Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last

Thread: BUSH

  1. #1
    pingm1
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Thumbs down BUSH

    Elect an idiot, receive and idiot. Pad the pockets of the oilmen Georgie. Bet you and daddy never donned any PPE. Bet you and Daddy never had to scrounge for money to support a fire departmant. Lets keep the emergency services in the 70's Bonehead. Thank god the people of the emergency services are for the people, because lord knows Georgie W isn't.What if they threw an Earthquake and nobody came?????

  2. #2
    jj1967
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Yet another ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you heard from.

    Fire Protection is a LOCAL issue. I didn't vote for George Bush to be MAYOR of PODUNK PA, I voted for PRESIDENT of the USA.

  3. #3
    RJE
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Actually, they both did. George H. W. Bush recieved basic damage control/FF training while in the Navy. George W. Bush in the Air Guard. It's part of the job.

    And how are oilmen supposed to benefit from Washington not spending money on fire depts?

    But you will benefit, if he gets his tax cut passed. I guarantee it!

  4. #4
    daysleeper47
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    I believe he was refering to the oilmAn George Bush, the person. As for that tax cut, boy, that worked so well under Reagan. Thank God we didn't go into a recession because of it or anything. The econemy really could have been bad if it wasn't for that tax cut.

    ------------------
    Joe
    Daysleeper47
    "When the bell goes ding-ding, its time to get on the woo-woo."
    "Dusting desire - starting to learn. Walking through fire with out a burn..."
    Youngstown Fire Department

  5. #5
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    As for that tax cut, boy, that worked so well under Reagan.

    Tell us all about the failed Reagan tax cut please. Start with how much federal revenues decreased and go on to how much the democrats in congress increased spending. Please give us that history lesson.

    Now dig out your US Constitution and post the section that says the feds are responsible for funding local fire protecttion. It should be easy to find. If not, here's a link for you http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

    How much of your money should the feds confiscate?

  6. #6
    BayRidge60
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Angry

    I agree with jj1967, fire protection is a local issue. For everyone crying about the money that their department probably wouldn't have seen anyway, just remember one thing: When you receive Frderal $, you also get all the Federal RED TAPE that comes with it. Thanks, but no thanks. Besides, do you think Gore wouldn't have squashed it? I think he's got some trees he needed to save somewhere!

  7. #7
    daysleeper47
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Mongo, I never said it was in the Constitution that the federal government should support LOCAL fire departments. My copy of the Constitution is almost as worn out as my Bible. I am a political science major so I know that document pretty well. My professors make me read it every night before I go to bed. As for that tax cut, it doesn't matter, you will pay one way or another. All programs dropped by the Feds will most likely be picked up by the states anyway. During Reagan's New Federalism II program in the early 1980's, the Ohio state income tax went up 90%!! So you let Bush push that tax cut through Congress, but when your state income tax comes and you pay through the nose, don't complain, becuase you will pay. And just remember who brought us these fine economic times, and don't say it was the Republicans, because we all know it was Clinton and Greenspan. Did you ever think that that increase in spending by the Democrats you mentioned is what stimulates this economy and keeps her pumping? If the government doens't spend, in the long run, no one does. The economy comes to a grinding halt and nothing moves. And that is why in 1991, we had the greatest recession this country had seen in decades, and that is why, during the Reagan presidency, the federal defecit had it largest increase ever. Just things to ponder. And just for your information, I am not for everything the Democrats throw. I am all for an increase in military spending, but I am also for welfare, humanities projects, NASA and almost every other thing Bush wanted to cut when he made his speech a couple days ago. I try and do my homework the best I can on these issues and the way I see it, no one wins.

    ------------------
    Joe
    Daysleeper47
    "When the bell goes ding-ding, its time to get on the woo-woo."
    "Dusting desire - starting to learn. Walking through fire with out a burn..."
    Youngstown Fire Department

    [This message has been edited by daysleeper47 (edited 03-01-2001).]

