Obama supporters. I have one question
- Thread starter darthtang aw
- Start date
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556807
Let's all be fair about these recent pictures
A friggin classic
http:///forum/post/2556807
Let's all be fair about these recent pictures
A friggin classic
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556723
I am for cutting some of the R&D taxpayer funding (GRANTS). Let the private sector pay for R&D, they end up selling the product to the Government anyway. That is a socialist view....
If you open up military technology completely to the private sector you then allow the same companies to sell the technology to the highest bidder. Surely you realize how bad of an idea that is.
http:///forum/post/2556723
I am for cutting some of the R&D taxpayer funding (GRANTS). Let the private sector pay for R&D, they end up selling the product to the Government anyway. That is a socialist view....
If you open up military technology completely to the private sector you then allow the same companies to sell the technology to the highest bidder. Surely you realize how bad of an idea that is.
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2556814
If you open up military technology completely to the private sector you then allow the same companies to sell the technology to the highest bidder. Surely you realize how bad of an idea that is.
Free market for private sector? I am saying private sector should pay for the R&D based on a military scope of work, if they want the business. Private sector business does exclusive contracts all the time, they pay more for the product in the end to have this exclusivity. Surely, your company has done this before, we have and it's not DOD or other government related. However, I will agree all the defense contractors would argue they need this funding, like AIRBUS and the oil companies arguing they still need subsidies...
http:///forum/post/2556814
If you open up military technology completely to the private sector you then allow the same companies to sell the technology to the highest bidder. Surely you realize how bad of an idea that is.
Free market for private sector? I am saying private sector should pay for the R&D based on a military scope of work, if they want the business. Private sector business does exclusive contracts all the time, they pay more for the product in the end to have this exclusivity. Surely, your company has done this before, we have and it's not DOD or other government related. However, I will agree all the defense contractors would argue they need this funding, like AIRBUS and the oil companies arguing they still need subsidies...
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556824
Free market for private sector? I am saying private sector should pay for the R&D based on a military scope of work, if they want the business. Private sector business does exclusive contracts all the time, they pay more for the product in the end to have this exclusivity. Surely, your company has done this before, we have and it's not DOD or government related. However, I will agree all the defense contractors would argue they need this funding, like AIRBUS and the oil companies arguing they still need subsidies...
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
http:///forum/post/2556824
Free market for private sector? I am saying private sector should pay for the R&D based on a military scope of work, if they want the business. Private sector business does exclusive contracts all the time, they pay more for the product in the end to have this exclusivity. Surely, your company has done this before, we have and it's not DOD or government related. However, I will agree all the defense contractors would argue they need this funding, like AIRBUS and the oil companies arguing they still need subsidies...
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
crashbandicoot
Active Member
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by Veeraj87
http:///forum/post/2556564
not point made my candidate has proven that he wont flip flop on his stance, and he will continue to be open to the americans with who he is, everyone has done something he has proven that he can be in the spot light and take hits, unlike mccain who is freelancing with no competitors just wait till the real debates start we might get some more pictures of idiot republicans scratching their heads, this time instead of bush, it will be Mcsucks...... CHECK MATE
Oh give me a break. Your candidate went bowling and only scored a 37, four year old kids bowl a higher score. drunken old men with serious alcohol impairment bowl a higher score
37 out of a possible 300.......that means he is not competant enough to roll a ball down an alley in a semi straight line. And this guy wants to be president.
http:///forum/post/2556564
not point made my candidate has proven that he wont flip flop on his stance, and he will continue to be open to the americans with who he is, everyone has done something he has proven that he can be in the spot light and take hits, unlike mccain who is freelancing with no competitors just wait till the real debates start we might get some more pictures of idiot republicans scratching their heads, this time instead of bush, it will be Mcsucks...... CHECK MATE
Oh give me a break. Your candidate went bowling and only scored a 37, four year old kids bowl a higher score. drunken old men with serious alcohol impairment bowl a higher score
37 out of a possible 300.......that means he is not competant enough to roll a ball down an alley in a semi straight line. And this guy wants to be president.
