Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Education - Public vs PrivateFollow

#202 Feb 19 2012 at 5:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Athletic scholarships are a good way for kids from poorer backgrounds to get into University, though. Which is nice.


You're making the assumption that poor and athletic students can't earn other scholarships, i.e. academic.

Wild idiot uses provoke.

It's not very effective.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#203 Feb 19 2012 at 6:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Athletic scholarships are a good way for kids from poorer backgrounds to get into University, though. Which is nice.


You're making the assumption that poor and athletic students can't earn other scholarships, i.e. academic.

Wild idiot uses provoke.

It's not very effective.


Wild idiot is confused.
Wild idiot is hurt in it's confusion.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#204 Feb 20 2012 at 7:15 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
wild idiot loses 5 HPs and gains the "Bad Breath" debuff.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#205 Feb 20 2012 at 2:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Apropos to the military budget discussion:
Atlantic wrote:
While everyone knows that the defense budget is large -- even in the numbers that the public sees as the formally admitted figures by the Department of Defense -- the truth is that when one scratches beneath the bureaucratic veneer, national security spending is much larger, nearly double the amount US citizens are told.

A Republican, numbers-compulsive defense wonk at the Center for Defense Information, Winslow Wheeler, has published a great summary of what America's defense budget 'really' is.


Spoiler: It's $986 billion for 2012 and $994 billion for 2013.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#206 Feb 21 2012 at 3:25 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
As a discussion on how to spend money, you should ask "Is the intent or mission being met?" If the mission is being met, then you ask the second question. Is there any place where we can cut spending.

That's like saying "We'll start with a Ferrari to drive to the store and, if it meets our needs, decide at a later date if we should save money by switching to a cheaper car" or "Let's lease a 150,000 sq ft building for our bread and jellies store and then see later if we should move to a smaller and more affordable building."

Works great if you have money to burn, I suppose. We don't.


Only if we had no concept of how much cars cost or the amount of space necessary to run that store. The reality is, some solutions are difficult, expensive and or long. History has shown that wars are not cheap. Therefore, we have a concept on the prices of war which makes your analogies invalid.

In counter to your example, that's like you being starving and saying "Hmmm.. I'm hungry, I'm going to start off with a Tic-Tac and buy more if I'm still hungry".

You should already have a gauge on how much food it will take to satisfy you and you should start there. Likewise, we know approximately how much money goes into being successful in war and you start there. Just because that number is higher than other things doesn't make it wrong by default.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#207 Feb 21 2012 at 6:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
In counter to your example, that's like you being starving and saying "Hmmm.. I'm hungry, I'm going to start off with a Tic-Tac and buy more if I'm still hungry".

Right. If only... if only... there was a middle ground between a Tic-Tac and a ten course feast! Oh, if only a middle ground existed between a fifteen cent bullet and a trillion dollars a year!

Sadly, it does not Smiley: frown

Quote:
History has shown that wars are not cheap

History has shown that politics aren't cheap which is a much larger problem when addressing the military.

Edited, Feb 21st 2012 6:36am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#208Almalieque, Posted: Feb 21 2012 at 9:08 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) ??? That doesn't contradict my statement. Just because I like to waste money doesn't mean I can find a cheaper way to fly to the moon. Flying to the moon will still cost a lot and unless you don't want to fly to the moon, then you will have to spend that money even with frugal politicians.
#209 Feb 21 2012 at 9:18 AM Rating: Good
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,512 posts
Unless we have a centrally-planned Jophiel economy, I don't think it really matters that he's not omniscient with regard to military spending. There's this crazy thing we've had for a little while called "people who know what the fuck they're doing."

It does take a little while to grok the concept, but there's a small spark of hope in my heart. That might be the drugs, though.
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#210 Feb 21 2012 at 9:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
The thing is that you're acting like you know the middle ground, but you don't.
[...]Is there room for cut backs, of course, but neither you nor me know the exact amount.

