2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#9,152
#9,152
alexmanu said:
It's probably a net loss. Lots of illegal immigrants don't pay taxes and those that do are on a low rate because of minimum wage employment.
Click to expand...

Depends on how the schools are funded. You guys are completely willing to guess that they don't pay in enough, but there is no way to know.

How are your schools funded? Property tax? Sales tax? Income tax? They all pay property tax, either directly or indirectly. Sales tax, duh. Income tax, a lot of them are paid under the table, so the government will never see that money, but a lot of them pay with fake info and don't get money back at the end of the year, so the government collects more on them.

But it's fine just to guess. I'm sure you're right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9,153
#9,153
n_huffhines said:
WWII isn't comparable to our modern day interventions. Truman got us into Korea. Kennedy and LBJ got us into Vietnam. They ended under Republicans. Intervention under Rs wasn't really a thing until Bush.

Also, most of our interventions have been complete disasters. It's one thing to help in a world war where war has been declared on us. Our interventions today are within countries, not between countries. It's not even close to the same thing as WWII.
Click to expand...

Eisenhower got us into Vietnam if you want to get technical about it. With both military advisers as well as the Domino Theory in regards to Southeast Asia.
 
#9,154
#9,154
n_huffhines said:
WWII isn't comparable to our modern day interventions. Truman got us into Korea. Kennedy and LBJ got us into Vietnam. They ended under Republicans. Intervention under Rs wasn't really a thing until Bush.

Also, most of our interventions have been complete disasters. It's one thing to help in a world war where war has been declared on us. Our interventions today are within countries, not between countries. It's not even close to the same thing as WWII.
Click to expand...

Most have been disasters?
 
#9,156
#9,156
What do you think of this report 88?

Welfare Use by Legal and Illegal Immigrant Households

In fact, illegal immigrants' use of some programs is quite high. For example, using just the two migration variables, 30 percent of households headed by illegal immigrants are on food stamps and 56 percent have at least one person on Medicaid. Any suggestion that there are no welfare costs associated with illegal immigrants is incorrect.
Click to expand...

camarota-welfare-illegals-t1.png


camarota-welfare-illegals-f1.png


camarota-welfare-illegals-f4.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,157
#9,157
Grand Vol said:
Eisenhower got us into Vietnam if you want to get technical about it. With both military advisers as well as the Domino Theory in regards to Southeast Asia.
Click to expand...

Well, it was a tiny operation right? I'm not counting every little intervention, otherwise it's business as usual. I'm talking about the guys that committed us to big cluster****s. Eisenhower would have never escalated like LBJ did.
 
#9,159
#9,159
n_huffhines said:
Korea - not a disaster
Vietnam - complete disaster
Iraq - not a disaster
Iraq - disaster
Afghanistan - disaster
Click to expand...

Korea was a disaster if you think about how many lives would have been saved if they didn't take the decision to move past the 38th parallel and force the Chinese into the war as a result. NSC-81/1 basically sanctioned rollback in northern Korea and MacArthur wanted to take it into China.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,160
#9,160
n_huffhines said:
Korea - not a disaster
Vietnam - complete disaster
Iraq - not a disaster
Iraq - disaster
Afghanistan - disaster
Click to expand...

Forgetting some.

Dominican Republic - not a disaster
Grenada - not a disaster
Panama - not a disaster
The Balkans - not a disaster
 
#9,161
#9,161
alexmanu said:
Korea was a disaster if you think about how many lives would have been saved if they didn't take the decision to move past the 38th parallel and force the Chinese into the war as a result. NSC-81/1 basically sanctioned rollback in northern Korea and MacArthur wanted to take it into China.
Click to expand...

Truman ****ed MacArthur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,162
#9,162
n_huffhines said:
Well, it was a tiny operation right? I'm not counting every little intervention, otherwise it's business as usual. I'm talking about the guys that committed us to big cluster****s. Eisenhower would have never escalated like LBJ did.
Click to expand...

Different times and different situations. Vietnam was still trying to find it's way after France left during the Eisenhower Admin and the communist insurgency in the South was still in it's infancy. We can't say for certain whether or not he would have upped the ante in regards to that war or not.

But the initial US involvement paved the way for the later, much larger intervention in 1965.
 
#9,163
#9,163
alexmanu said:
Korea was a disaster if you think about how many lives would have been saved if they didn't take the decision to move past the 38th parallel and force the Chinese into the war as a result. NSC-81/1 basically sanctioned rollback in northern Korea and MacArthur wanted to take it into China.
Click to expand...

OK then. That works in my favor.
 
#9,164
#9,164
hog88 said:
Forgetting some.

