If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
"Philip Sondericker" wrote in message ... Errr, then explain again how we're financing the current war? Do you think redistributing other peoples assets is financing the war? |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message et... And the "conservatives" are different, how? Conservatives object to excessive government spending, especially when it is used to force social engineering. Brian Riedl at the Heritage Foundation notes (quoted in part): The federal government is projected to spend $21,671 per household in 2004 — the most since World War II and $3,500 more than in 2001. Here is a breakdown of where that $21,671 goes: -Social Security and Medica $7,165 -Low-income programs: $3,479 -Interest on the federal debt: $1,460 -Federal employee retirement benefits: $835 -Unemployment benefits: $451 -Interest on the federal debt: $1,460 -Defense: $4,240, Veterans benefits: $565 -Health research and regulation: $619 -Education: $583 -Highways and mass transit: $400 -Justice administration: $389 -International affairs: $320 The programs listed above cover $20,506 per household. The remaining $1,165 is allocated to all other federal programs, including farm subsidies, environmental programs, space exploration, air transportation and community development. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete" wrote in message ... Then why the fight against gay marriage? What fight against gay marriage? Why the fight against abortion? Because all current abortion methods kill a child. When an abortion procedure is developed that does not kill the child the fight against abortion will end. Why the fight against pr0n? What's pr0n? Conservatives are all for the rights of corporations to dump waste oil into fresh water supplies, for the rights of employers to force their workers to take horrrible physical risks and then not be compensated when they're injured. They're in favor of telling women what they can do with their bodies, in favor of snooping in private bedrooms, in favor of snooping on people's computers. The way things are going, the only good conservative, is a dead one, and in case you're wondering, I'm 53 years old. I see what happens when idiots like Chimpie are in power. Or evil criminals like Reagan and Nixon. As I said, you've bought the propaganda and rejected the facts. Open your eyes, open your mind. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ... Seems a number of people have forgotten that liberalism has abandoned liberal principles. Modern liberalism is just monarchy dressed up in new clothes. It was not so long ago that the people who today call themselves liberals were called aristocrats and Tories. Bingo. Few people today understand the differences between classic liberalism and modern liberalism. They are polar opposites. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote: wrote: "Matthew S. Whiting" wrote: Yes, I did that for years when I owned my 182, the the comment said the "average" G/A guy. The average G/A pilot doesn't fly IFR very often at all. Matt If that's the case, why does AOPA continue to push so hard for all those GPS approaches to small airports? Because they support all GA aviation, not just the average 182 pilot. Matt Earlier you said "average G/A" pilot, now you're saying "average 182 pilot." So, does that mean that G/A, overall, needs all those small airport GPS approaches? |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net... "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... Seems a number of people have forgotten that liberalism has abandoned liberal principles. Modern liberalism is just monarchy dressed up in new clothes. It was not so long ago that the people who today call themselves liberals were called aristocrats and Tories. Bingo. Few people today understand the differences between classic liberalism and modern liberalism. They are polar opposites. I think it is funny as heck that liberals like to compare JFK's administration to Camelot. Shows what their real values are. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Most of it comes from taxes on airline tickets. And airlines generate most of the costs. The average G/A guy who flys a Cessna 182 100 hours a year doesn't begin to pay for the system. The average G/A who flies a Cessna 182 100 hours a year doesn't begin to burden the system. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Well, although that may be true for you, there are lots of Cessna 182's that make a lot of instrument approaches at airports with control towers. Or, even instrument approaches at airports without control towers; all supported by center equipment, controllers, FAA approach designers, expensive flight inspections, etc., etc. How many control towers would be shut down if those Cessna 182s did not exist? How many approaches could be dropped if those Cessna 182s did not exist? How many centers could be shut down? How many controllers could be terminated? Etc., etc., etc. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message ... Well....that is true for the cost of the center building. It isn't necessarily true where an approach control serves what is primarily a general aviation airport. What's a primarily general aviation airport? One where the majority of the traffic is general aviation? Yup, there are plenty of airports with approach control facilities that have more general aviation traffic than air carrier traffic, but there aren't very many that would have approach control facilities if the airlines weren't there. And, it certainly isn't true for instrument approach procedures established for airports that have no commercial traffic (which is many, many more instrument approach procedures than those established for airports with mostly, or some, commercial operations. Yup. But a lot of those airports that have no commercial traffic today are airports that formerly had commercial traffic and exist only because they were built for the purpose of commercial traffic. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote in message ... I think it is funny as heck that liberals like to compare JFK's administration to Camelot. Shows what their real values are. I think it odd that Democrats call their party the party of Jefferson. If Jefferson was alive today he'd be vilified by Democrats as a right wing extremist. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Dover short pilots since vaccine order | Roman Bystrianyk | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 29th 04 12:47 AM |
Pilot's Political Orientation | Chicken Bone | Instrument Flight Rules | 317 | June 21st 04 06:10 PM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | Military Aviation | 120 | January 27th 04 10:19 AM |
[OT] USA - TSA Obstructing Armed Pilots? | No Spam! | General Aviation | 3 | December 23rd 03 08:53 PM |