Franknbeans
Footballguy
Yeah, let's cut the military budget, too
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Amy Klobuchar for President 2020 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter TobiasFunke
- Start date
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Man, there's probably no other incentives that the military can give to recruits other than subsidized college education.PhantomJB said:
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I don't think it's a death sentence. And there's some sexism in it- the stories would have come out if she was a man, but probably wouldn't have been as big a deal to many people.bananafish said:
But ultimately I look at it this way: one, I've never known of a person who was an ###hole boss but a good person. Two, I think the person who can ultimately connect with both the Dem activist base and maybe even the Obama/Trump voters is someone who understands and respects the whole "dignity of work" thing and that management has been screwing labor for the last couple decades. Still time for her to find that message obviously but this is not a great start.
msommer
Footballguy
From USA Today article..
Are Klobuchar’s apparent management flaws disturbing? Yes. Are they disqualifying? Not yet.
In the next 20 months, she has a sustained chance to show she has learned and changed — that she can run a drama-free Senate office and a stable, even-keeled presidential campaign.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/02/25/democrats-2020-amy-klobuchar-bad-boss-too-soon-write-her-off-column/2971302002/
Are Klobuchar’s apparent management flaws disturbing? Yes. Are they disqualifying? Not yet.
In the next 20 months, she has a sustained chance to show she has learned and changed — that she can run a drama-free Senate office and a stable, even-keeled presidential campaign.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/02/25/democrats-2020-amy-klobuchar-bad-boss-too-soon-write-her-off-column/2971302002/
An open letter from staffers who worked for her
https://medium.com/@erick.garcia.luna/open-letter-to-the-editors-e65482976de7?fbclid=IwAR2c0Nlgg89aqdgoheKWNKzTq8AjJoPOJJ-SEilvurb22ROVPEcDIHrEMWk
https://medium.com/@erick.garcia.luna/open-letter-to-the-editors-e65482976de7?fbclid=IwAR2c0Nlgg89aqdgoheKWNKzTq8AjJoPOJJ-SEilvurb22ROVPEcDIHrEMWk
Signed by 61 staffers who used their real names.
It'll be interesting to see how much airtime is given to the rebuttal stories. This letter was published yesterday but no updated comments yet from NYT.
Sorry but you're not understanding my point. It's absolutely not about where the funds for free college come from.
According to a 2011 Pew study, about 75% of those who enlist in the military do so to obtain educational benefits. It's an essential part of the recruitment strategy.
If you make college straight-up free with no service, then the only reason to voluntarily enlist in the military is patriotism, eat sand and get underpaid. Good luck with that. Recruiting would likely fall off a cliff and then where are you? Bring back the draft?
Apologies for temporarily de-railing the Klobuchar thread but thought it was important to make this distinction.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
What if we paid them more and stopped sending them to stupid wars? That might be a start.
Dedfin
Footballguy
I disagree with you to a degree. There is some technical training you gain in the military that gives you open doors without college education. This is considered education too, at least for many people. Overall you have a good point.
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
I would like to add the requirement of military service to join the NRA. You want to play cowboy, cool, we have a place for you.
-fish-
Footballguy
Thanks. I respect your opinion.
All I can say is that personally if I was offered even just two years community college for free there is no way on this planet I would have gone in for four years. The technical training is great and all but the risks are also kind of non-trivial. Others may weight their decision differently.
But frankly it's shocking that the idea of ensuring the military talent level is kept high could be so controversial...so I'm not going to respond to some of these more ludicrous comments and just start a dedicated thread when free college comes up in the primaries.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
I wonder how other Western, industrialized countries with low cost post secondary education recruit for their militaries?
Dickies
Footballguy
Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
I did a lot of door knocking for her in 2006. I later had a local officer position in the Minnesota DFL. I have met her a bunch of times. I have met and worked with multiple people from her staff. I have never heard anything that would make me believe she was bad to work for.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Klobuchar and Biden would have a better chance in a general election over the Harris', Warren's, Beto's, and Sanders' of the world, because those candidates cannot move more centrist like Klobuchar and Biden can. Some here seem to think Harris falls into that category, but we all know she doesn't. Just look at her most recent remarks regarding the Green New Deal. Her and others with similar comments will have to answer to them in a general election. Not so much in the primaries.
Last edited by a moderator:
Best quote yet from a former aide:
Said another: “Her job wasn’t to be my mentor and cheerleader. Her job was to get s— done for Minnesota.”
https://people.com/politics/amy-klobuchar-presidential-candidate-behavior-as-boss/
Said another: “Her job wasn’t to be my mentor and cheerleader. Her job was to get s— done for Minnesota.”
https://people.com/politics/amy-klobuchar-presidential-candidate-behavior-as-boss/
Klobuchar named most effective Democratic senator of 115th Congress.
