support business, in all forms. Social programs only deplete the national treasure when it can be put to much better use. Fighting wars, supporting business and adding more jobs, making sure that the people with the most money will support them when time to be re-elected.

It has been said that the democrats are a tax and spend party. Well if you have been around long you know that if you are going to spend you better have money coming from somewhere to pay for it.

But let us look at the last few years. Republican President, Republican congress, and the national debt has never ever been higher. Why? Because if you can spend wildly but not have to pay for it you don't have to tax. And you sure don't want to tax the very people who put you in office.

But no good deed goes unpunished. Problem is you and I will suffer that punishment. Not the rich. Not the people in power and in the know. When the check finally bounces we will all pay the price. In the mean time we will have destroyed a country that was not a direct threat to us and now we have to build it back.

But what is IRAQ doing now? Looking internationally for companies to help build it's oil program back to where it was. Will U.S. companies be included? Who knows.

2006-07-05 02:52:13 · answer #2 · answered by John B 5 · 0 0

We have been asked/required to send aid to other countries by the UN since its inception. The billions we are spending in Iraq is to help make terrorists an endangered species. Some may argue about the US being terrorists, but we have been invited and encouraged to stay by the Iraqi government.

I have my own reasons for wanting to see welfare cut. One day I was at the country health department getting my daughter immunized. I started speaking to two women who were very excited about getting their checks and buying new Tommy Hilfiger outfits. When I asked where they worked, they said they were waiting on welfare checks to go shopping and their husbands paid their bills. The part I couldn't believe is they actually believed it was their money! I am not dumb enough to believe that this is an isolated case. That is why I believe if someone receives welfare they need to be working or actively looking for a job.

MODIFICATION: You get a check, you cash it...you spend cash. Then again this was over 15 years ago. Does the government dole out welfare differently now?

2006-07-05 02:44:30 · answer #3 · answered by deana_joe 2 · 0 0

I dont think this viewpoint shows all the sides of the story. People in most countries of the world are extremely poor. As an American with a computer, you are richer than about 97% of the entire population of the world THROUGHOUT HISTORY. Even homeless people in the USA have a higher standard of living than about half the people in the world. I should know, I'm going to school in Indonesia, where people will gladly work for $2 a day in hot sun, and most people in the eastern islands still do not own clothes or permanent housing (they live in bamboo huts if you must know). True, there is a ton of money that is being spent right now in Iraq, but have you ever sat and thought, "something good will come out of this"?

2006-07-05 02:41:36 · answer #4 · answered by jonathan_liem 2 · 0 0

No, this war is not and has never been about helping the Iraqi people. If the Iraqi people are in some way helped by the American occupation, it will only be considered collateral damage in the eyes of Republicans. Republicans only care about power and money which is why it's okay to spend so much money in Iraq to secure it's oil reserves for our current and future exploitation. Social programs are merely a crutch the American people lean on and they are widely abused throughout America. Welfare is not justifiable regardless of which nation America wastes it on.

2006-07-05 02:35:18 · answer #5 · answered by Samson 2 · 0 0

The Republicans yell about any huge wasteful social welfare programs administered on a federal level. The welfare of the people should be left to the individual state. Washington cannot, and never will be able to, adequately supervise the need and the regional answers to this countries complex problems. Not meaning to ask another question but just think: Why is the federal government obliged to cover the inadequacies of the individual state employment programs?

2006-07-05 06:53:15 · answer #6 · answered by anothersomeonenew 5 · 0 0

not all republicans want to cut all social programs. i used to be like "no welfare, get a job, they are leaches of the system", but then i met my wife, a social worker, and she explained most programs make sense, and are hard to abuse. i have not heard that funds from social programs are funding the war. it will always seem like foreign aid is more because you hear what is being spent in the billions on the news because anything against the administration is hot news because the liberal media tells you it is. I'd bet a paycheck any day that we spend more in domestic social programs and aid than in foreign aid, but the social programs the administration are utilizing aren't hot news, because just like the war, the media doesn't want it to get out that good things are happening, that would mean them reporting something good about the administration.

2006-07-05 02:39:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Since the social program under this administration are enjoying their largest budget increase in many administrations I don't see where people are suffering. You can't compare the huge strain the illegals are putting on our social programs to the tune of Billions to what we are doing in Iraq. Two totally different issues, and both have two totally separate solutions.
We (the coalition) liberated a people that was under a brutal dictator for over 30+ years. We have found (and documented) mass graves and uncovered atrocities that we didn't think could anyone could be capable of in this day and age. We helped them to be able to have free elections to vote for the leaders of their choice and develop a constitution that they voted on and accepted as a nation. We are now helping them rebuild their infrastructure and their OWN security forces so they can take care of themselves. A strong democratic government in the middle east benefits everyone in the world.

2006-07-05 02:46:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Maybe because it's our fault they are struggling now because of the battles. It's only right that we should help them get back on there feet.

Also, we have no problem with people who really can't work getting welfare. It's people who abuse the system, people who can work and just don't, welfare queens, etc that becomes the drawback. Also, since dems always for big taxes and more entitlements, it kinda like they are buying votes with our tax dollars, because people are going to vote for whoever is going to keep the check coming.

2006-07-05 02:35:27 · answer #9 · answered by Vincent Valentine 5 · 0 0

US congress also has had two raises to three raises themselves in the past six years.
Serve them selves first and others last should be their motto, minimum wage has not increased in more than ten years. They use hatred of other races to push their programs then profess God told them to maim rape and kill. But they are not the only ones, Islam does it too.
But take heart, their judgement will come and they will get what they deserve I am sure. Isn't it interesting to see the revealing of liars happening daily? Just like the crucifixion the angrymom asked for a murderer to run the country instead of an adulterer or poor man.

Sad. But don't worry, eat and drink for tommorow we die, sound familiar?

2006-07-05 02:35:11 · answer #10 · answered by eg_ansel 4 · 0 0

They don't understand the full impact of the decisions they make. They look at the now and not the later when all this spending will really impact the world. If they are living and have a pot to piss in no one else matters but them. From what I have seen in the passed 6 years it has become a very selfish party. ME ME ME and F the poor they are not human anyway.

2006-07-05 02:43:53 · answer #11 · answered by DEEJay 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers