Page 5 of 5
WaterGod
BernieBro
Join date: Sep 2010
541 IQ
#161
It's time to go off the cliff dammit. These Republicans need to have a cold bucket of water dumped on their heads and realize that the Tea Party and Grover Norquist don't run this country.
MakinLattes
fully retractable
Join date: Mar 2007
997 IQ
#162
During the debates both candidates stated that the main purpose of government was the ensure the safety of its citizens. How job security, education, and health do not fall under this is strange.
Thrashtastic15
socialist cuz bernie xd
Join date: Mar 2009
697 IQ
#163
Quote by magnus_maximus
Which is exactly how Europe views you lot.

We sometimes think there must be a time machine out in the Atlantic that keeps dragging you guys backwards.

And the rest of North America for that matter. Keeps us from progress in some areas as well.
Ninja#117
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2009
23 IQ
#164
Quote by MakinLattes
During the debates both candidates stated that the main purpose of government was the ensure the safety of its citizens. How job security, education, and health do not fall under this is strange.



Mind blown.

No seriously though cut the military spending. Its insane and beyond comprehension.

I know its wikipedia but look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures


Thats nutz. 4.7% of the GDP? 41% of the worlds share? Over 700 BILLION? This cant possibly be true. Even if not 100% accurate the numbers are alarming. I feel someone should be rioting in the streets over this.

We have the largest military in a world where no one can truly conquer others and simple button presses often keep people in check.

We also have the most people in prisons and are prett shitty when it comes to that area in general as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
Knowledge is power
Eastwinn
through being cool
Join date: Dec 2008
3,110 IQ
#165
you can't just cut the military budget. that would put a lot of people out of work. you have to do that shit gradually to make sure the people you're throwing out are finding jobs elsewhere.
lncognito
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2011
44 IQ
#166
Quote by Ninja#117
Thats nutz. 4.7% of the GDP? 41% of the worlds share? Over 700 BILLION? This cant possibly be true. Even if not 100% accurate the numbers are alarming. I feel someone should be rioting in the streets over this.
At first I thought, that's not so bad, as I read it as saying percentage of the national budget. Then I realized it said percentage of GDP
Last edited by lncognito at Nov 13, 2012,
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#167
Quote by Ninja#117
Mind blown.

No seriously though cut the military spending. Its insane and beyond comprehension.

I know its wikipedia but look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures


Thats nutz. 4.7% of the GDP? 41% of the worlds share? Over 700 BILLION? This cant possibly be true. Even if not 100% accurate the numbers are alarming. I feel someone should be rioting in the streets over this.

We have the largest military in a world where no one can truly conquer others and simple button presses often keep people in check.

We also have the most people in prisons and are prett shitty when it comes to that area in general as well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States


it might be beyond comprehension if you're a moron. If you look at and dissect the budget and where the money goes, it makes sense and is commensurate with what is currently going on. It's also getting smaller as things change, which is the status quo for budgetary fluctuations during times of increased and decreased warfare.

Large portions of that budget go towards health care and healthcare services for service members and their families as well as veterans affairs, which takes care of prior service members.
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
Ninja#117
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2009
23 IQ
#168
Quote by Dreadnought
it might be beyond comprehension if you're a moron. If you look at and dissect the budget and where the money goes, it makes sense and is commensurate with what is currently going on. It's also getting smaller as things change, which is the status quo for budgetary fluctuations during times of increased and decreased warfare.

Large portions of that budget go towards health care and healthcare services for service members and their families as well as veterans affairs, which takes care of prior service members.


You did nothing to refute what i posted. Just stated some vague assumptions.

Here have this too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012


The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012[1] is a United States federal law which besides other provisions specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. The bill passed the U.S. House 283 to 136 votes[2] and was signed into United States law on December 31, 2011, by President Barack Obama.[3][4]

The Act authorizes $662 billion[5] in funding, among other things "for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad." In a signing statement, President Obama described the Act as addressing national security programs, Department of Defense health care costs, counter-terrorism within the U.S. and abroad, and military modernization.[6][7] The Act also imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1045), commissions appraisals of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia,[8] and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards "energy security."[9] The Act also increases pay and healthcare costs for military service members[10] and gives governors the ability to request the help of military reservists in the event of a hurricane, earthquake, flood, terrorist attack or other disaster.[11]

I bolded all the stuff thats clearly bullshit. They do increase pay AND healthcare costs for military service members though. Look at the first Wiki article about te spending.