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2556834
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
This is where business partners work together. One being the Prime and the others being sub-contractors. Where do you think this R&D is done - by employees in the shadows at the Pentagon? It's private sector business, sure you got to think out of the box, and let the companies that stand to make a ton of taxpayer cash put some skin in the game. I didn't say cut it totally out, but I am for reducing it. I would keep the university cloak and dagger R&D grants...
http:///forum/post/2556834
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
This is where business partners work together. One being the Prime and the others being sub-contractors. Where do you think this R&D is done - by employees in the shadows at the Pentagon? It's private sector business, sure you got to think out of the box, and let the companies that stand to make a ton of taxpayer cash put some skin in the game. I didn't say cut it totally out, but I am for reducing it. I would keep the university cloak and dagger R&D grants...
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2556847
37 out of a possible 300.......that means he is not competant enough to roll a ball down an alley in a semi straight line. And this guy wants to be president.
Good one... That's like saying when McCain crashed 3 planes in the Navy, he can't fly straight, therefore he can't President....
http:///forum/post/2556847
37 out of a possible 300.......that means he is not competant enough to roll a ball down an alley in a semi straight line. And this guy wants to be president.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2556834
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
actually this is done by the private sector but not in the degree many think. Working in the metal finishing industry for many years the company I worked for worked with the national labs here in New mexico. A lot of time the military designs something, procures the parts from the private sector, then farms the work needed to be done out to the finisher (coting the plates or what not then pick it up and take it back for testing if it works it goes into to production through aprivate firm. if it doesn't they try again and reuse the private sector again...so the R&D could not be done without the private sector in many cases.
http:///forum/post/2556834
Ok, let me explain further.
Let's take the Stealth Fighter as an example. Without Government funded R&D going to a host of different companies, what one company would have been able to build it?
.
actually this is done by the private sector but not in the degree many think. Working in the metal finishing industry for many years the company I worked for worked with the national labs here in New mexico. A lot of time the military designs something, procures the parts from the private sector, then farms the work needed to be done out to the finisher (coting the plates or what not then pick it up and take it back for testing if it works it goes into to production through aprivate firm. if it doesn't they try again and reuse the private sector again...so the R&D could not be done without the private sector in many cases.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556857
Good one... That like saying when McCain crashed 3 planes in the Navy, he can't fly straight, therefore he can't President....
However I would have to say flying and landing a plane is a bit more complicated when being shot at than throwing a ball down an alley with no physical distraction...but I do get your point....just playing along.
http:///forum/post/2556857
However I would have to say flying and landing a plane is a bit more complicated when being shot at than throwing a ball down an alley with no physical distraction...but I do get your point....just playing along.
1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556852
This is where business partners work together. One being the Prime and the others being sub-contractors. Where do you think this R&D is done - by employees in the shadow at the Pentagon? It's private sector business, sure you can got to think out of the box to let the companies that stand to make a ton of taxpayer cash put some skin in the game. I didn't say cut it totally out, but I am for reducing it. I would keep the university cloak and dagger R&D grants...
The point is, however, that much of this research is done by companies that have no idea what the other companies are working on to keep projects more secretive.
They didn't go to Company A and say "Build us a Stealth Fighter". Instead they went to company A and said "design us a skin that deflects radar". To Company B "design us this computer system". Company C "Design us this engine", etc.
My point is, the private sector cannot be expected to spend millions designing things unless the military orders and funds it. What company out there would willingly choose to dump millions into a project that might fail and then not get paid for it?
I love the private sector and all, but no corporation is that patriotic...
http:///forum/post/2556852
This is where business partners work together. One being the Prime and the others being sub-contractors. Where do you think this R&D is done - by employees in the shadow at the Pentagon? It's private sector business, sure you can got to think out of the box to let the companies that stand to make a ton of taxpayer cash put some skin in the game. I didn't say cut it totally out, but I am for reducing it. I would keep the university cloak and dagger R&D grants...