  8. #8
    ffnbs
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    I'll admit I have to agree with the fact that funding for fire service is a local issue. If your department can't afford necessary equipment then why should I have to pay for it? All the people on these forums crying about this issue have to realize that fire equipment is very expensive, how is this meazly amount of $$ (if you even get any) going to solve any of your unique problems. For those of you thinking that I don't know anything about small town fire departments, my wife grew up in a town in Michigans U.P. and their fire truck is used mostly as there tool crib for their DPS. They own 1 scba and it looks like it is 30 years old. The moral of my story is that YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR! If you are not happy with the protection your town can afford, then remember this is AMERICA! You have the freedom to move where you wish.

  9. #9
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    All programs dropped by the Feds will most likely be picked up by the states anyway.

    You mean they're going to be funded from where they should be? And then the cititzens will have more control over them because they have more control over who's in their state legislature and what goes on there than in the US Congress?

    Wow! What a concept! I wished the founding fathers had thought of that and then we wouldn't be in this mess.

    During Reagan's New Federalism II program in the early 1980's, the Ohio state income tax went up 90%!!

    The fault here lies with the citizens of Ohio for allowing this to happen, not with Reagan. (But I wonder, even with a 90% increase, did they save money over what they were having confiscated by the feds?)

    And just remember who brought us these fine economic times, and don't say it was the Republicans, because we all know it was Clinton and Greenspan.

    Cite the year and your reference to when this "longest economic expansion in history" started. Was it with Clinton's retroactive tax increase? How about when the republicans took control of the house? Or maybe when Bush was in office. And tell us when the economy really took off.

    Did you ever think that that increase in spending by the Democrats you mentioned is what stimulates this economy and keeps her pumping?

    No. But that's a funny statement. Stupid me, I thought it was all of us working people that the dremocrats love to tax to death that keeps the ecomnomy pumping. People like you and me going out and working everyday or creating jobs.

    If the government doens't spend, in the long run, no one does. The economy comes to a grinding halt and nothing moves.

    The government can spend, no one said they couldn't. It's what our confiscated money should be spent on that's at issue.

    And that is why in 1991, we had the greatest recession this country had seen in decades, and that is why, during the Reagan presidency, the federal defecit had it largest increase ever.

    The democrats in Congress outspent all but one of Reagans budgets. Whose really at fault for the increase? Oh and the recession ended and this longtime expansion began in in '91.

    I am all for an increase in military spending, but I am also for welfare, humanities projects, NASA and almost every other thing Bush wanted to cut when he made his speech a couple days ago.

    Being a poly-sci major, you should be able to tell us which one of these is constitutional and which are uncostitutional?

    By the way, you still didn't answer how much the government should confiscate from you. (you probably won't).

  10. #10
    One-L
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Mongo,

    >>Tell us all about the failed Reagan tax cut please. Start with how much federal revenues decreased and go on to how much the democrats in congress increased spending. Please give us that history lesson.<<

    Take a look at the budgets that Reagan proposed that were *always* bigger than the budgets that the democratic Congress approved. Take a look at Reagan's revenue projections when pushing his tax cut and how wrong they turned out to be.

    The Democrats were idiots for allowing such deficit spending to occur. Reagan was an even bigger idiot for consistently demanding more deficit spending than the democrats ended up approving. We are just now emerging from the deficit mess created by Regan and implemented by the democrats. This is not a place that we should want to return to.

    [This message has been edited by One-L (edited 03-01-2001).]

  11. #11
    Engine69
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    It's time for a change!!! 1-800-FAIRTAX
    http://www.fairtax.org


  12. #12
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    OK, here you go...

    First number is Reagans, second is congress (in billions)

    1982 - 695.3 proposed - 745.8 congress
    1983 - 773.3 proposed - 808.4 congress
    1984 - 862.5 proposed - 851.8 congress
    1985 - 940.3 proposed - 946.4 congress
    1986 - 973.7 proposed - 990.3 congress
    1987 - 994.0 proposed - 1003.9 congress
    1988 - 1024.3 proposed - 1064.1 congress
    1989 - 1094.2 proposed - 1144.2 congress

    TOTAL 7,357.6 - 7554.9

    Democrats outspend Reagan all but once (1984). But CLinton, Gore, Kennedy, Dashle and Gebhardt don't want you
    to know that, so you don't.

