- This topic contains 0 voices and has 16 replies.
January 24, 2013 at 7:10 pm #606325
So, did you hear that the House voted to eliminate ALL of the agreed to cuts to the defense budget and replaced them with cuts to food stamps and other social programs? Yeah, good stuff: http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/226703-house-votes-to-replace-pentagon-cuts-mandated-by-debt-deal
Oh, and in a related note, the Pentagon and Homeland Security departments are UNAUDITABLE. That’s right, we don’t have any real idea how much they spend and what they spend it on, and they won’t let us know until at least 2017. Where’s the outrage, you “conservatives”? How have you demonstrated your furor? Or is that somehow inoffensive to your sense of fiscal responsibility? Makes me want to spit, it does.January 24, 2013 at 7:16 pm #783377
A nation hollowed out by greed and paranoia. Ashes, ashes, all fall down…January 24, 2013 at 7:30 pm #783378
Still waiting for our darling Senator Patty Murray to vote AGAINST a military appropriations bill.
Not likely she’s going to be doing that any time soon, though, considering that she has specifically told my group that she would NEVER vote against a military appropriations bill so long as there’s a war going on.
(And when was the last time there wasn’t an American war going on somewhere?)January 24, 2013 at 7:56 pm #783379
Perpetual war. Eisenhower saw it coming in the ’50’s. Feed the MIComplex or else we’ll be taken over by…
…whoever!! BE AFRAID!!!January 24, 2013 at 8:02 pm #783380
Nice to know that PEACE DIVIDEND we were all promised after the end of the cold war not only never materialized, it metastasized into a growth that’s killing the patient.January 24, 2013 at 9:12 pm #783381January 27, 2013 at 6:40 pm #783382
imagine what the world would be like if money spent on military could be used to the betterment of humanity.January 27, 2013 at 7:16 pm #783383
“imagine what the world would be like if money spent on military could be used to the betterment of humanity.”
Although some people – the Hitler persecuted jews beings just one of many examples – would probably say these things are not mutually exclusive.January 28, 2013 at 12:48 am #783384January 28, 2013 at 12:54 am #783385
Surely you’re not suggesting that because Hitler persecuted Jews 70-some years ago that our modern military budget should be larger than the next 10 advanced countries combined? Or that we really need to outspend our nearest competitor, China, at a more than 6 to 1 ratio? I didn’t think so.January 28, 2013 at 1:37 am #783386
“Surely you’re not suggesting that because Hitler persecuted Jews 70-some years ago that our modern military budget should be larger than the next 10 advanced countries combined? Or that we really need to outspend our nearest competitor, China, at a more than 6 to 1 ratio? I didn’t think so.”
No. Just responding to #7 which came across as an absolute. One or the other type of thing.January 28, 2013 at 7:01 am #783387
Good for the Republicans. Since Reid and company haven’t had the balls to pass a real budget in about 1100 days and counting, the Republicans are telling the Democrats to show me the money.
1. National Defense is mandated by the Federal Constitution to protect us. Could it be cut in certain areas? You betcha. Are you going to help families and businesses at JBLM when 7,000 people leave the area? I doubt it.
2. The Democrats have been using class warfare against the Republicans while hiding the cost of these benefits. Time to come clean. There hasn’t been any cuts to speak of since the last budget. The Economic voodoo spell has to run out sometime.
Having people dependent on Welfare and food stamps when they could be working is wrong. It is very tough out there, and between the government and charity we can help people. But many people have to help themselves. And the government needs to do what it is mandated to do. Pass a budget.
Another issue about the military. We are the main force in Europe. Since they did not have to have as large armies and navies they had the luxury of spending in other areas. And spend they did it seems. Same with Japan and South Korea.
The question is, should we remain as big or not. I say we pull back a bit, but with one caveat. We become energy independent. We have the oil, coal, hydro, natural gas, wind, solar, nuclear, and hamsters on a wheel resources. But we do have committments to Japan and other nations to keep the oil flowing. I say let the energy industry lead the way.
I know that is horrible for many of you to contemplate, but since you have been so supportive of the wars in Iraq and Pakistan, I think the War on the Environment is much more palatable to you.January 28, 2013 at 7:36 am #783388
“Having people dependent on Welfare and food stamps when they could be working is wrong”
We spend 5% of GDP on all the federal welfare programs. 5%. For all the whining and hand wringing you’d think it was 20 or 30 per cent. But it isn’t. you really think 5% GDP is too much to help people out in a country of 300 million people?January 28, 2013 at 7:46 am #783389
GDP for the Federal Government? What do the states supply? How about charitable organizations? Look, the poverty level did not dramatically drop once Johnson started the Federal programs. In fact from what I have read, we have spent billions with no discernable change.
Sure, it has helped a lot of people who have needed it. You neglected to highlight the part about people at times definitely need the help. No argument. But too many game the system. And constitutionally, I doubt the Feds were really supposed to have their hands in so many peoples lives. Some states are better than others in helping their people.
Now with the ACA, it will not be 5%. It will be more.
Dobro, I want people to have a place to turn to when they are in need. Welfare is not breaking the budget. Other Entitlements and spending is. Nothing in a budget should be sacred.January 28, 2013 at 8:00 am #783390
“But too many game the system.”
Do you have any figures on that or is it just something you “feel”? Or have you known someone who games the system so you figure lots of other people do, too. In other words, any factual info to back that up?
“GDP for the Federal Government? What do the states supply?”
I thought we were talking about cuts to the Federal gov’t.January 28, 2013 at 3:14 pm #783391January 28, 2013 at 3:49 pm #783392
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.