The point is, however, that much of this research is done by companies that have no idea what the other companies are working on to keep projects more secretive.
They didn't go to Company A and say "Build us a Stealth Fighter". Instead they went to company A and said "design us a skin that deflects radar". To Company B "design us this computer system". Company C "Design us this engine", etc.
My point is, the private sector cannot be expected to spend millions designing things unless the military orders and funds it. What company out there would willingly choose to dump millions into a project that might fail and then not get paid for it?
I love the private sector and all, but no corporation is that patriotic...
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/2556862
I do get your point....just playing along.
Me Too
http:///forum/post/2556862
I do get your point....just playing along.
Me Too
zman1
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2556867
My point is, the private sector cannot be expected to spend millions designing things unless the military orders and funds it.
There must be a fundamental difference on how you view business relating to a statement/scope of work bid process, cost control, and earned value project management (EVM). Yes, there is only one Prime on a contract and not all subs know what the end product will be, they only know their part. P.S. a lot of times the statement/scope of work is written by a consultant for the government, not employees.
http:///forum/post/2556867
My point is, the private sector cannot be expected to spend millions designing things unless the military orders and funds it.
There must be a fundamental difference on how you view business relating to a statement/scope of work bid process, cost control, and earned value project management (EVM). Yes, there is only one Prime on a contract and not all subs know what the end product will be, they only know their part. P.S. a lot of times the statement/scope of work is written by a consultant for the government, not employees.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2556581
He won't fip flop... He's a Socialist that apparently has little regard for our country and won't gain any more love for our country as time passes.
Open with who he is? Is that why he started off by saying he didn't know his pastor was an extremist?
More pictures? Is Photoshop coming out with a new edition?
How about addressing the issues?
*Higher taxes
*Weaker foreign policy
*Potentially millions of civilian allies dead in Iraq
*Negotiating with our enemies
*Church ties to Hamas
*Ties to Weather Underground
*Weaker military (Seriously, in this day and age you want to cut Research and Development in the military???)
The Church doesn't have ties to Hamas... Obama doesn't have ties to Weather Underground...you can't tie Obama to protestors of the Vietnam War
when he was only 5 or 6 years old.
You also can't say what potentially might happen... at this stage of the war... total regression is very possible with Iraq going back to complete chaos.
Obama has also said he is looking to build and improve the military... It states this as part of his Issues on his campaign site.
Negotiating with our enemies and Foreign Policy is the same thing.. he hasn't said he will negotiate with our enemies, but that he will meet with them directly as an option instead of always sending a US diplomat. I see nothing wrong with that... We act as if we are the gods of the modern world.. this is part of the problem with our foriegn policy... it is seriously flawed...and that is why there is so much anti-America sentiment.
I've also stated my feelings on taxes... Most people won't feel any tax increases... the tax increase would be for the most wealthy, whom many of these people are Obama supporters... I find this interesting...
But we need more tax dollars... we can't continue to spend $9-12 billion per month in Iraq...which doesn't include reconstruction or all the many other things associated with the war and the services (medical, mental, etc.) the troops need who return. We have pressing issues domestically, the war hasn't made us safer...why spend large sums of $ across the world and cut our services to pay for it? That doesn't make sense... and at the same time allow Iraq not to put any of their own dime towards the rebuilding. Lastly, I'll say we our borrowing from Social Security and other nations like China... What is funny is... we can't boycott the Olympics because we are so tied (in debted) to China, we can't afford to do so. Our National Debt is beyond serious... we have alot to pay back... and we can't do it by saving alone... otherwise bye-bye Social Security and many of our other services.
http:///forum/post/2556581
He won't fip flop... He's a Socialist that apparently has little regard for our country and won't gain any more love for our country as time passes.
Open with who he is? Is that why he started off by saying he didn't know his pastor was an extremist?
More pictures? Is Photoshop coming out with a new edition?
How about addressing the issues?