    Source http://reagan.webteamone.com/reagan_budgets.html and if you don't like that source, he has his sources are:
    Budget Message of the President, FY's 81 to 89
    Budget of the United States, FY 1993, Part 5, Table 1.3, page 5-18.
    Proposed outlays for 1981 from 1981 FY 1982 Budget Revisions

  13. #13
    daysleeper47
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Larry, are you ever wrong?

    ------------------
    Joe
    Daysleeper47
    "When the bell goes ding-ding, its time to get on the woo-woo."
    "Dusting desire - starting to learn. Walking through fire with out a burn..."
    Youngstown Fire Department

  14. #14
    tridget
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Angry

    i say every fire dept in the us(paid or vollie), take one piece of apparatus and park it right in front of the white house.
    and boycott this thing

  15. #15
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Name's William, not Larry and you failed to answer the questions and back up your statements with some facts.

    And you won't....

    [This message has been edited by mongofire_99 (edited 03-02-2001).]

  16. #16
    phxfyr
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Fire Protection is a LOCAL issue. I didn't vote for George Bush to be MAYOR of PODUNK PA, I voted for PRESIDENT of the USA. [/B][/QUOTE]

    It's attitudes like this that is the reason that the fire rate in the US is the highest among all of the industrialized nations. We burn more property, loose more money, and kill and injure more people than any other 1st world county. All of this affects things like the GNP and health insurance rates.

    IF fire protection is a local issue, then so is education! Education is the responsibility of the states NOT the federal government. Should we leave education solely to the responsibility of local school boards without funding assistance of the federal government? Of course not. Education is essential to the competativeness and defense of our nation. It is a key issue to our continued survival and key to our democracy (yes, I know, we're a REPUBLIC but thats beyond most of these nimrods).

    How about law enforcement? LOCAL issue too. Yet, we spend billions on public safety to the extent of paying for LOCAL law enforcement officers from federal dollars.

    The fire service is about to take it on the kisser for their support of Gore

  17. #17
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    IF fire protection is a local issue, then so is education! Education is the responsibility of the states NOT the federal government.

    YES!!!

    Should we leave education solely to the responsibility of local school boards without funding assistance of the federal government?

    YES!!! But the government will also have to quit confiscating money for it from our paychecks.

    Of course not.

    Man just when I thought we were on the same page...

    Education is essential to the competativeness and defense of our nation.

    Agreed, but local control and financing of government schools is the only way to go. If the schools do not perform then those kids won't keep up with the rest of the kids and you can adjust your schools "priorities" immediately. Look at home schooling, those kids continually out perform government indoctrinated kids. Why? Local control, as local as you can get.

    Get the feds involved and it's a convoluted mess. Even at the 6% level (from what I've heard) they currently fund.

    (yes, I know, we're a REPUBLIC but thats beyond most of these nimrods).

    Because they went to government schools and don't do their own research, they just buy in to whatever someone they think is smarter than they are says. I saw an interview with a US congresswoman from Texas the other day and she claimed we were a democracy and that Gore was the democratically elected president. Can you believe that?

    How about law enforcement? LOCAL issue too. Yet, we spend billions on public safety to the extent of paying for LOCAL law enforcement officers from federal dollars.

    Two (or more) wrongs don't make a right...


  18. #18
    cpr4u
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Exclamation

    I agree with Mongofire here. These are local issues just as much as Fire suppression is a local issue. Why is Law Enforcement so much more special then we are? Is it just because the majority of firefighters nation-wide are "uneducated, backwoods, red-neck" vollies? I have heard so many reasons why the local government can't help us it is not even funny. If you think I am any of the above then you are in for a rude awakening!

    [This message has been edited by cpr4u (edited 03-02-2001).]

  19. #19
    Dalmatian90
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    By all means, ABOLISH the Department of Education. The Feds should not be in our Schools...the States should be ensuring everyone gets a decent K-12 education.

    Yes, the Feds have a role in Education -- they provided the seed money for many great schools (The Land Grant Universities) that support R&D we all benifit from. They have a role in Police -- the FBI, nationwide Criminal databases. They even have a role for hte Fire Service developing leaders & doing R&D. They don't have role funding any of those locally.

    So what is wrong with State & Local taxes rising?