Sen. Klobuchar is not only the top-performing Democratic senator, but she is the fifth best-performing senator overall, despite her minority-party status. She is the only minority-party senator to break the overall top five since 2002, and is only the second minority-party senator to do so since Sen. John McCain did it in 1994.
https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/02/28/grassley-klobuchar-most-effective-senators-of-115th-congress-according-to-study/
Sen. Klobuchar is not only the top-performing Democratic senator, but she is the fifth best-performing senator overall, despite her minority-party status. She is the only minority-party senator to break the overall top five since 2002, and is only the second minority-party senator to do so since Sen. John McCain did it in 1994.
https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/02/28/grassley-klobuchar-most-effective-senators-of-115th-congress-according-to-study/
The Commish
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Unreal how people don't get this.Give them that money in the form of increased pay
Any increase in pay would have to equal the existing educational benefits plus an additional incentive on top of that for the of risk getting your head blown off. Then that increase in pay would have to keep escalating upon subsequent re-enlistment.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
I don’t get it. Right now we pay X and give college benefits with a value of Y. If we just paid X+Y that would actually be a better deal than service members are getting now.Unreal how people don't get this.
Any increase in pay would have to equal the existing educational benefits plus an additional incentive on top of that for the of risk getting your head blown off. Then that increase in pay would have to keep escalating upon subsequent re-enlistment.
The Commish
Footballguy
Don't get what? It's rather simple....if their package is $25K a year plus $50K for college tuition (just making numbers up for illustration) with the known risk of getting head blown off, then give them $75K instead also with the known risk of getting head blown off PLUS if they avoid getting their heads blown off, they get to come back to the country that's going to also pay for their higher education should they choose to go that route.Unreal how people don't get this.Give them that money in the form of increased pay
Any increase in pay would have to equal the existing educational benefits plus an additional incentive on top of that for the of risk getting your head blown off. Then that increase in pay would have to keep escalating upon subsequent re-enlistment.
Your last two sentences both equal X + Y, no?
If you just give everyone else Y for no service, then you're going to have to offer prospective enlistees their existing X+Y, then an additional Z to get incentive them to join over just going to college.
Dickies
Footballguy
X = current pay
Y = current cost of college that military pays
Z = what everyone is currently paid to go to college
Today: Military receives X + Y + Z, where Z=0. Average citizen receives X + Z, where Z=0.
If college is paid for: Military receives X + Y + Z. Average citizen still receives X + Z
If you're saying the new math becomes $25/yr + $50K + cost of college when they come out, then I believe saying close to the same thing.
What I'm trying to point out is that the current $50K then becomes an extra cost/incentive going forward.
The $50K will also have to be raised even further because right now it is sufficient incentive. But when you introduce the option of free college it will have to be increased.
Yes. We're getting there.
Currently Y is a sufficient incentive because there is no Z alternative. When you offer a Z alternative then the Y will need to be increased. Y plus its increase then becomes an added cost for the government.
I'm not trying to be argumentative. I faced this exact choice coming out of high school.
Most high schoolers currently going into the military for the purpose of financing college won't otherwise go in for four years deferring their career plus $50K. They'll just go right to college.
Dickies
Footballguy
I don't disagree with your last statement, but you also have to consider that not everyone in the military goes to college. Maybe you entice more people who aren't college-bound because the pay is actually worth it.
Maybe. But that is why I quoted the Pew Research study that said 75% go in the military at least partially to obtain educational benefits.
I'm not at all saying it's a reason not to do free college. Just that before politicians make too many campaign promises they need to fully understand the cost and potential unintended consequences.
Dickies
Footballguy
It's definitely something to consider, and to be honest it wasn't even something I had thought of in the proposals to expand education for everyone. I don't recall Hillary bringing it up in the Dem debates. I'm not sure I'm even 100% on board with the idea myself, but when I hear how much it would cost compared to some of the insane costs of other projects that get approved without batting an eye, I can't help but think the money would be better spent investing in our country's education
Dedfin
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
It's a salary. Of course it will have to be increased to stay competitive. You're basically switching the incentive from college to competitive wage. I don't see the concern here. GI Bill goes up today. It's not the same $10K they offered me when I was in highschool.
Franknbeans
Footballguy
Maybe we just shrink our military?
I'm only going to belabor this topic because I don't think Klobuchar gets nearly enough credit for her pragmatic approach to free college and other stuff.
Below is a link to a Harvard Kennedy School white paper. It's all there, including the following excerpt:
Or would simply higher pay be sufficient? If it were, it would have to be substantially higher than current pay levels, likely compounding objections regarding the government budget deficit and defense spending in general.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/09/does-free-college-threaten-our-all-volunteer-military/
rockaction
Footballguy
I was going to weigh in on the great GI Bill debate (I agree with Phantom JB) but I'll instead point out that LBJ was rumored to have been a lot worse than Klobuchar and that didn't really disqualify him from anything.
The Commish
Footballguy
What's the assertion YOU are making. I guess I am confused.
Are you saying politicians would be "concerned" about the military budget and what it'd cost to attract people to the military? I can't buy that any politician outside of maybe one or two are concerned about the budget anymore and our spending. It's a talking point with no teeth IMO. If one thinks that the GI BIll is the only thing attracting people to the military, shouldn't that give all the military types a huge reason to pause and evaluate what benefit they are providing their enlistees?
