Globalist Trump proposes increase to military spending, cuts to domestic spending
-
Have a fit and scream. Sauce for the goose...
WSS
Also "cuts" vs "a few bucks less"
Also "cuts" vs "a few bucks less"
Switch the 2 if it gives you a boner.
-
just pointing it out...
-
So cal's a different person here?
I guess you need to read more of the thread. That way you would see that whoever's ox is being gored will cry that it's the end of the world.
I'm pretty sure I'm current...
But put that way... we all want to see programs that fit our philosophy preferentially funded. For me military budget is a question of: how strong is strong enough? Where is the line between "security" and Defense Industry "welfare".
When facts like that our Air Force is substantially bigger, more powerful than the second-largest, flying force in the world surface, then that strikes me as somewhat excessive.
When the fact arises that the 2nd-largest, flying force belongs to our US Navy, then that strikes me as pretty excessive.
When both those forces are essentially unused assets due to the changing nature of our enemies, i.e., border-free terrorist groups vs. nation-states, plus our understandable aversion to putting pilots in harms way vs unmanned options, e.g., drones or cruise missiles, then that build up seems like overkill.
And then there's the fact that some of our best, most modern, most capable, manned fighters have never seen use due to cost considerations were one to be lost.
Add the limitations and vulnerabilities of Carriers the rationale for their continued additions escapes me.
Salaries for the rank and file? I'm fine with them except when they prove to be insufficient to keep spouses/families of deployed, rank-and-file service-members out of the SNAP program... and in their homes.
I am not fine with the outsourcing of "military support" to the private sector, e.g., food service, minor construction, armed support for "security" and other purposes.
On the other hand.... I'm not sure what we spend, or how wisely we spend what we spend, on Cyber Warfare capabilities, but doesn't seem like enough.
So cal's a different person here?
I'm pretty sure I'm current...
But put that way... we all want to see programs that fit our philosophy preferentially funded. For me military budget is a question of: how strong is strong enough? Where is the line between "security" and Defense Industry "welfare".
When facts like that our Air Force is substantially bigger, more powerful than the second-largest, flying force in the world surface, then that strikes me as somewhat excessive.
When the fact arises that the 2nd-largest, flying force belongs to our US Navy, then that strikes me as pretty excessive.
When both those forces are essentially unused assets due to the changing nature of our enemies, i.e., border-free terrorist groups vs. nation-states, plus our understandable aversion to putting pilots in harms way vs unmanned options, e.g., drones or cruise missiles, then that build up seems like overkill.
And then there's the fact that some of our best, most modern, most capable, manned fighters have never seen use due to cost considerations were one to be lost.
Add the limitations and vulnerabilities of Carriers the rationale for their continued additions escapes me.
Salaries for the rank and file? I'm fine with them except when they prove to be insufficient to keep spouses/families of deployed, rank-and-file service-members out of the SNAP program... and in their homes.
I am not fine with the outsourcing of "military support" to the private sector, e.g., food service, minor construction, armed support for "security" and other purposes.
On the other hand.... I'm not sure what we spend, or how wisely we spend what we spend, on Cyber Warfare capabilities, but doesn't seem like enough.
This is spot on. I'd like to think Americans are smart enough to determine which programs make sound logical and fiscal sense to fund. Unfortunately it appears that campaign donations, a driving need to stay in office and stimulating your buddies portion of the economy has driven policy making in Washington.
-
$20 trillion in debt, this doesn't surprise me. . .
-
-
-
So cal's a different person here?
I'm pretty sure I'm current...
But put that way... we all want to see programs that fit our philosophy preferentially funded. For me military budget is a question of: how strong is strong enough? Where is the line between "security" and Defense Industry "welfare".
When facts like that our Air Force is substantially bigger, more powerful than the second-largest, flying force in the world surface, then that strikes me as somewhat excessive.
When the fact arises that the 2nd-largest, flying force belongs to our US Navy, then that strikes me as pretty excessive.
When both those forces are essentially unused assets due to the changing nature of our enemies, i.e., border-free terrorist groups vs. nation-states, plus our understandable aversion to putting pilots in harms way vs unmanned options, e.g., drones or cruise missiles, then that build up seems like overkill.
And then there's the fact that some of our best, most modern, most capable, manned fighters have never seen use due to cost considerations were one to be lost.
Add the limitations and vulnerabilities of Carriers the rationale for their continued additions escapes me.