    Who do you think will listen to you more, your Congressmen who has 400,000 voters, your State Rep listening to 40,000 voters, or your local Town Councilor listening to 4,000 voters?

    Who do you think understands the needs of their community more? The Congressman living in Washington who has to fly home, The State Rep who has a long drive home, or the City Councilor who lives next door?

  20. #20
    RJE
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    If a dollar needs to be spent, then the dollar should be spent.

    The problem stems from WHERE the dollar goes, and who says how it gets spent. Education, Law Enforcement, Fire Protection (or prevention, or education) doesn't matter.

    The bottom line is the closer the money stays to "home", the more likely that it will be spent wisely.

    What President Bush is saying (and many of us are arguing) is that it's not the FEDERAL government's job.

    Now: You make $10. You send $3 to Washington. Washington sends $1 back to you (and one dollar to someone clear across the country - probably a welfare queen - or welfare corporation?) and wastes $1 paying itself.

    With a tax cut: You make $10. You send $1 to Washington - who cares where it goes - (should be to the military, and not much else). Your local gov't. takes $1 for local use. Yes, that's a tax increase. But your local community still has that $1 it always had. And if it needs another, you're still no worse off than you were. And all the money stays home. So it gets spent where it's needed. Not on some bridge or ditch or "gov't study" boondoggle or junket.

    BTW, the "recovery" started in '83. For those who aren't old enough to remember - 1979 - Jimmy Carter - double digit inflation, unemployment, and interest rates. Reagan got the taxes cut (he didn't cut them, Congress did - only Congress has the power to tax) and the recovery started. Everything since then (Bush the elder is closer to Clinton than Reagan in this repect) has had the effect of slowing it back down.

    And, no disrespect, but fire depts, as with all "public" functions, are a DRAIN on the economy. Never mind that you all also pay taxes, individually it's true, but corporately it's insignificant. What makes the economy go are those of us who work in private enterprise, be it manufacturing, service, etc. You earn money, and you spend money, and you pay taxes on what you earn and what you spend.

    On the other hand:

    I MAKE money. (Yes, there is a difference between earning and making). I know some of you are volunteers that have other private sector jobs. Some of you are probably even entrepeneurs, and will know what I'm talking about. But I just want you all to keep some things in perspective.

    I am a partner in a trucking company. Our equipment inventory exceeds $5,000,000. We grossed over $100,000,000 last year. We purchased $1,000,000 in new trucks. We paid $500,000 in FUEL taxes. Not income taxes. Not property taxes. Lot license fees or plates. Just FUEL!

    Believe me when I say the numbers you all are talking about are INSIGNIFICANT. TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. Like I said in earlier posts - I personally (as in I wrote the check!) paid enough taxes to buy your depts. next ladder truck (or two).

    If I was your neighbor - and I didn't have to pay that tax - what else could I be doing with that money? I'm not rich. And I don't want to be rich. I'd spend it. And someone (some business) would benefit. As would every govt. entity that could tax it along the way.

    I'm just trying to point out that the higher up it goes, the less likely that it's going to be put to some beneficial use.

  21. #21
    phxfyr
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    NO, NO, NO!

    The primary responsibility of fire suppression DOES belong to state and local governments! Nevertheless, there remains a significant role of the federal government in providing assistance through federal funding and technical support!

    Am I contradicting myself? No, read on.

    I doubt anyone would argue with me that the BEST place for planning and implementing fire protection policy is at the LOCAL level. After all, the fire problem in Walla Walla, Washington is NOT the same fire problem as in New York City. Decisions of fire protection are best left to those directly affected by the problem...local citizens.

    However, the federal government DOES have a vested interest in fire protection from two points (1) the financial impact of fire, and (2) the safety and welfare of its citizens.

    According to statistics from the US Fire Administration, the estimated direct property loss related to fire is in the area of $10 billlion dollars annually. The total cost (direct losses, the cost of fire departments, built-in fire protection, insurance overhead, and other expenditures related to fire protection) is much higher.

    The total cost of fire to society is staggering - over $100 Billion per year! This includes all of the total costs of fire protection I mentioned. This is an enourmous number, and is on the order of 1 to 2 percent of the gross-domestic product. Thus, from a monetary viewpoint, fire ranks among the significant NATIONAL problems.

