The troop levels in Panama were miniscule compared to Afghanistan.
How many daisy cutters, F-15s, hummers, etc. did we lose in Panama?
How many troops did we lose? Doesn't even come close.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> Not sure how Grenada went down as that was a l
ceased. I guess not long term compared to Iraq and Afghanistan, but long
term for the forays we had in the 80's.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Maureen [mailto:mamamaur...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 23:49
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: So Ryan's Budget Proposal ...
Real numbers, which don't match the imaginary numbers provided by
either Gruss or Ryan.
http://www.cms.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/NHEProjections2009to2019.pdf
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> I still can't get behind the idea that it is a substantiative plan
Getting your numbers from here?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> At current trend the number is infinite, so I'd say $308tt is conservative
~|
What was it under Clinton and Bush I?
No wars under Reagan. A couple of excursions into Grenada and Panama,
but no real wars.
End the wars, you can get it down very quickly.
It's just so easy to blame it on Social Security, which is not and has
never been an entitlement.
Just sayin'.
On Mon
I still can't get behind the idea that it is a substantiative plan if
it is based on imaginary numbers.
Lots of people have put out plans to solve the problem based on
completely bogus premises, Ryan isn't exactly plowing new ground
there. Let's start with some agreed upon and realistic numbers a
ZOMG!! Zero overload!! zero overload!! Does not compute!
@_@
On 11 April 2011 21:36, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
>
> I think we have a math issue.
>
> 10 million per person = 10,000,000
> 400 million people = 400,000,000
>
> multiple those, and you get
>
> 4,000,000,000,000,000, which is 4 quadri
sage-
> From: Jerry Milo Johnson [mailto:jmi...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 5:05 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: So Ryan's Budget Proposal ...
>
>
> You really think you can get $308,000,000,000,000 of liability insurance for
> $1,000,000,000?
&
Sorry... But even with massive inflation, you are not going to incur a 1
trillion dollar liability for every person in america.
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 6:05 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: So Ryan's B
Jeff Garza wrote:
>
> So, you're saying that health care in america is 308 trillion dollar
> liability? Any numbers to back that up?
>
At current trend the number is infinite, so I'd say $308tt is conservative
~|
Order the Ad
lo Johnson [mailto:jmi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 5:05 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: So Ryan's Budget Proposal ...
You really think you can get $308,000,000,000,000 of liability insurance for
$1,000,000,000?
If so, would you right now give me $308,000 of health insurance for $1
Judah McAuley wrote:
> Err, what makes you think that it is a sincere effort?
Because he put forward something that you can substantively criticize,
but that would solve the problems. Expecting someone to come out with
a plan, by themselves, that solves the World's largest math problem is
a bit
And massively stop this welfare for the corporations and the rich
-Original Message-
From: Gruss Gott [mailto:grussg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 18:28
To: cf-community
Subject: So Ryan's Budget Proposal ...
First off, I really applaud the guy for making a si
You really think you can get $308,000,000,000,000 of liability
insurance for $1,000,000,000?
If so, would you right now give me $308,000 of health insurance for
$1? I bet Maureen could use it, too.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Jeff Garza wrote:
>
> Or you could use that money and give each
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> First off, I really applaud the guy for making a sincere effort, no
> matter what you may think about how he gets the job done (which, btw,
> is 25 years away in his plan).
Err, what makes you think that it is a sincere effort? He wouldn't
e
approach would do just
fine. Oh I remember, it's because the government has to create another
massive trillion dollar beauracracy to make sure it's done "right".
-Original Message-
From: Vivec [mailto:gel21...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 4:36 PM
To: cf-comm
That really isn't much of a difference .. +/- 4%??
That's a key issue?
For starters we could all spend 680 million on health related research
and development to enhance end of life health and productivity,
rather than spend it on bombing Libya.
On 11 April 2011 19:27, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> * Un
First off, I really applaud the guy for making a sincere effort, no
matter what you may think about how he gets the job done (which, btw,
is 25 years away in his plan).
That said, I've been looking for a way to greatly simplify this whole
debate and with some quick math and good ole Google (fact-
18 matches
Mail list logo
