![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
So Chimpy McFuckstick doesn't think we're heading into a recession.
He thinks it's "patentedly" unfair if the telecom companies are actually held accountable for their illegal actions.
...
I can't even go on. My brain wants to implode from listening to that dipshit.
He thinks it's "patentedly" unfair if the telecom companies are actually held accountable for their illegal actions.
...
I can't even go on. My brain wants to implode from listening to that dipshit.
TANSTAFL
Address the point SIR.
You equated the DOD, it's employees, it's budget and the VA along with other departments as Agents of Jingoism. You were vet are you an agent of jingoism?
This tone started from your faulty economic logic that less taxes and more money into the military will fix our economic woes and that there are fat and lazy free-riders on the Dole who are dragging the country down.
The fact is that Since Before WWII the Percentages of the Military Budget as compared to the total Budget has SHRUNK consistently. From OVER HALF of all expenditures to less than 20% on a routine basis.
Meanwhile social programs and other functions NOT authorized under the Constitution have expanded to over 60% of the budget. Even if you take Social Security and it's funding source OUT of the equation the Federal Budget both mandatory and non mandatory ARE LARGER than the consistent military Outlays.
You want to make complaints about people not getting enough funding? Explain to me why hastily constructed barracks buildings from WWII are STILL housing troops today?
Again, let me state, the Social Programs in the Federal Budget have Ballooned to be the lions share of the Federal Budget. I do not deny that there are needy people I do however STRONGLY disagree that EVERY SINGLE APPROPRIATION is going to pay for people who are destitute and
The people profiled numerous times as 'victims' of Katrina who STILL don't have some sort of self support methods and don't seek it are PROOF of that fact. New Orleans was IMPORTING labor for the reconstruction efforts from other states.
The fault is is that the unnecessary invasion of a country that was not a clear and present danger, and was absolutely known not to be one, but for the falsified intelligence, is an extraordinary expense that must be paid for. "Economic Conservatism" as you appear to like to use it, is a misnomer because it is not conservative to pay for huge grand new expenses on the credit card and then blame all the bills that have been building up for years.
Now on a whim and a lie, we have invaded Iraq and embedded ourselves in a foreign occupation and counter-insurgency in an expensive and fruitless war without end, dumping treasure in bucket-loads to impressively drive armored vehicles all over a foreign desert and occasionally shoot at stuff.
So your contention is that Prior to the Iraq invasion everything was good and that the amount of spending was on target all things considered? That the Budget Deficit is ENTIRELY the fault of the War in Iraq. Is that your contention?
If so the numbers don't bear that out. The 2001 Deficit swing started under the Clinton Administration. Bush didn't set the FY2001 budget, Clinton did. The down swing starts just prior to 2001. That's a combination of factors, the economic downturn expanded federal budget spending and all exacerbated by the 9/11 attacks.
Another way to look at it is percent of GDP and Gross Numbers.
Here's Military Expenditures as a percentage of GDP.
Notice that when Military spending was a Significantly LARGER portion of our federal Budget the Differences between Gross and Public Debt were much closer together. Even coming out of the great depression. However, when you look at the expansion in the 80s and 90s, the federal spending on all fronts expanded while the military expenditures shrank (peace dividend) in proportion to federal budget size.
Let me say that again. Military Expenditures have trended down, consistently over the past 40 years with the occasional upsurge and drawdown again. You cannot blame the budget deficit on Military expenditures and operations. They're JUST not that big a fraction any more. It's domestic spending which has ballooned. Even if you look JUST at discretionary expenditures, Military expenditures have STILL gone down since 1962.
no subject
Your affectation of smarmy politeness doesn't impress me.
You're high-handed Coultier-style of discourse is fundamentally insulting, and I am predisposed to lack respect for you based on our previous engagement. If I recall you promised me a dismissive "Good day to you, sir!" which I kind of hoped was permanent.
As for the rest, post graphs all you like. The fact is that
1. The hobby of blowing shit up overseas costs money.
2. Deposing Saddam Hussien eliminated exactly zero clear and present threats to the United States.
3. The case for invasion of Iraq, sold to the American public and the world, was entirely fabricated.
4. Efforts in Iraq distracted from useful efforts against Al Queda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, resulting in the current resurgence of Taliban, which has the local commander begging NATO hat-in-hand for more troops (which the US cannot provide due to Iraq)
5. The budget surplus in 2000 was squandered on tax-cuts, which was not a terrible decision at the time, except that it completely shirks that responsibility of our government to reduce the national debt. And, before you start, the preposterous "it will pay for itself" story is bullshit and has been debunked thoroughly
6. After lying to the American people to go in to Iraq, billions of dollars out of an already deficit budget were dumped into Iraq, doing it on the cheap. This of course backfires, so every year a do-or-die budget request gets made begging for billions more "or you are not supporting the troops."
7. Every year for 5 years, we were told that it was getting better in Iraq and we were almost there, but all the statistics no matter how they were manipulated spelled "bloodbath." The surge was too little, too late. But most importantly? Iraq was a waste of effort to begin with, except as a means to forward a domestic agenda of Conservative power, so claims can be made of war-time powers. Because, having tanks rolling around the desert looks a lot more like a war than the in-the-shadows fearmongering horseshit that is the War on Terra(tm).
8. Having been lied to for 5 years, the administration has no credibility, and neither due Coultier-esque talking-point jingoists smuggly waving the flag and using the troops as a shield for their irrational rhetoric.
9. Having burdened the country with this enormous expense of an unnecessary invasion, and a completely mismanaged and seemingly perpetual occupation, now you have the gall to blame poor people for having TVs.
First of all, that $608 billion in entitlements doesn't go to Catrina victims in FEMA trailers, it goes to retired people. Secondly, a simple review of US demographics will demonstrate that not only was an increase in SS outlays completely predictable due to aging baby-boomers, but we are only just getting started.
You blame welfare, but invoke Social Security. You raid the social security insurance payment as "just a tax" but refuse to pay benefits that people have been paying into for their entire lives. And you know, that you don't like SS is fine with me. What is dishonest, is that you equate SS to low-income housing and welfare which is a lie.
You are saying "war war war support the war!" But you are not serving and you will not spend a dime to support it yourself. Instead, you want you way and you will just blame the poor (inaccurately) and threaten the old to try to divert the discussion from the fact that the Bush administration has been entirely dishonest and irresponsible across the board.
No amount of flag-waving, fear-mongering, blaming Bill Clinton, quoting irrelevant bullshit, and painting a pretty face on the economy sucking is going to get your credibility back.