Salaries for the rank and file? I'm fine with them except when they prove to be insufficient to keep spouses/families of deployed, rank-and-file service-members out of the SNAP program... and in their homes.
I am not fine with the outsourcing of "military support" to the private sector, e.g., food service, minor construction, armed support for "security" and other purposes.
On the other hand.... I'm not sure what we spend, or how wisely we spend what we spend, on Cyber Warfare capabilities, but doesn't seem like enough.
This is spot on. I'd like to think Americans are smart enough to determine which programs make sound logical and fiscal sense to fund. Unfortunately it appears that campaign donations, a driving need to stay in office and stimulating your buddies portion of the economy has driven policy making in Washington.
This is spot on. I'd like to think Americans are smart enough to determine which programs make sound logical and fiscal sense to fund. Unfortunately it appears that campaign donations, a driving need to stay in office and stimulating your buddies portion of the economy has driven policy making in Washington.
Thanks, BH...
Seems we might also both agree that we have to get the $$$ out of politics.
Ban all private contributions.
Ban PACs.
Publicly fund all campaigns.
At least when it comes down to the final two for all national offices... Pres, Senate, House.
Primaries for the above? Tougher... maybe very small limit for individuals? Say $100? Businesses? I don't see them as "people" (and apparently neither do subpoena laws), but subject ot the same limitations? No harm...
State offices? Up to the states...
Funding for the public financing? Maybe a National sales tax on discretionary spending? With an $18 trillion economy less the gov't budget of $3.8 trillion or $14.2 trillion... and about 23% of expenditures being discretionary 0.10% tax would generate $3.27 billion for all races... more than needed.
You with me?
-
trouble with that is, only republicans will get hammered by the law.
the corrupt left will simply flaunt it one way, or another, and their corrupt political
hacks will refuse to enforce the law.
exactly like they did with Dinesh D'Osouza.
etc. it's what the corrupt leftwing democrat deep state sombetiches do.
-
This is spot on. I'd like to think Americans are smart enough to determine which programs make sound logical and fiscal sense to fund. Unfortunately it appears that campaign donations, a driving need to stay in office and stimulating your buddies portion of the economy has driven policy making in Washington.
Thanks, BH...
Seems we might also both agree that we have to get the $$$ out of politics.
Ban all private contributions.
Ban PACs.
Publicly fund all campaigns.
At least when it comes down to the final two for all national offices... Pres, Senate, House.
Primaries for the above? Tougher... maybe very small limit for individuals? Say $100? Businesses? I don't see them as "people" (and apparently neither do subpoena laws), but subject ot the same limitations? No harm...
State offices? Up to the states...
Funding for the public financing? Maybe a National sales tax on discretionary spending? With an $18 trillion economy less the gov't budget of $3.8 trillion or $14.2 trillion... and about 23% of expenditures being discretionary 0.10% tax would generate $3.27 billion for all races... more than needed.
You with me?
Thanks, BH...
Seems we might also both agree that we have to get the $$$ out of politics.
Ban all private contributions.
Ban PACs.
Publicly fund all campaigns.
At least when it comes down to the final two for all national offices... Pres, Senate, House.
Primaries for the above? Tougher... maybe very small limit for individuals? Say $100? Businesses? I don't see them as "people" (and apparently neither do subpoena laws), but subject ot the same limitations? No harm...
State offices? Up to the states...
Funding for the public financing? Maybe a National sales tax on discretionary spending? With an $18 trillion economy less the gov't budget of $3.8 trillion or $14.2 trillion... and about 23% of expenditures being discretionary 0.10% tax would generate $3.27 billion for all races... more than needed.
You with me?
Absolutely. I've had the pleasure of being involved with local politics and I can tell you know one writes a check for more than $500 with a gentleman's understanding. I don't know how rich people have brainwashed middle and lower class voters that they are in it to help others, mind boggling.
-
well, having been on a corporate charity committee, the amount of
$$$$$$$$$$$ that went into the charity fund, all over to many charities,
local and national....
they don't have to do that. They just don't get credit - it doesn't fit the false
anti-corp narrative that they are greedy hoarders who spit on the little people.
bs, most of the time, I think.