I never claimed I knew an exact amount. I said we're spending too much on defense and "Well, it's working so far" is a really bad reason to continue doing so.

Jophiel wrote:
History has shown that politics aren't cheap which is a much larger problem when addressing the military.
??? That doesn't contradict my statement.[/quote]
I'm just going to let that sit.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#211Almalieque, Posted: Feb 21 2012 at 10:31 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) You're combining two RELATED concepts as one. The spender doesn't affect the price of the goods.
#212 Feb 21 2012 at 10:37 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,275 posts
I know I can't do my mission successfully if I don't get new carpeting in my office every year.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#213 Feb 21 2012 at 10:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,742 posts
Almalieque wrote:
The spender doesn't affect the price of the goods.
Actually, they do.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#214 Feb 21 2012 at 10:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm just going to let that sit.
You're combining two RELATED concepts as one. The spender doesn't affect the price of the goods.

I'm just going to let that one sit.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#215 Feb 21 2012 at 11:42 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I know I can't do my mission successfully if I don't get new carpeting in my office every year.


As I said, I'm sure there are some areas where money can be saved (i.e. stupid studies, uniform changes, etc.), but we don't have the knowledge of the big picture in order to say anything other than "we need to save money". We can say that on any topic. I'm sure that there's money wasted on Education as well, that doesn't mean we should make overall statements of reducing spending on Education in reference to our national economic plan.

That is something that should be handled on a lower level. That money spent on your new carpet may have been allocated to be spent on something else. Just because it was wasted on carpet, doesn't mean that the allocated money isn't needed in some other area. After moving that money to another area, your budget might remain the same.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#216 Feb 21 2012 at 11:55 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,275 posts
Alma wrote:
That money spent on your new carpet may have been allocated to be spent on something else.
Oh, we're pretending that money isn't spent at the end of the year for the sole purpose of spending money to keep from receiving a reduction in funding for the following fiscal year?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#217 Feb 21 2012 at 12:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Just because it was wasted on carpet, doesn't mean that the allocated money isn't needed in some other area.

We need that money so we can mismanage it!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#218Almalieque, Posted: Feb 21 2012 at 12:12 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Except it doesn't.. The actual price spent on a product is irrelevant. Something that is considered "expensive" or "more worth" will ALWAYS cost more and or have more worth than something that is considered "cheap" and or "less worth".
#219 Feb 21 2012 at 12:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Sniping Sweetpea
*****
18,461 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm just going to let that sit.
You're combining two RELATED concepts as one. The spender doesn't affect the price of the goods.

I'm just going to let that one sit.
I'd make it sit in a corner. Wearing a pointy hat.

Glad to see you're still battling the evils of asshattery, love.


Edited, Feb 21st 2012 12:24pm by Atomicflea
____________________________
That's the kind of dude
I was lookin' for
And yes you'll get slapped
if you're lookin', ho

#220 Feb 21 2012 at 12:20 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,953 posts
Lol at using relativistic, subjective classifications to try and make an objective argument.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#221 Feb 21 2012 at 12:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The Pentagon needs to get Alma on its PR payroll.


Speaking of mismanaged funds and all...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#222 Feb 21 2012 at 12:39 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Alma wrote:
That money spent on your new carpet may have been allocated to be spent on something else.
Oh, we're pretending that money isn't spent at the end of the year for the sole purpose of spending money to keep from receiving a reduction in funding for the following fiscal year?


No.. What I'm saying is that I'm sure that there were other areas where that money wouldn't have been considered a waste. Instead, it was mismanaged in order to support the next fiscal year.

Just because money was mismanaged doesn't mean that the money was a surplus. I'm not saying that it weren't, but you can't say unless you see the whole big picture. What we can say is that the money was mismanaged at a certain level. Once all areas are met and money is wasted, then yes, there needs to be a reduction in the overall budget.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#223 Feb 21 2012 at 12:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Almalieque wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Alma wrote:
That money spent on your new carpet may have been allocated to be spent on something else.
Oh, we're pretending that money isn't spent at the end of the year for the sole purpose of spending money to keep from receiving a reduction in funding for the following fiscal year?


