ping
..wait..it was all a joke!!
(mutterin a string.....%&*#)
Doogle
Rangel is wrong about so much, one has difficulty deciding where to start.
But don't you see, the military is clearly discriminating against the poor!!
You don't really think he believes what he says about the demographics of the Army, do you?
Move along...nothing to see here.
Charlie Rangel is just plain wrong. The only "data" you need to prove it is to listen to the crap pouring out of his mouth.
Now hold it! Weren't the Dims freaking out because they thought that Pres Bush was going to re-instate the draft??? Since it's coming out of the mouth of Rangle now makes it OK?
And where does he get off on saying that our military personel are just a bunch of losers who couldn't get any other kind of job? That has really got to rankle with all personel who are professionals and hold a degree if not multiple.... I don't know about his army, but in mine I'm protected by seriously brilliant, caring and giving people. To bad they fight to protect the likes him also......
"mean income for 2004 recruits was $43,122 (in 1999 dollars). For 2005 recruits, it was $43,238 (in 1999 dollars). These are increases over the mean incomes for the 1999 cohort ($41,141) and 2003 cohort ($42,822)."
You have to look at this data with Charlies Dem-o-crat worldview --
If you are a family of 4 and only make $43K/yr, you must be at poverty level, right? It is the 'mean' after all.
(Real life, a family of five making $23,108 dollars in 2004 is at poverty level) see http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/povdef.html
Rangel knows the truth. He calmly chooses to endlessly lie (he is a democrat)
Rangel lies, know he lies, but lies anyway. It is his part of the Left agenda of deceit.
bump
Ping!
Rangel Offers Solution to Social Security Funding Problem
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) said the solution to shoring up the solvency of the Social Security System may lie in a new approach to the draft. Rep. Rangel’s proposal to revive the military draft has been given little chance for passage in the upcoming congress.
“The youth of America may just be too selfish to submit to the call to serve,” Rangel conceded. “But I was thinking, if we drafted the oldsters we might kill two birds with one stone.”
Under Rangel’s new plan, those receiving Social Security benefits would be required to serve two years in the military. “War today is highly mechanized and automated,” Rangel pointed out. “A senior citizen is perfectly capable of pushing a button to launch a missile or drop a bomb. The hand-to-hand combat could still be left to the younger volunteers.”
The government is expected to save money in two ways. First, the drafted seniors will displace some of the current military personnel. “Instead of having to pay salaries to soldiers and Social Security benefits to retirees, we’d make one payment to the senior soldiers,” Rangel observed.
The second source of savings is the option of seniors to opt out of the draft by declining to receive Social Security benefits. “The government wouldn’t have to make any payments to those unwilling to serve,” Rangel said. “A lot of the elderly are well-off financially. They own homes free-and-clear. They have private sector pensions. Many own stocks and bonds or businesses. They won’t need Social Security in their old age.”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm
The type of people Rangel is appealing to do not have the ability to understand words and numbers. Especially when mixed together.
And the military isn't a decent career?
"US troops come from wealthier neighborhoods than their civilian peers"
I didn't realize Soldiers had any peers outside the military.
bump