Dominican Republic - not a disaster
Grenada - not a disaster
Panama - not a disaster
The Balkans - not a disaster
Click to expand...

I didn't know we were discussing little ****ters like these. I would say Panama is a total embarrassment to our country. We captured a leader of another country with little justification. It's a good thing we are the biggest kid on the block.

Now we gotta throw in every kind of intervention.

CIA coup in Iran
Backing Iraq against Iran
Backing Afghanistan against USSR
and everything during Obama admin
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9,165
#9,165
hog88 said:
Truman ****ed MacArthur.
Click to expand...

I wrote my dissertation on Containment policy in Korea and both MacArthur and Truman made errors. But MacArthur just made error after error. When he heard that the communists in the north had invaded south Korea he thought nothing of it and assumed Rhee would deal with it. Then when he got into Korea - granted he did a great job turning the tide and pushing the commies back into the north - he planned from the start to push the war past the 38th parallel. He wanted to get into China too and didn't rule out nuclear weapons use. He was just too aggressive to command the military when Containment was the policy of the day.

I think Kennan was generally on the money with his foreign policy ideas at the time. Nitze turned his original containment strategy into a rigid and slightly aggressive form, through NSC-68, and it came to haunt the US. Gaddis wrote a very good book on Kennan. Acheson was also pretty good but he was one of the reasons that southern Korea was invaded in the first place by excluding them in the defensive perimeter.
 
#9,166
#9,166
Grand Vol said:
Different times and different situations. Vietnam was still trying to find it's way after France left during the Eisenhower Admin and the communist insurgency in the South was still in it's infancy. We can't say for certain whether or not he would have upped the ante in regards to that war or not.

But the initial US involvement paved the way for the later, much larger intervention in 1965.
Click to expand...

If Ike would have met with Ho Chi Min things might have been different also. He did come to us first.
 
#9,168
#9,168
alexmanu said:
I wrote my dissertation on Containment policy in Korea and both MacArthur and Truman made errors. But MacArthur just made error after error. When he heard that the communists in the north had invaded south Korea he thought nothing of it and assumed Rhee would deal with it. Then when he got into Korea - granted he did a great job turning the tide and pushing the commies back into the north - he planned from the start to push the war past the 38th parallel. He wanted to get into China too and didn't rule out nuclear weapons use. He was just too aggressive to command the military when Containment was the policy of the day.

I think Kennan was generally on the money with his foreign policy ideas at the time. Nitze turned his original containment strategy into a rigid and slightly aggressive form, through NSC-68, and it came to haunt the US. Gaddis wrote a very good book on Kennan. Acheson was also pretty good but he was one of the reasons that southern Korea was invaded in the first place by excluding them in the defensive perimeter.
Click to expand...

True, MacArthur was itching for a fight with the Chinese and should have at least stopped at Pyongyang. But Truman could have stopped him at any time.
 
#9,169
#9,169
hog88 said:
True, MacArthur was itching for a fight with the Chinese and should have at least stopped at Pyongyang. But Truman could have stopped him at any time.
Click to expand...

To be fair to Truman both the NSC and JCS (as well as elements of the State Department) were feeding him very bad info. Eventually he got it right, but there was a massive loss of life because they didn't just stop at the damn 38th!
 
#9,171
#9,171
n_huffhines said:
WWII isn't comparable to our modern day interventions. Truman got us into Korea. Kennedy and LBJ got us into Vietnam. They ended under Republicans. Intervention under Rs wasn't really a thing until Bush.

Also, most of our interventions have been complete disasters. It's one thing to help in a world war where war has been declared on us. Our interventions today are within countries, not between countries. It's not even close to the same thing as WWII.
Click to expand...

Dems wanted us in WW2 much earlier. Can you imagine if we had? We would've had casualties in the million+ range. Also you can easily make a case where we didn't belong in WW1 at all and our involvement made WW2
 
#9,175
#9,175
n_huffhines said:
WWII isn't comparable to our modern day interventions. Truman got us into Korea. Kennedy and LBJ got us into Vietnam. They ended under Republicans. Intervention under Rs wasn't really a thing until Bush.

Also, most of our interventions have been complete disasters. It's one thing to help in a world war where war has been declared on us. Our interventions today are within countries, not between countries. It's not even close to the same thing as WWII.
Click to expand...

You need to go back and review history. Ike signed the treaty with S Vietnam that we would defend them if/when the French left. At that time we were still a country of integrity and honored our commitments.

You're correct in that it's not the same as WWII. That was the last war we have been involved in that we intended to win, not just come to some kind of stalemate at some point, and lately we just turn tail and run.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top