No.. What I'm saying is that I'm sure that there were other areas where that money wouldn't have been considered a waste. Instead, it was mismanaged in order to support the next fiscal year.


That doesn't make sense. If it was needed, it wouldn't have had to be spent on carpeting...
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#224 Feb 21 2012 at 12:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,742 posts
Almalieque wrote:
I know what you're trying to say
No, clearly you don't. This has nothing to do with the quality and everything to do with who purchases something.

An example: I will charge Joe Blow more money for one of my hotel rooms than I will charge a corporate client who stays at my hotel frequently. I will charge the government more money than I charge the corporate client, despite the government having more people stay at my hotel, but I'll still charge them less than I charge Joe Blow.

Everyone gets the same room, none of them pay the same price.

Why will I charge the government more? Because I can. They have bloated budgets and no one is truly held accountable. The same deal works for most products.


My absolute favourite customer though? Relocating military personnel. They'll come in, tell me they need a room for 3-4 weeks, I'll try to negotiate with them and they cut me off saying "I just need a room. I don't care about the cost, the military is paying for it." Oil and gad exploration companies are a pretty close second for the same reason.

So, yes, who the spender is does affect the cost. And it's not just as simple as government versus corporate versus individual. Costs will vary depending on the department spending as well.




____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#225 Feb 21 2012 at 1:32 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,275 posts
Nilatai wrote:
That doesn't make sense. If it was needed, it wouldn't have had to be spent on carpeting...
Yeah, he doesn't seem to even know how the budget is dealt with. I'm not going to be the one to correct his imagination this thread. Needless to say, it's done the previous year and leaves a good 15% off as a buffer in case something major occurs that needs repairs or such.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#226 Feb 21 2012 at 2:06 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
My absolute favourite customer though? Relocating military personnel. They'll come in, tell me they need a room for 3-4 weeks, I'll try to negotiate with them and they cut me off saying "I just need a room. I don't care about the cost, the military is paying for it." Oil and gad exploration companies are a pretty close second for the same reason.
I can almost see the dollar signs in your eyes.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#227 Feb 21 2012 at 3:33 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
My absolute favourite customer though? Relocating military personnel. They'll come in, tell me they need a room for 3-4 weeks, I'll try to negotiate with them and they cut me off saying "I just need a room. I don't care about the cost, the military is paying for it." Oil and gad exploration companies are a pretty close second for the same reason.
I can almost see the dollar signs in your eyes.

Canadian dollars, though. Shame. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#228 Feb 21 2012 at 3:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,742 posts
Probably one of the more stable currencies right now.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#229 Feb 21 2012 at 4:02 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
True. Let's all laugh at the Eurozone. Glad Tony Blair didn't get his way with that one. Trololol *monocle*
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#230 Feb 21 2012 at 4:44 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,875 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
The thing is that you're acting like you know the middle ground, but you don't.
[...]Is there room for cut backs, of course, but neither you nor me know the exact amount.

I never claimed I knew an exact amount. I said we're spending too much on defense and "Well, it's working so far" is a really bad reason to continue doing so.


But it's a valid response if we're comparing two different things on which we spend similar amounts of money nationally. We spend less money (yeah, I'm going to discount the surely inflated calculations in the article you linked and go with the actual dollars budgeted and spent each year) on the military than we do on education. Is there anyone on this forum who'd doubt that the US has the best military in the world? Not just the best, but far and away the best? Is there anyone who'd say we have the best education system in the world? Is there anyone who'd say we have even remotely close to the best?

While we can certainly debate whether or not our military could operate just as well while trimming the total cost a bit, we at least have a military that performs as we expect it to. We do *not* have an education system which does. So. Shouldn't we be more concerned with a system that costs us more than we think it should and doesn't perform as expected?

