Lucky... 0 #26 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. We could decrease it into 1/7th of what it is and still have the most spendy military. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 September 18, 2008 Quote i don't think you understand how Obama is going to tax us. Over $250,000 will get a tax increase, over $99,000 will get a soso security tax increase, everyone will loose the bush reduction, anyone selling a house will pay higher capitol gains, people with stock will pay higher taxes on dividends. this will affect almost all americans. Obama has got everone on his side snowed. corperations that are on the edge now will go under with a heavier tax burden and people will loose their jobs because of that. Obama want to raise taxes for most corperations including s-corps like mine and that means higher prices for goods or less money for employees. Kinda like what Clinton did..... how did that work out? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #28 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay?So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #29 September 18, 2008 Quote"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Joseph Goebbels “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” Jospeh Goebbels That's your plan with the McSame crap."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #30 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? Largest in terms of spending. We spend 8 times that of #2, Britain. Having 300,00 troops isn't neccessarily a great thing over having higher technology. The more troops does not eqqula greater sucess. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterblaster72 0 #31 September 18, 2008 QuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. I don't find myself in agreement with your posts often, but here I agree 100%. Higher taxes are the last thing that this country needs right now with the cost of almost every aspect of life going through the roof. Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #32 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuote"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Joseph Goebbels “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” Jospeh Goebbels That's your plan with the McSame crap. That's me with the McSame crap. That's just sarcasm, but let's see if it's applicable. Is McCane the same as Bush and the neo-cons? He voted 90% with Bush, he has the same platform as the neo-cons, where is the difference? Is it a lie? Can you establish that he is different? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #34 September 18, 2008 Quote >Over $250,000 will get a tax increase . . . Correct. >over $99,000 will get a soso security tax increase, Incorrect. From $100K to $200K will see an average $2000 decrease. (Source - Tax Policy Center, June 2008) Wrong, http://www.taxfoundation.org/candidates08/compare/ ...the top two brackets will increase, meaning 33% to 36% and 35% to 39.5%. Single filers making more than $160K will see an increase, 3% ($3000+) and over $357K 4.5% increase ($16,000+). Married thresholds are slightly higher (if filing jointly) and much lower (if filing separately). Quote >corperations that are on the edge now will go under with a heavier >tax burden and people will loose their jobs because of that. Right. Because the Bush tax cuts did such a good job saving AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Lehman Brothers. Tax cuts had little to do with investment choices made by private (now govt) companies. Despite the cuts, the US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. Quote It's time to get a responsible adult in the White House who is willing to pay the bills - not just get another sub-prime mortgage from China. I'm pretty sure you're near the top tax bracket, so are you willing to pay more in taxes? Did you know that you can do so, without a compulsory increase from the IRS? I know you think that may not be fair, but why would that really bother you? You'd be doing for the greater good. Go on, just write a check - invite Warren Buffet and Bill Gates to join you too...why involve the government when the solution is in your own check book? So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #35 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. I don't find myself in agreement with your posts often, but here I agree 100%. Higher taxes are the last thing that this country needs right now with the cost of almost every aspect of life going through the roof. Clinton did it with the last Bush recession and it worked. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #36 September 18, 2008 QuoteLargest in terms of spending. We spend 8 times that of #2, Britain. Having 300,00 troops isn't neccessarily a great thing over having higher technology. The more troops does not eqqula greater sucess. Want to revise this? Who's number two in spending? Not the UK. Not France. Not Germany...keep trying. You also made my point, the US military's technological edge is what makes as formidable as it is. I know you willing to give that up though, so don't worry about re-explaining it.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #37 September 18, 2008 QuoteClinton did it with the last Bush recession and it worked. You might want to check when that last recession ended... ...man, I'm just knocking them out of the park tonight...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #38 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #39 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%? Maybe you should have paid more attention to your math TEACHER.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteLargest in terms of spending. We spend 8 times that of #2, Britain. Having 300,00 troops isn't neccessarily a great thing over having higher technology. The more troops does not eqqula greater sucess. Want to revise this? Who's number two in spending? Not the UK. Not France. Not Germany...keep trying. You also made my point, the US military's technological edge is what makes as formidable as it is. I know you willing to give that up though, so don't worry about re-explaining it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Want to revise this? Who's number two in spending? Not the UK. Not France. Not Germany...keep trying. Oh, is someone now in #2, someone else who we are what 7 or 8 times in spending over? Hmmm, kinda makes my piont, we don't need to spend 2,3, or 8 times over anyone, esp spending money that will be generated in 150 years frrom now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You also made my point, the US military's technological edge is what makes as formidable as it is. I know you willing to give that up though, so don't worry about re-explaining it. It's not giving it up, it's about downsizing it and maintaining a resonable edge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #41 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%? Maybe you should have paid more attention to your math TEACHER. ---------------------------------------------------------- The President's actual budget for 2007 totals $2.8 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2006. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures: $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare $294.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology $23.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government I think it says 9% Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #42 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteClinton did it with the last Bush recession and it worked. You might want to check when that last recession ended... ...man, I'm just knocking them out of the park tonight... >>>>>>>>>>...man, I'm just knocking them out of the park tonight... In your own mind you're the Barry Bonds of yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>You might want to check when that last recession ended... I keep asking people to post evidence of the so-called Clinton recession. All I get are guys who are legends in their own mind. