Comments on: The Real Number http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/ Where public policy meets common sense Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:55:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: David Anderson http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21497 David Anderson Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:42:07 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21497 Getting back to the subject, :) I look forward to Dave's article on Delaware's U-6. I mentioned it in mine near the end, but I took more of an individual impact and political consequence than I did a local impact. I will enjoy the local angle. I am disturbed that U-6 is headed for its highest level since the depression (some say it is already there but they changed the way it was caculated around 1993 so there is some debate), and the administration does not even plan to talk about a plan until next month. It is unbelievable. So much for Democrats caring about the little people. Getting back to the subject, :) I look forward to Dave’s article on Delaware’s U-6. I mentioned it in mine near the end, but I took more of an individual impact and political consequence than I did a local impact. I will enjoy the local angle.

I am disturbed that U-6 is headed for its highest level since the depression (some say it is already there but they changed the way it was caculated around 1993 so there is some debate), and the administration does not even plan to talk about a plan until next month. It is unbelievable. So much for Democrats caring about the little people.

]]> By: David Anderson http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21496 David Anderson Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:37:26 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21496 Well said, that has served us well for over an hundred years. That is not to say that we can't look over the list of bases. I support a strong military as do most of our readers. I guess it is just a matter of interpreting the best way to maintain that strength. Well said, that has served us well for over an hundred years. That is not to say that we can’t look over the list of bases. I support a strong military as do most of our readers. I guess it is just a matter of interpreting the best way to maintain that strength.

]]> By: annoni http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21494 annoni Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:29:32 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21494 first rule of war fighting, always be the away team, never be the home team. first rule of war fighting, always be the away team, never be the home team.

]]> By: Evan Q http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21484 Evan Q Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:46:37 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21484 David, What you're forgetting to mention to Chris is that most of those bases are actually funded almost entirely by payments, tarriff incentives or other perks from the countries where the bases are housed. I also understand your concerns of forward deployment bases, etc. but I think Chris has an excellent point. It's time for America to take a small step back. If the rest of the world is sick of America playing protector I say fine. Let's get our own house in order, pull our boys out of the countries that don't want us there and ensure that our borders are secure. For those countries happy to have us and willing to pay a lions share of the cost of housing our troops on their soil I say we stay. That's all the more reason to become energy independent and to reset our production base here in America as well. David,
What you’re forgetting to mention to Chris is that most of those bases are actually funded almost entirely by payments, tarriff incentives or other perks from the countries where the bases are housed. I also understand your concerns of forward deployment bases, etc. but I think Chris has an excellent point. It’s time for America to take a small step back. If the rest of the world is sick of America playing protector I say fine. Let’s get our own house in order, pull our boys out of the countries that don’t want us there and ensure that our borders are secure. For those countries happy to have us and willing to pay a lions share of the cost of housing our troops on their soil I say we stay.

That’s all the more reason to become energy independent and to reset our production base here in America as well.

]]> By: David Anderson http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21481 David Anderson Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:22:46 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21481 Democrats don't support those bases as well? The last time I checked almost as many did as Republicans percentage wise. Not only are many important as forward troop deployment bases so that we can react quickly in our interests anywhere in the world, not only have they helped keep a sort of global peace, they make great places for Congressmen and Senators to fly into on their junkets with no customs and no personal cost to them. Who wouldn't support them. LOL Democrats don’t support those bases as well? The last time I checked almost as many did as Republicans percentage wise. Not only are many important as forward troop deployment bases so that we can react quickly in our interests anywhere in the world, not only have they helped keep a sort of global peace, they make great places for Congressmen and Senators to fly into on their junkets with no customs and no personal cost to them. Who wouldn’t support them. LOL

]]> By: Chris Slavens http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21476 Chris Slavens Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:11:04 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21476 Democrats waste billions of tax dollars in the U.S. through unnecessary and unconstitutional redistributions of wealth, but let's not forget that most Republicans support our overseas military presence. I'm not talking about Iraq and Afghanistan exclusively; I'm referring to our permanent bases in over 130 countries around the world. If we returned to a constitutional noninterventionist foreign policy (which is much more of a conservative position than a liberal one), we would not only deal a blow to the formation of the loose form of international government that is in the future, but would save billions of tax dollars that could better be used on true defense (not merely maintaining a "police" presence), and bettering our economy. Democrats waste billions of tax dollars in the U.S. through unnecessary and unconstitutional redistributions of wealth, but let’s not forget that most Republicans support our overseas military presence. I’m not talking about Iraq and Afghanistan exclusively; I’m referring to our permanent bases in over 130 countries around the world. If we returned to a constitutional noninterventionist foreign policy (which is much more of a conservative position than a liberal one), we would not only deal a blow to the formation of the loose form of international government that is in the future, but would save billions of tax dollars that could better be used on true defense (not merely maintaining a “police” presence), and bettering our economy.

]]> By: Evan Q http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21475 Evan Q Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:08:22 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21475 http://www.examiner.com/x-30090-Delaware-Education-Examiner~y2009m11d15-UD-Cleared-to-Purchase-Chrysler-Plant U-6 is 13.5% and yet the state is JUST fine with U of D purchasing an abandoned auto plant that was recently retooled and has recently produced SUVs despite a number of "non-union" automakers who expressed interest in the plant. Rumors are Nissan wanted to build the Rogue there and that Hyundai was interested in building their Veracruz here in Delaware. http://www.examiner.com/x-30090-Delaware-Education-Examiner~y2009m11d15-UD-Cleared-to-Purchase-Chrysler-Plant

U-6 is 13.5% and yet the state is JUST fine with U of D purchasing an abandoned auto plant that was recently retooled and has recently produced SUVs despite a number of “non-union” automakers who expressed interest in the plant. Rumors are Nissan wanted to build the Rogue there and that Hyundai was interested in building their Veracruz here in Delaware.

]]> By: Dave Burris http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21470 Dave Burris Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:23:33 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21470 U-6 in Delaware is 13.5%. I'm working on a post on it over the next day or so. U-6 in Delaware is 13.5%. I’m working on a post on it over the next day or so.

]]> By: John Hightower http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21466 John Hightower Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:51:57 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21466 I like to look at both sides of the health care reform and provide sources when possible. I encourage people to look at an issue from multiple directions. Here is a review by CBPP of the Coburn Ryan health bill mentioned in the above post. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2879 I like to look at both sides of the health care reform and provide sources when possible. I encourage people to look at an issue from multiple directions.
Here is a review by CBPP of the Coburn Ryan health bill mentioned in the above post.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2879

]]> By: Mike Protack http://www.delawarepolitics.net/the-real-number/comment-page-1/#comment-21464 Mike Protack Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:51:21 +0000 http://www.delawarepolitics.net/?p=7477#comment-21464 Here is the lighter side of the Obama wrecking ball. http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/biden-says-we-want-to-expand-the-middle-class/ Mike Protack Here is the lighter side of the Obama wrecking ball.
http://delawarerepublican.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/biden-says-we-want-to-expand-the-middle-class/

Mike Protack

]]>