Even more bizarre is the idea that someone would attempt to excuse the problems with our education system by pointing to the military and declaring that it costs too much. Remember, that's how the whole military spending thing got injected into this conversation in the first place. I thought it was a ridiculous argument at the time, and I still think it's ridiculous.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#231 Feb 21 2012 at 4:52 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,817 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Oh, if only a middle ground existed between a fifteen cent bullet and a trillion dollars a year!

Please tell me where you're getting your bullets. I can't find them less than 24 cents each.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#232 Feb 21 2012 at 5:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The military buys in bulk.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#233 Feb 21 2012 at 5:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,991 posts
They should do the same with hotel rooms. Smiley: nod
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#234 Feb 22 2012 at 3:17 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
and carpet.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#235Almalieque, Posted: Feb 22 2012 at 10:46 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Let me give you an example.
#236 Feb 22 2012 at 10:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Guess how many times the mother will give the kid $4 to buy milk?

Now guess how many times Lolgaxe's office will be carpeted.

See the point, now?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#237 Feb 22 2012 at 10:59 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,275 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
See the point, now?
Just a minute while I hold my breath before the ensuing revelation.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#238 Feb 22 2012 at 11:01 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
See the point, now?
Just a minute while I hold my breath before the ensuing revelation.

Smiley: laugh
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#239 Feb 22 2012 at 11:01 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
See the point, now?
Just a minute while I hold my breath before the ensuing revelation.


How long can you hold your breath?
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#240 Feb 22 2012 at 11:03 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
rdmcandie wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
See the point, now?
Just a minute while I hold my breath before the ensuing revelation.


How long can you hold your breath?

It'll have to be the rest of Alma's life, at least.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#241Almalieque, Posted: Feb 22 2012 at 11:04 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) The fact that you spent $100 for a fake Rolex, doesn't make that fake Rolex worth $100.
#242 Feb 22 2012 at 11:10 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
double

Edited, Feb 22nd 2012 7:11pm by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#243 Feb 22 2012 at 11:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Relatively expensive compared to what?

The entire point here is If we could spend 300M to get 1.1B in mileage, we'd be in a better position. This is not a hard concept. Do you have some sort of a moral objection to efficiency?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#244 Feb 22 2012 at 11:18 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Guess how many times the mother will give the kid $4 to buy milk?

Now guess how many times Lolgaxe's office will be carpeted.

See the point, now?


Yes, I see clearly that you fail to admit that you are wrong. I never claimed that the government ever gave a kid $4 to buy milk. It was an example for you to understand the concept. Mismanaging money doesn't mean that the money wasn't needed. I'm sure that money spent on the carpet could have been well spent some where else. Unless that is, he's working in a financially perfect environment, where money isn't needed.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#245 Feb 22 2012 at 11:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
I never claimed that the government ever gave a kid $4 to buy milk. It was an example for you to understand the concept.

Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#246 Feb 22 2012 at 11:21 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,275 posts
It was a horrible example, though. And by horrible I mean even horrible by your lousy track record. It isn't "Mom gives $4 for milk, kid steals $4 for magazine." It's "Mom gives $4 for milk, kid spends $3 on milk and pockets the $1, while telling Mom milk was $4."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#247 Feb 22 2012 at 11:24 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Wow...
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#248 Feb 22 2012 at 11:31 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Relatively expensive compared to what?



Relative to other national spending.

TLW wrote:
The entire point here is If we could spend 300M to get 1.1B in mileage, we'd be in a better position. This is not a hard concept. Do you have some sort of a moral objection to efficiency?


No. My point is that you have no data or basis to even think that is possible. You are claiming that we should reduce spending without actually understanding the spending. All you are doing is looking at big numbers and saying "I know we can reduce that!". Of course we can reduce spending. There isn't a spending project that we can't reduce the spending somehow. However, if you do a cost/mission analysis, you may find out that it may only go from 1.1B to 1 B. Yet, you have this fantasy that it could/should be much more based on absolutely nothing but desires.

