Half of US soldiers to potentially pull out of Europe.

[Mike_Hunt]

1 hour ago, Patong2021 said:

 

It seems that reading comprehension isn't one of your skillsets  or is  your bias so overwhelming that you assumed something I did not write? I merely inquired if Alaska was well guarded because of  Sarah Palin's keeping a watchful eye out for Russians. Mine was a question, not a definitive statement. The response was that Sarah will not be keeping an eye out for Russians, so now we know.

 

You said she should see it from her house.   You should learn when to take a loss.

[Mike_Hunt]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

You really should do the homework before making such ludicrous statements.

You seem to forget that Bush conned Blair into taking the UK to war against the will of the population. Nothing more than a US face saving exercise where British forces were killed by US pilots,  justice was never served and the US population should be hanging their heads in shame.

Time all US forces packed their bags and went back to where they came from, world would be far better off.

 

Again, why would a US Solider die for Europe? 

[Mike_Hunt]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

Been on the table for a long time.

 

 The European project was a few votes from launching as a military project rather than an economic one. The idea of a common European force was revived in the 1990s as the European Union was formed, but the concept lost favor due to U.S. opposition and commitment to NATO.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/why-its-time-reconsider-european-army#:~:text=Europe on paper has nearly,Europe collectively a military power.

A few votes and nothing got done.  

[Mike_Hunt]

36 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

..... because Nazi Germany was just a European problem, and Japan was part of Europe to?

 

And I suppose the post war situation with the USSR was just another European issue too? 

What happens in Europe is a European problem.   

[Patong2021]

58 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

You said she should see it from her house.   You should learn when to take a loss.

 

No, I did not say she "should see it from her house". You are imagining that. Let's review; 

 

1. Your fellow Putin admirer  stated that there  There will be no invasion of Alaska by Russia

 

2. To which I ASKED,   Is that because Sarah Palin can see Russia from her back porch and will sound the alarm if she sees anything suspicious, which scares off the Russians?

 

It was a QUESTION because of the use of the words, IS THAT  and the presence of a Question Mark ? In the English language we call this an interrogative sentence. Is is the verb, and the format of "is that" is termed a an interrogative phrase.  

 

Your claim is an illustration of the failure of the US educational system to teach basic language and communication skills. I had asked a question.

 

[sandyf]

20 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

A few votes and nothing got done.  

The US will block anything not in their interest, irrespective of the consequences.

The most dangerous nation on the planet.

[Mike_Hunt]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

The US will block anything not in their interest, irrespective of the consequences.

The most dangerous nation on the planet.

 

LOL...No.

[BLMFem]

22 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

What happens in Europe is a European problem.   

Yes, because what happens in one region of the world can have absolutely no impact on other parts of the world.

Gotcha, thanks for clearing that up!

[Mike_Hunt]

1 minute ago, BLMFem said:

Yes, because what happens in one region of the world can have absolutely no impact on other parts of the world.

Gotcha, thanks for clearing that up!

 

Why should the US continue to bail out Europe? 

[still kicking]

2 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

 

Why should the US continue to bail out Europe? 

Why should OZ help the US? Close down Pine Gap and let the US spy on the whole world somewhere else 

[TedG]

On 4/13/2025 at 10:50 PM, Patong2021 said:

 

You still don't get it, either because you are intentionally trying to present an incorrect comparison, or you are not able to comprehend basic math.

The  Section above that you quote is a narrative to explain why the EU  used a 60% threshold.  The USA uses 40%.

If the EU used 40%, the  poverty rate in the EU  would be significantly lower.  

The USA does not use a 40% for the poverty rate. 

 

Back in 1963–64, economist Mollie Orshansky developed the original poverty line using this idea:

Families spent about one-third of their income on food.
So she calculated the cost of a minimum food diet and multiplied it by three to estimate the minimum income needed to survive.

So, basically:

Poverty line=Cost of food budget×3Poverty line=Cost of food budget×3

That number became the baseline poverty threshold.

 

This is another casue of you not doing your homework. 

[Patong2021]

2 hours ago, TedG said:

The USA does not use a 40% for the poverty rate. 

 

 

Back in 1963–64, economist Mollie Orshansky developed the original poverty line using this idea:

Families spent about one-third of their income on food.
So she calculated the cost of a minimum food diet and multiplied it by three to estimate the minimum income needed to survive.

So, basically:

Poverty line=Cost of food budget×3Poverty line=Cost of food budget×3

That number became the baseline poverty threshold.

 

This is another casue of you not doing your homework. 

 

No. It is you once again going off on a tangent that has no relationship to the claim.

Mollie Orshansky is not the US Government, nor does this person set the poverty parameters that are used by  the US government.

Why would you even bother with this reference? 

 

The data is available at the US Census. The US federal government defines poverty based on family size and income.   It looks at total household income. If a family’s total income is less than the poverty threshold set by the federal government, then that family is considered impoverished.  This is how the USA determines its poverty thresholds;  https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines/frequently-asked-questions-related-poverty-guidelines-poverty#developed

It is you who has not done the homework because you could not be bothered to look at the US Census data, like this;

 

 Poverty Thresholds for 2024 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years  

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-thresholds.html

 

The family income levels are found here and elsewhere

https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/p60-282.html#:~:text=Highlights,median household income since 2019.

 

Let's do the math using data for 2023.

If all  households have a median total household income of $80,610 and the  threshold for poverty is $31,200. This gives a value of 38.9%. You can  work through the incomes for all classifications from single to duo, to family sizes up to 6, and the ratio comes out at 40% (or less).

 

You have not disproven the statement that the EU has a broader  parameter for the definition of  poverty than the USA and that is why the poverty levels appear higher in the EU. If the EU used the same parameters  as the USA, the EU poverty rate would be significantly lower.