Just because I don’t support them doesn’t mean I don’t see the value they provide. Lesser of 2 evils and all that.
Which is backed up by what exactly? All the times China/Russia tried to start WWIII and NATO stopped them?
Again, if EU/etc isn’t pulling their weight in NATO, the simple fix would be to make them, yes? Since these problem countries are quite literally in their backyard, they don’t have a lot of choices to pick up the slack.
I will also add my condolences. Indeed, this is directly in my wheelhouse (just last week I was part of the program for a national meeting with the national leaders in ventricular assist device research, and several of the sessions included some absolutely heart-shredding discussions about how to determine which patients are suitable for VAD therapy and how we can work on the options available for pediatric patients). Deepest sympathies for your loss, and if it may be any comfort, know that lots of smart(ish) people are working hard, and perhaps your daughter’s sacrifice will not be in vain if, someday, what we learned from her and others is what leads to the breakthrough that saves the next generation’s life.
One of the things I admittedly struggle with is that, no matter how you slice it, health insurance cannot work without some communist stripes to it. It only works if we all put something into the kitty, and those who need it are covered when things go south and we need some help.
In principle, the idea of “catastrophe only” coverage sounds like a great idea. Who wants their healthcare dollars to subsidize diabetes medications for fat people that won’t get off the couch and lose weight, right? But there are soooooooo many complexities in defining where that line gets drawn of what’s elective care versus catastrophe or critical care.
Are you suggesting military spending is the greater evil between the two?
What do you think the Soviet Union would have done post WW2 without NATO? It’s a deterrent. Should we dismantle our nuclear arsenal because China and Russia haven’t tried to nuke us?
The only way we could “make them” would be simply pull funding and even then that might not work. More likely China or Russia would be happy to pick up the slack.
Not at all. I’m suggesting the lesser of 2 evils is to spend money on entitlements.
Which is awesome. I’m proud of America for picking up the slack thus far. I just can’t find a way to rationalize spending billions on other countries while cutting spending to our own.
God, that’s awful. So sorry for your loss. I can’t even imagine.
This phrase “spending billions on other countries” implies that the US actually gives massive amounts of money to NATO members countries, which is not the case.
https://2009-2017.state.gov/t/pm/ppa/sat/c14560.htm
Also, if you look at the numbers of US troops stationed overseas, the US has less troops in the whole of Europe than in South Korea and comparable to the number of troops in Japan…
Not at all. It implies we have bases in a ridiculous number of countries which includes bases, people, hardware, software, etcetcetc. It implies we foot far more than our fair share of NATO funding. I’m also in no way placing blame on EU and am including those SK and Japan troops in my original thought.
We simply spend far too much on “defense” than I could ever be comfortable with, hence the “cut defense before entitlements” mentality.
Edit: I actually wasn’t aware of the sheer number of troops we have deployed in some of these countries, and I thank you for showing me. It only reinforces my point.
14.2% of prisoners in America have Mexican citizenship
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_citizenship.jsp
What segment of the prison population is being looked at here? Looks like some loaded stats without any support to me
46.4% of federal inmates are drug offense related, good lord.
Have you noticed that something like 90% of the prison population is composed of Americans? Clearly, they represent the real criminal element.
I’m more worried about the men. 93% are men?!?! Can we get these men off the streets already.
I’m also confused that when you click “race” the only options are white, black, asian, & native american. 0% Hispanic seems low to me
For reasons someone else can probably explain better, “race” (white, black, etc) and “ethnicity” (Hispanic or non-Hispanic) are often considered two distinct variables. I only know this because in virtually all healthcare studies that I work on, there is a race variable and an ethnicity variable. Someone else can probably tell us why that’s the case.
Time to deport them to, er, my vote is New Jersey.
Time to build a wall along the Mason-Dixon line then…
Let’s chalk it up to the same idiots that came up with miles/F over km/C and call it a day.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
I prefer furlongs per fortnight.