    Since the cost of fire is so great the federal government should, and DOES, have a role is funding the fire service. Our problem is that fires are generaly small (in comparision to natural disasters) so they receive very little attention from the public or elected officials. But the cumulative costs of fire are stagering! To lower OUR costs we need to have the feds fund our departments particularly with regard to prevention!


  22. #22
    Dalmatian90
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Just being a NATIONAL problem does not make it a FEDERAL problem!

    Technical support and national coordination for natural/manmade disasters? Great place for a federal role.

    Buying equipment to protect a single community or county? Bad use of federal funds.

    All the money thrown at buying fire trucks and hiring firefighters isn't going to make an appreciable difference on our nation's fire loss in lives or dollars. They're coldpatch thrown on a pothole -- the bad roadbed is still there.

    You fix problems in two ways -- Engineer a solution or change social behaviors.

    Deployment AND enforcement of better building codes will have a significant impact. Since quasi-Federal agencies control most mortgage markets, that's a clear place the Federal Gov't could move to mandate near-universal residential sprinklers. With the double benifit over the long, long term (a century or so) it will reduce the overall need for fire suppression funding saving the gov't money in the future. Most manufactured housing crosses state lines, so there's another place the Federal Gov't could constitutionally order sprinklers.

    Second way is to address American's carelessness with fire, but I suspect like our levels of violence, it's in society and isn't going to change anytime soon.

    Neither one requires significant Federal dollars to accomplish. Both will have far more impact in the long term than any piece of equipment someone buys.

  23. #23
    Engine69
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by mongofire_99:
    Name's William, not Larry and you failed to answer the questions and back up your statements with some facts.

    And you won't....

    [This message has been edited by mongofire_99 (edited 03-02-2001).]
    Hmmm... spells like Larry, talks like Larry and even demands proof for every single little detail like Larry... If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck... no, wait, that was Daddy Bush that said that... right before he said, "Read my lips, no new Taxes".


  24. #24
    mongofire_99
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    All this BS and still no answers...

    even demands proof for every single little detail like Larry

    Which of these details are little? The US Constitution? The lies about Reagan? The lies about the recovery that the democrats have built their whole case around? Which ones? Be a man and tell us.

    I'm wrong plenty and I won't hide behind not answering the questions when I am. I've said it before and I'll say it again - show me with facts, not a weak unsupportable opinion, where I'm wrong and I'll eat my words.

    You don't have anything useful to add? Maybe you could answer the questions since the poli-sci major can't or won't simply because the facts do not support his or her beliefs.

    Also, and I don't know if I'm reading it right or not, if you go back and read his posts and editorials it seems to me that Larry and I disagree on this issue.

    [This message has been edited by mongofire_99 (edited 03-02-2001).]

  25. #25
    Engine 33
    Firehouse.com Guest

    Post

    Originally posted by mongofire_99:
    All this BS and still no answers...

    even demands proof for every single little detail like Larry

    Which of these details are little? The US Constitution? The lies about Reagan? The lies about the recovery that the democrats have built their whole case around? Which ones? Be a man and tell us.

    I'm wrong plenty and I won't hide behind not answering the questions when I am. I've said it before and I'll say it again - show me with facts, not a weak unsupportable opinion, where I'm wrong and I'll eat my words.

    You don't have anything useful to add? Maybe you could answer the questions since the poli-sci major can't or won't simply because the facts do not support his or her beliefs.

    Also, and I don't know if I'm reading it right or not, if you go back and read his posts and editorials it seems to me that Larry and I disagree on this issue.

    [This message has been edited by mongofire_99 (edited 03-02-2001).]

    Well whatever Mongo's name actaully is Well he seems to disagree with everyone on this issue. Mongo were you even in favor of the fire act?, Since when are the Feds not allowed to try and help out the States, Isn't that the whole reason why we have a Federal Goverment?. So let me guess the Federal Goverment is not allowed to help out the California with our power crisis, What should be done with the FIRE Act is the money should be given to the states to issue to in grants to fire departments that apply, I have to disagree with everything Mongo has said

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register