-
well, having been on a corporate charity committee, the amount of
$$$$$$$$$$$ that went into the charity fund, all over to many charities,
local and national....
they don't have to do that. They just don't get credit - it doesn't fit the false
anti-corp narrative that they are greedy hoarders who spit on the little people.
bs, most of the time, I think.
well, having been on a corporate charity committee, the amount of
$$$$$$$$$$$ that went into the charity fund, all over to many charities,
local and national....
they don't have to do that. They just don't get credit - it doesn't fit the false
anti-corp narrative that they are greedy hoarders who spit on the little people.
bs, most of the time, I think.
I'd be fine with corporations not doing any charitable work but paying the 30% tax rate on revenue like many of us.
-
Trickle down economics would be a viable thing if that were true, no?
edit: boys we've got a championship to head to and win. I shall refrain from posting until we get there.
Go Cavs!
-
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
But back-to you JB. I've never said there where absolutely no cases were people need to go on the Dole for a while. Everything here gets painted with a broad-brush but I think you don't need to do much more than look over the explosion of medicaid, food stamps and disability over the past 8 or 9 years.
Did America fall into that severe disrepair during the Obama administration? And why?
And if we are going anecdotal I know a fair amount of people on disability and medicaid the vast majority certainly able to work.
Some of them drink on a regular basis and some of them smoke a pack or 2 of ciggarettes A-day. Some of them work under-the-table.
Ballpark of 750 bucks a month a couple hundred of food stamps bonus on electricity and gas, subsidized housing And medicaid is plenty good enough to live on.
I admit I'm a little surprised that a guy as obviously intelligent as you couldn't find employment that paid over 13500 Which I think was the cut-off point for medicaid back then correct?
But my statement stands. It doesn't seem like it's affordable it seems like it's free to a segment of societee and rediculously expensive for others. I'm not the CEO of General Motors I'm a 'fucking singer.
I pay:
Over 10 grand a year plus copay and prescriptions with a deductible of about 7500 bucks.
WSS
-
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
WSS
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
WSS
I thought it was small business owners who create all the jobs, isn't that what I keep hearing when it comes to state tax? They aren't the ones writing large Presidential campaign checks.
-
In trump def he's made it clear to def contractors he wont tolerate their goiging much longer
-
Trump would have never let the f35 program get to this point
-
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
WSS
I thought it was small business owners who create all the jobs, isn't that what I keep hearing when it comes to state tax? They aren't the ones writing large Presidential campaign checks.
I thought it was small business owners who create all the jobs, isn't that what I keep hearing when it comes to state tax? They aren't the ones writing large Presidential campaign checks.
Did take?
Seems like the interests coincide.
WSS
-
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
WSS
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
I don't recall calling for FNC to be muted... nor any other right-leaning outlets.
As for public-funding... if I check, will I find you criticizing Obama for not taking it in 2008 as McCain wanted to do?
Businesses? Yes, they should have "less say", because the "say" they have today is oversized bordering on astronomically overwhelming. And almost exclusively that "say" comes from privately held corporations whose self-interested owners, unchecked by stockholders, use their business income to amplify their allotted, one-man/one-vote voices to deafening levels.
Our representative democracy was not designed to respond to the loudest voice, it was designed to respond to the plurality, if not majority, of voices.
But back-to you JB. I've never said there where absolutely no cases were people need to go on the Dole for a while. Everything here gets painted with a broad-brush but I think you don't need to do much more than look over the explosion of medicaid, food stamps and disability over the past 8 or 9 years.
Did America fall into that severe disrepair during the Obama administration? And why?
And if we are going anecdotal I know a fair amount of people on disability and medicaid the vast majority certainly able to work.
Some of them drink on a regular basis and some of them smoke a pack or 2 of ciggarettes A-day. Some of them work under-the-table.
Ballpark of 750 bucks a month a couple hundred of food stamps bonus on electricity and gas, subsidized housing And medicaid is plenty good enough to live on.
I admit I'm a little surprised that a guy as obviously intelligent as you couldn't find employment that paid over 13500 Which I think was the cut-off point for medicaid back then correct?
But my statement stands. It doesn't seem like it's affordable it seems like it's free to a segment of societee and rediculously expensive for others. I'm not the CEO of General Motors I'm a 'fucking singer.
I pay:
Over 10 grand a year plus copay and prescriptions with a deductible of about 7500 bucks.
First... "JB"??? (nm... J Blum...)
Well... you should get a nice raise when you turn 65. Did you shop the Ohio Exchange?