The top 5 are all considered "World Powers" yet non have the percentage of GDP being spent and the actual bottom line spending is 4 times that of next closest China. Yes China who has a huge army and insane population themselves. Pretty big movers on the economic stage as well. Yet they spend a 4th of what we do.

Lets be real. The amount of money spent on the military isnt "necessary" and i can assure much of it could be cleaned up but there are those who profit from all this. If you really think that kinda spending is validated given the current economic situation america finds itself in then im not the only moron on this board.
Knowledge is power
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#169
I'll respond to this later when I'm not on my phone. It's too easy. You're incorrect and misinformed, and I'll show you why.
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
GC Shred Off
is into you.
Join date: Jan 2008
884 IQ
#171
Quote by Ninja#117
Lets be real. The amount of money spent on the military isnt "necessary" and i can assure much of it could be cleaned up but there are those who profit from all this. If you really think that kinda spending is validated given the current economic situation america finds itself in then im not the only moron on this board.

Spending so much on war-mongering sounds pretty awful, I'll admit. Fortunately, any one of the 3+ million DoD employees, their families, or many millions of folks (around the world) engaged with the network of defense-related businesses and academic institutions could explain how it doesn't all go to missiles and fuel and flags.

Edit: For example, the impeccably timed poster below.
Last edited by GC Shred Off at Nov 13, 2012,
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#172
Quote by Ninja#117
You did nothing to refute what i posted. Just stated some vague assumptions.


ALRIGHTY THEN, let's get into this. Keep in mind I've been slamming down a Four Loko, so bear with me.

First and foremost, the Fiscal Year 2013 Federal budget is much more relevant to actual spending, as it allocates funds and sets limits, than the NDAA which is a more broad document that deals with policies and procedures across a broad spectrum of changes.

With that being said, we can see here from the offical 2013 budget (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/budget.pdf) that the federal government has provided for $525.4 billion as the base Department of Defense budget. This number is down approximately 1% (or 5 billion dollars) from the previous year. From that base number, we can break it down further into the following components:

Military personnel: $135 billion
Operation and maintenance: $208 billion
Procurement: $98 billion
Research, development, test and evaluation: $69 billion
Military construction: $9 billion
Family housing: $1.5 billion
Revolving and management funds: $2 billion

Based on that particular breakdown, it can be further looked at and broken down. The "military personnel" bracket concerns all things related to paychecks, and also accounts for the health care system that covers about 10 million eligible beneficiaries.

"Family housing" covers just that, the on-base military housing that is lived in by certain service members and their family members. "Military construction" concerns all the construction and contract costs going on across the US military's many bases. If you've ever been on a military base, you'll know that there is ALWAYS construction going on... road improvement, building updating, more housing being added, etc. This allowance covers those construction costs. Hardly equivalent to fighting terrorists.

After the shakedown, the last components are the ones that really concern warfighting efforts; the R&D budgeting, the operation and maintenance budgeting (the soul of the money going towards the war efforts), and "procurement" which is basically money used to buy new things, such as replacing any damaged or lost vehicles across the military and buying new products.

Now:



The top 5 are all considered "World Powers" yet non have the percentage of GDP being spent and the actual bottom line spending is 4 times that of next closest China. Yes China who has a huge army and insane population themselves. Pretty big movers on the economic stage as well. Yet they spend a 4th of what we do.

Lets be real. The amount of money spent on the military isnt "necessary" and i can assure much of it could be cleaned up but there are those who profit from all this. If you really think that kinda spending is validated given the current economic situation america finds itself in then im not the only moron on this board.


Come on now, use some common sense. No other country has the percentage of GDP being spent on their DoD (or equivalent) quite frankly and understandably because they do not have the commitment to the war that we have. No nation has anywhere near the involvement in the current engagements. Whether evaluated purely on a man-power basis, or on a vehicular basis, or on a dispersal of power basis, or whatever, we are the obviously most involved nation in the current engagement which is also the largest ongoing war in the world. This obviously equates to us having to spend more to maintain and develop the involvement that we already have. With that being said, the DoD portion of the budget is currently on a plan to cut about 480 billion over the next 10 years, because it is obvious that the war effort is winding down and will eventually stop. Because of this, we can predictably scale back the budget to produce one that is more appropriate to a peacetime or minimal-involvement military.