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,006 #43 September 18, 2008 >Wrong, http://www.taxfoundation.org/candidates08/compare/ ...the top >two brackets will increase, meaning 33% to 36% and 35% to 39.5%. Single >filers making more than $160K will see an increase, 3% ($3000+) You're looking at the wrong table. From the same website: "While the majority of the redistribution is targeted to taxpayers in the middle three quintiles, a surprising large amount—$40 billion—would flow to taxpayers in the 80th to 95th percentile (those earning roughly $93,000 to $192,000 per year)." So incomes up to $192,000 see a tax cut. >Tax cuts had little to do with investment choices made by private (now govt) >companies. I agree! Indeed, our real GDP climbs during periods of higher taxation. >I'm pretty sure you're near the top tax bracket, so are you willing to >pay more in taxes? Yes, and I generally do. I often wonder if the "support the troops!" types do the same, or if it's all talk for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #44 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteLargest in terms of spending. We spend 8 times that of #2, Britain. Having 300,00 troops isn't neccessarily a great thing over having higher technology. The more troops does not eqqula greater sucess. Want to revise this? Who's number two in spending? Not the UK. Not France. Not Germany...keep trying. You also made my point, the US military's technological edge is what makes as formidable as it is. I know you willing to give that up though, so don't worry about re-explaining it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Want to revise this? Who's number two in spending? Not the UK. Not France. Not Germany...keep trying. Oh, is someone now in #2, someone else who we are what 7 or 8 times in spending over? Hmmm, kinda makes my piont, we don't need to spend 2,3, or 8 times over anyone, esp spending money that will be generated in 150 years frrom now. Let me help you - China. They don't pay their soldiers. They don't need the tech edge. They have numbers. Their doctrine is in terms of human waves. Quote>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You also made my point, the US military's technological edge is what makes as formidable as it is. I know you willing to give that up though, so don't worry about re-explaining it. It's not giving it up, it's about downsizing it and maintaining a resonable edge. The military doesn't deal in reasonable. Any military's mission is to attain victory over its enemy. Of course, if you were in the military, you would know that.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #45 September 18, 2008 Read your own table! "Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2006" 9% INCREASE, not 9% of the total budget. Do the math. Don't forget the "supplemental appropriations", veterans' affairs, and the cost of military R&D hidden in the DoE budget.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #46 September 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteReduce the defecit by decreasing spending. That is what need to happens. Raising taxes only benefits the government and the leaches that rely on it. Government needs to shrink drastically. Right - we could cut military spending by 2/3 and STILL have the world's largest military. Okay, since we don't have the world's largest military already, I'd like to know what new math you're using. So, in terms of size of the Army only, we're number six, behind China, India, DPRK, ROK, and Pakistan. When you include all personnel, we're number three behind China and Russia...barely ahead of India. Explain how we would have the world's largest military, by cutting spending? Also, how do we maintain readiness, maintenance, and oh yeah, pay? I assume spending 23% of our federal budget, and as much as every other nation in the world combined is just fine with you, then. I wonder why Canada and Sweden haven't been overrun when they spend so little. Comparing militaries just on the basis of number of legs is really doing a dis-service to American service personnel. ---------------------------------------------------------- 23%? the number on 2007 military spending was 9% were did you get 23%? Maybe you should have paid more attention to your math TEACHER. ---------------------------------------------------------- The President's actual budget for 2007 totals $2.8 trillion. Percentages in parentheses indicate percentage change compared to 2006. This budget request is broken down by the following expenditures: $586.1 billion (+7.0%) - Social Security $548.8 billion (+9.0%) - Defense[2] $394.5 billion (+12.4%) - Medicare $294.0 billion (+2.0%) - Unemployment and welfare $276.4 billion (+2.9%) - Medicaid and other health related $243.7 billion (+13.4%) - Interest on debt $89.9 billion (+1.3%) - Education and training $76.9 billion (+8.1%) - Transportation $72.6 billion (+5.8%) - Veterans' benefits $43.5 billion (+9.2%) - Administration of justice $33.1 billion (+5.7%) - Natural resources and environment $32.5 billion (+15.4%) - Foreign affairs $27.0 billion (+3.7%) - Agriculture $26.8 billion (+28.7%) - Community and regional development $25.0 billion (+4.0%) - Science and technology $23.5 billion (+0.8%) - Energy $20.1 billion (+11.4%) - General government I think it says 9% Right, increase from 2006, not total expenditure, as you claimed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #47 September 18, 2008 did miss read the table but didn't forget about the other stuff Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #48 September 18, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me help you - China. They don't pay their soldiers. They don't need the tech edge. They have numbers. Their doctrine is in terms of human waves. You don't need to help me, I knew who you were referring to. That's the new Axis of Evil, after the other axis took a shit and revealed they were never a threat after the Bay of Pigs. So we still spend 7 or 8 times of what they do? That's my point. And human waves, that is so WWII; do you really think it would work today? Let's get real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The military doesn't deal in reasonable. Any military's mission is to attain victory over its enemy. Of course, if you were in the military, you would know that. Yes, and I understand the brainwashing you are undergoing, I resisted. Apparently you can't understand that we are our own worst enemy with the military spending the neo-cons are engaging in. We are fiscally destroying ourselves and lookign stupid all the while. I mean, can you imagine what other countries think when we spend several times that of #2 and match teh rest of teh world in spending, then 911 happens? It was a roughshod, pathetic plan by unarmed boobs and tehy pulled it off. What do we do now, double teh spending of the rest of the world? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #49 September 18, 2008 Quote did miss read the table but didn't forget about the other stuff IOW's, military spending, direct and indirect via other support svs is HUGE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #50 September 18, 2008 Quote did miss read the table but didn't forget about the other stuff So that's where the 23% comes from. More $$$ than all the other nations of the Earth combined.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