As for "severe disrepair"... there was this little thing called the Crash of 2008??? when the entire globe almost fell into a 2nd great depression??? It was in all the papers... ten million lost their jobs... unemployment and SNAP enrollment swelled... Ring any bells? It should... and they took a long time to unring...
But speaking of "public assistance"... reminds me of my favorite, conservative "celebrity" moment...
-
Well of course you guys want public financing. Of course you want corporate money taken away. Because of that those who create the jobs and run the business have less say in what clown sits in the White House. And when the money is gone the press who have always been in the Democrat parties pocket and even more so today will control everything you hear about any candidate. Don't they have enough power for you guys right now?
I don't recall calling for FNC to be muted... nor any other right-leaning outlets.
As for public-funding... if I check, will I find you criticizing Obama for not taking it in 2008 as McCain wanted to do?
Businesses? Yes, they should have "less say", because the "say" they have today is oversized bordering on astronomically overwhelming. And almost exclusively that "say" comes from privately held corporations whose self-interested owners, unchecked by stockholders, use their business income to amplify their allotted, one-man/one-vote voices to deafening levels.
Our representative democracy was not designed to respond to the loudest voice, it was designed to respond to the plurality, if not majority, of voices.
But back-to you JB. I've never said there where absolutely no cases were people need to go on the Dole for a while. Everything here gets painted with a broad-brush but I think you don't need to do much more than look over the explosion of medicaid, food stamps and disability over the past 8 or 9 years.
Did America fall into that severe disrepair during the Obama administration? And why?
And if we are going anecdotal I know a fair amount of people on disability and medicaid the vast majority certainly able to work.
Some of them drink on a regular basis and some of them smoke a pack or 2 of ciggarettes A-day. Some of them work under-the-table.
Ballpark of 750 bucks a month a couple hundred of food stamps bonus on electricity and gas, subsidized housing And medicaid is plenty good enough to live on.
I admit I'm a little surprised that a guy as obviously intelligent as you couldn't find employment that paid over 13500 Which I think was the cut-off point for medicaid back then correct?
But my statement stands. It doesn't seem like it's affordable it seems like it's free to a segment of societee and rediculously expensive for others. I'm not the CEO of General Motors I'm a 'fucking singer.
I pay:
Over 10 grand a year plus copay and prescriptions with a deductible of about 7500 bucks.
First... "JB"??? (nm... J Blum...)
Well... you should get a nice raise when you turn 65. Did you shop the Ohio Exchange?
As for "severe disrepair"... there was this little thing called the Crash of 2008??? when the entire globe almost fell into a 2nd great depression??? It was in all the papers... ten million lost their jobs... unemployment and SNAP enrollment swelled... Ring any bells? It should... and they took a long time to unring...
But speaking of "public assistance"... reminds me of my favorite, conservative "celebrity" moment...
Nice raise at 65? JB yes J Blum That was his tale I was responding to. No I didn't personally check the Ohio exchanges I had a friend in the business do it.I don't recall calling for FNC to be muted... nor any other right-leaning outlets.
As for public-funding... if I check, will I find you criticizing Obama for not taking it in 2008 as McCain wanted to do?
Businesses? Yes, they should have "less say", because the "say" they have today is oversized bordering on astronomically overwhelming. And almost exclusively that "say" comes from privately held corporations whose self-interested owners, unchecked by stockholders, use their business income to amplify their allotted, one-man/one-vote voices to deafening levels.
Our representative democracy was not designed to respond to the loudest voice, it was designed to respond to the plurality, if not majority, of voices.
First... "JB"??? (nm... J Blum...)
Well... you should get a nice raise when you turn 65. Did you shop the Ohio Exchange?
As for "severe disrepair"... there was this little thing called the Crash of 2008??? when the entire globe almost fell into a 2nd great depression??? It was in all the papers... ten million lost their jobs... unemployment and SNAP enrollment swelled... Ring any bells? It should... and they took a long time to unring...
But speaking of "public assistance"... reminds me of my favorite, conservative "celebrity" moment...
I make too much for a subsidy. Not a bad problem to have I guess. And the health care I received has been worth every penny. Better than being dead in Saskatchewan.
Sorry did somebody tell you I opposed everything Obama did or was a McCain lover? I think I've said plenty of times before that I'm a big fan of the public mandate and I think even broke ass people should pay a proportionate amount to let them know that they're getting something of value. Clear?
Obama opposed to public mandate if you recall.
Maybe I will watch your video.
OK I watched it. Was hoping for a little bit more but...
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login