I don't think I have to explain this to you, but the budget is commensurate with national military involvement in warfare and engagements. Because our entire military is currently involved in a large and distant war, the budget for sustaining that effort will be equivalent to the intensity and commitment of the effort of the military. It is better to have a large defense budget that is supporting a nation's war efforts than for Congress/the President to declare war and send a massively underfunded military to fight that war.

My point is that if you want the defense budget to be less, then the only way to do that is to get rid of the war or to get rid of our involvement in the war. This is a valid critique and opinion which you are certainly likely to hold, HOWEVER, you cannot rationally evaluate the federal defense budget without realizing this fact and without understanding that a nation must necessarily increase a defense budget in order to properly fund its military. The budget is exactly where it needs to be to facilitate our government's goals in the current war and to support those involved in the war. Whenever there is going to be a military involved in a war, there will be a substantially increased defense budget. This is self-explanatory and inherently obvious.
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
Last edited by Dreadnought at Nov 13, 2012,
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#173
Successful thread killing is successful
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
Arby911
Finding the Pattern
Join date: Jul 2010
830 IQ
#174
Quote by Dreadnought
Successful thread killing is successful


You're an efficient killing machine!!!
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#175
Shutting 'em down all day son, it's what I do
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
Dreadnought
Infinite & Momentary
Join date: Sep 2002
5,068 IQ
#177
1853 son
But we little know until tried how much of the uncontrollable there is in us, urging across glaciers and torrents, and up dangerous heights, let the judgment forbid as it may.
ron666
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2010
226 IQ
#178
Just out of curiosity, if these cuts go ahead, how much money will disappear? I heard estimates saying that close to a $1 trillion will vanish. Is this true?

ron666
son_of_bodom
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2011
288 IQ
#179
Just cut the damn entitlement programs!!!
Just a sub-par guitar player..

Quote by darkstar2466
Let's make this the Pit's motto:

"Forever alone, together"



IS THIS FREEDOM, OR CONFINEMENT?! FREE MOSCOE_ESPANOL!!!
Hydra150
cutebutt mcsexyface
Join date: Nov 2006
1,793 IQ
#180
Quote by ron666
Just out of curiosity, if these cuts go ahead, how much money will disappear? I heard estimates saying that close to a $1 trillion will vanish. Is this true?

ron666

Seriously, every one of the threads you post in have been inactive since Nov 11th. Stop bumping, I don't think it quite counts as a necro but your posting habit is weird and annoying.
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
ron666
Registered User
Join date: Feb 2010
226 IQ
#181
Quote by Hydra150
Seriously, every one of the threads you post in have been inactive since Nov 11th. Stop bumping, I don't think it quite counts as a necro but your posting habit is weird and annoying.


What is bumping? I just reply to anything that I find interesting. I don't really look at dates.

ron666
Hydra150
cutebutt mcsexyface
Join date: Nov 2006
1,793 IQ
#182
Bumping is when you post in a thread that has been inactive for some time.
Look in the forums to see what threads are currently active, getting involved in conversations is better than reviving old threads.
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
primusfan
Conspiracy Music Theorist
Join date: Mar 2004
5,337 IQ
#183
and yet, if you wanted to discuss the fiscal cliff everyone would just say "searchbar" with varying bad jokes if you made a new thread. damned if you do; damned if you don't.
#DTWD
Hydra150
cutebutt mcsexyface
Join date: Nov 2006
1,793 IQ
#184
Quote by primusfan
and yet, if you wanted to discuss the fiscal cliff everyone would just say "searchbar" with varying bad jokes if you made a new thread. damned if you do; damned if you don't.

Yep, such goes the catch 22 of forum life...

I wasn't really complaining about this bump, I was just pointing out that I noticed that every few days he would bump a bunch of week old threads.
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
WaterGod
BernieBro
Join date: Sep 2010
541 IQ
#185
Well, 30 days to go and Republicans and Democrats have refuse to budge either way. Looks like the pooch has been screwed on this one.

Get ready to see your tax rates skyrocket.