ETA: I'd like to see a breakdown of costs and our spending on defense. Meaning, when we order 25 fighter jets, what would altering that slightly and only ordering 20 fighter jets do to aid in the raising of our military compensation? We can go to just about any technology they use and ask the same question. Would the military complex be pissed? Yeah, probably. I'm ok with that. They aren't my concern.
Last edited by a moderator:
1) My initial assertion several days ago was that, before making too many campaign promises about free college, whoever is proposing it (which thankfully Klobuchar is not) should put in a phone call to the Sec. of Defense, because it will likely impact military recruiting. In the extreme it could result in bringing back the draft. I stand by that assertion and have a Harvard white paper from an ex-Marine to back it up.What's the assertion YOU are making. I guess I am confused.
Are you saying politicians would be "concerned" about the military budget and what it'd cost to attract people to the military? I can't buy that any politician outside of maybe one or two are concerned about the budget anymore and our spending. It's a talking point with no teeth IMO. If one thinks that the GI BIll is the only thing attracting people to the military, shouldn't that give all the military types a huge reason to pause and evaluate what benefit they are providing their enlistees?
ETA: I'd like to see a breakdown of costs and our spending on defense. Meaning, when we order 25 fighter jets, what would altering that slightly and only ordering 20 fighter jets do to aid in the raising of our military compensation? We can go to just about any technology they use and ask the same question. Would the military complex be pissed? Yeah, probably. I'm ok with that. They aren't my concern.
2) Is your first question rhetorical? I would hope whichever politician is going to be Commander in Chief would be "concerned" about the quality of the military they preside over.
3) I never said that the GI Bill is the only thing attracting people to the military. Please be more precise. What I have done, is quoted Pew research that proves educational benefits are a very, very important recruiting incentive. Whether or not you think that should be the case is not important. What is important is that it is the current reality. You can't just waive a magic wand and make this reality go away. It impacts policy making.
4) Your ETA is just conflating issues. Besides, just saying the military should whack their budget to pay for free stuff is an overly simplistic argument made ad nauseum.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
The way I see this happening is if all else was held constant and education was simply removed. It's true that the military would have to find another way to make itself appealing to people. Hiking up salaries in a significant way is a good way to do that, no?
It seemed that you were prepared to go down the "giving the military personnel more money would cause significant budget issues" road. I can't take seriously anyone making that claim when we are already spending 50 times what everyone else is spending.
Again...the military would have to find a way to make themselves more attractive. I have no problem with that.
I haven't suggested "whacking" their budget. I have suggested prioritizing their funds differently by having a significantly larger focus on the individuals that make up the military, their families and their health.
Bottom line is, I am of the opinion that this isn't as huge of a hurdle as you think it's going to be. There are a ton of things our military can do to make themselves more attractive. It's not as if they are the beaming light on the hill that everyone wants to be a part of today.
Klobuchar showing some humor during a speech at the Gridiron Club...
"So when Jerry called me about tonight, he asked, 'Do you need a microphone or do you just prefer to yell at everyone?'" she said.
I have an interesting base strategy," she said. "George Will wrote a nice column and [also] the Wall Street Journal. And Politico actually did a big story with Republicans saying nice things about me........And then the New York Times gave the rebuttal."
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/02/politics/klobuchar-gridiron-speech/index.html
"So when Jerry called me about tonight, he asked, 'Do you need a microphone or do you just prefer to yell at everyone?'" she said.
I have an interesting base strategy," she said. "George Will wrote a nice column and [also] the Wall Street Journal. And Politico actually did a big story with Republicans saying nice things about me........And then the New York Times gave the rebuttal."
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/02/politics/klobuchar-gridiron-speech/index.html
That would be solid- Klobuchar and Brown. Garnering Minnesota's (10) and Ohio's (18 electoral votes) and many of them from both coasts is how you beat Trump .Never understood how candidates pick VP running mates that come from states with just a handful of electoral votes. Nothing worse than McCain choosing unknown Governor Sarah Palin with so few electoral votes.
With Biden having his issues i think another option to consider is Klobuchar. Solid again today on ABC
https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-itm-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=itm&p=amy+klobuchar+this+week+with+george+stephanopoulos#id=1&vid=aaaeed446b1d8bbf105a7674c710784f&action=click
https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-itm-001&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=itm&p=amy+klobuchar+this+week+with+george+stephanopoulos#id=1&vid=aaaeed446b1d8bbf105a7674c710784f&action=click
joffer
Footballguy
Phil Elliott
Footballguy
It wasn't about the plethora of electoral votes in Alaska, it was more about having a female on the ticket
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Thread deserves a bump considering she just got 10% in an Emerson College poll (rated A- by FiveThirtyEight) for Iowa.
McBokonon
Footballguy
I just saw this. Her team must be doing something right on the ground there because that’sa huge jump. I remain convinced she would clobber Trump in the general.
Similar threads