*Higher taxes
*Weaker foreign policy
*Potentially millions of civilian allies dead in Iraq
*Negotiating with our enemies
*Church ties to Hamas
*Ties to Weather Underground
*Weaker military (Seriously, in this day and age you want to cut Research and Development in the military???)
The Church doesn't have ties to Hamas... Obama doesn't have ties to Weather Underground...you can't tie Obama to protestors of the Vietnam War
when he was only 5 or 6 years old.
You also can't say what potentially might happen... at this stage of the war... total regression is very possible with Iraq going back to complete chaos.
Obama has also said he is looking to build and improve the military... It states this as part of his Issues on his campaign site.
Negotiating with our enemies and Foreign Policy is the same thing.. he hasn't said he will negotiate with our enemies, but that he will meet with them directly as an option instead of always sending a US diplomat. I see nothing wrong with that... We act as if we are the gods of the modern world.. this is part of the problem with our foriegn policy... it is seriously flawed...and that is why there is so much anti-America sentiment.
I've also stated my feelings on taxes... Most people won't feel any tax increases... the tax increase would be for the most wealthy, whom many of these people are Obama supporters... I find this interesting...
But we need more tax dollars... we can't continue to spend $9-12 billion per month in Iraq...which doesn't include reconstruction or all the many other things associated with the war and the services (medical, mental, etc.) the troops need who return. We have pressing issues domestically, the war hasn't made us safer...why spend large sums of $ across the world and cut our services to pay for it? That doesn't make sense... and at the same time allow Iraq not to put any of their own dime towards the rebuilding. Lastly, I'll say we our borrowing from Social Security and other nations like China... What is funny is... we can't boycott the Olympics because we are so tied (in debted) to China, we can't afford to do so. Our National Debt is beyond serious... we have alot to pay back... and we can't do it by saving alone... otherwise bye-bye Social Security and many of our other services.
rylan1
Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2556645
Issues don't matter, results don't matter. Remember when Rylan was whining about "addressing the issue" and quoted Obama's little soundbite about CEO's making to much money. And I wrote this huge post disgussing the idiotic idea from an economic perspective, and Rylan never even responded to my posts? A liberal can't win on issues. They have to win by making fun of an ivy league grad for being stupid, misinformation like "McBush", and attempting to define appropriate political discourse by creating absurd politically correctness rules that attempts to silence the other side.
HMMM... I heard recently that McCain has been talking about capping CEO pay... or that they make too much...
http:///forum/post/2556645
Issues don't matter, results don't matter. Remember when Rylan was whining about "addressing the issue" and quoted Obama's little soundbite about CEO's making to much money. And I wrote this huge post disgussing the idiotic idea from an economic perspective, and Rylan never even responded to my posts? A liberal can't win on issues. They have to win by making fun of an ivy league grad for being stupid, misinformation like "McBush", and attempting to define appropriate political discourse by creating absurd politically correctness rules that attempts to silence the other side.
HMMM... I heard recently that McCain has been talking about capping CEO pay... or that they make too much...
rylan1
Active Member
Here's a big question I have...
Why on the same day that Petraeus is speaking about the war in Iraq... does the Bush Admin give the Medal of Honor to that soilder who sacrificed his life?
Does anyone see a problem with this?
It seems rather ironic that they chose to have it on the same day... which draws sympathy and patriotic feelings on the same day they are trying to justify the war... The family should be upset... we should all be upset... because this was deliberate... Think about it
Why on the same day that Petraeus is speaking about the war in Iraq... does the Bush Admin give the Medal of Honor to that soilder who sacrificed his life?
Does anyone see a problem with this?
It seems rather ironic that they chose to have it on the same day... which draws sympathy and patriotic feelings on the same day they are trying to justify the war... The family should be upset... we should all be upset... because this was deliberate... Think about it
stdreb27
Active Member
Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2556857
Good one... That's like saying when McCain crashed 3 planes in the Navy, he can't fly straight, therefore he can't President....
Only if they were shooting at the bowling ball while he scored a 37.
http:///forum/post/2556857
Only if they were shooting at the bowling ball while he scored a 37.