With that being said, you can apply that same concept to anything. "We should be able to have an effective public education without spending more than $1M for the entire nation!".

So, why are you pointing out the military? Part of that answer is because of the amount of money spent, which is why I explained to you that somethings will just be relatively expensive if you do it effectively. Just because you elect you a frugal politician, doesn't mean that the change in the price of war will be noticeable to the overall deficit.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#249 Feb 22 2012 at 11:34 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,046 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Relatively expensive compared to what?



Relative to other national spending.

TLW wrote:
The entire point here is If we could spend 300M to get 1.1B in mileage, we'd be in a better position. This is not a hard concept. Do you have some sort of a moral objection to efficiency?


No. My point is that you have no data or basis to even think that is possible. You are claiming that we should reduce spending without actually understanding the spending. All you are doing is looking at big numbers and saying "I know we can reduce that!". Of course we can reduce spending. There isn't a spending project that we can't reduce the spending somehow. However, if you do a cost/mission analysis, you may find out that it may only go from 1.1B to 1 B. Yet, you have this fantasy that it could/should be much more based on absolutely nothing but desires.

With that being said, you can apply that same concept to anything. "We should be able to have an effective public education without spending more than $1M for the entire nation!".

So, why are you pointing out the military? Part of that answer is because of the amount of money spent, which is why I explained to you that somethings will just be relatively expensive if you do it effectively. Just because you elect you a frugal politician, doesn't mean that the change in the price of war will be noticeable to the overall deficit.

____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#250 Feb 22 2012 at 11:36 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Guess how many times the mother will give the kid $4 to buy milk?

Now guess how many times Lolgaxe's office will be carpeted.

See the point, now?


Yes, I see clearly that you fail to admit that you are wrong. I never claimed that the government ever gave a kid $4 to buy milk. It was an example for you to understand the concept. Mismanaging money doesn't mean that the money wasn't needed. I'm sure that money spent on the carpet could have been well spent some where else. Unless that is, he's working in a financially perfect environment, where money isn't needed.


You must be the worst marksman in the world if you can miss that sort of a point. I assume that's why your on desk duty.

Also, as a sidenote, what kind financially perfect environment doesn't use money? Do you think perfection in the economic markets came and went with the Sumerian barter exchanges?

This would be in keeping with your disturbing moral objection to anything resembling efficiency. I'm really curious as to the why.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#251 Feb 22 2012 at 11:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
Relatively expensive compared to what?



Relative to other national spending.

TLW wrote:
The entire point here is If we could spend 300M to get 1.1B in mileage, we'd be in a better position. This is not a hard concept. Do you have some sort of a moral objection to efficiency?


No. My point is that you have no data or basis to even think that is possible. You are claiming that we should reduce spending without actually understanding the spending. All you are doing is looking at big numbers and saying "I know we can reduce that!". Of course we can reduce spending. There isn't a spending project that we can't reduce the spending somehow. However, if you do a cost/mission analysis, you may find out that it may only go from 1.1B to 1 B. Yet, you have this fantasy that it could/should be much more based on absolutely nothing but desires.

With that being said, you can apply that same concept to anything. "We should be able to have an effective public education without spending more than $1M for the entire nation!".

So, why are you pointing out the military? Part of that answer is because of the amount of money spent, which is why I explained to you that somethings will just be relatively expensive if you do it effectively. Just because you elect you a frugal politician, doesn't mean that the change in the price of war will be noticeable to the overall deficit.



No, buddy, you don't have numbers. Quite a lot is either freely accessible, or availiable if you ask the pertinent parties nicely, and thus availiable, for say, me. It's not me who's flailing his hands in the air saying "math is hard, whatever we spend on the military is just the right amount".
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 74 All times are in CST
Debalic, Demea, Kastigir, Yodabunny, Anonymous Guests (70)