View Single Post
Old 12-08-2019, 12:29 PM   #19
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This is one of the financial rabbit holes that the federal government crawls into when it assumes responsibilities that it constitutionally does not have. When it takes on a host of other things that constitutionally should be left to local governments and to individuals, such as various welfare and entitlement programs, then an expectation is created in the people that it is right and necessary for it to transfer to those programs the funds necessary for its constitutional mandates such as spending on the military.

And when both obligations, constitutional and unconstitutional, need more money than the government has, it must borrow it. But the financial burden becomes permanently entrenched, so not only must the borrowing continue and the debt pile up, but it expands even more than the already exponential growth when politicians realize that this slight of bureaucratic hand can be used to pile on even more compassionate sounding vote getting giveaways.

And, naturally, the people now having been trained that it is the federal governments duty to provide the most basic personal needs to those who it deems are incapable of providing themselves, the populace feels that it is only right that it scrape out the money from seemingly over-luxurious things going to the less needy military and give it to those who obviously, so we are told, need it more.

Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 12-08-2019 at 02:27 PM..
detbuch is offline