Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-16-2014, 01:24 PM  
Taco John Taco John is online now
12on Paul
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Casino cash: $5945
FEDS TAKE RECORD $1.9 TRILLION IN REVENUE

Yes, this is a Drudge Headline. Yes, you can eat it if you don't like that. This should end the discussion about needing to raise revenues. Despite taking in a record $1.9 trillion, they're running a deficit of $436 billion.

The problem isn't that the rich aren't kicking in their "fair share." The problem is the pigs in DC will promise anything and everything in order to get elected.

This is why the tea party was willing to shut down the government. This is why they were willing to do the sequester. This is why the tea party is willing to replace conservative leaders. And it will keep on this way until those numbers get fixed.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...l-running-436b
Posts: 50,871
Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Taco John is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 06:07 PM   #31
Brainiac Brainiac is offline
Veteran
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lenexa, KS
Casino cash: $6025
From 2011:

The Founders on Defense Spending

Marion Smith /November 18, 2011/36 comments

In the midst of the current budget battle, there are a lot of folks—right and left—who assume that defense spending is a luxury that America just can’t afford at the moment. This a view far removed from James Madison’s conviction that “security against foreign danger is…an avowed and essential object of the American Union.”

America’s spending priorities are out of whack. Congress’s shortsighted intransigence on the budget will likely mean cutting back the number of delivery days for the U.S. postal service and indiscriminately slashing the defense budget (two items explicitly mentioned in the Constitution). Meanwhile a host of welfare programs (created in the 20th century) are treated as sacrosanct.

Assessing the Founders’ constitutional understanding of federal spending priorities can most certainly help us judge the order and degree to which we cut and reform federal funding in this urgent environment of financial constraints.

The historical record reveals that, today, we consider defense spending to be a lower priority than did the U.S. Congress in the first 70 years of the Republic (see chart). From 1792 to 1860, defense spending as a percentage of the federal budget averaged 48.1 percent, and—even in the most peaceful times—never fell below 23 percent. The next most important items were the costs of the country’s few federal infrastructure programs (e.g., post offices and post roads), maintaining the federal government’s buildings and staff, and the costs of maintaining diplomats abroad.

Moreover, the original impetus for calling the Constitutional Convention in 1787 centered on growing security threats facing the newly independent American states. The Constitution makes national security a main priority. Congress shall have the power to “declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.… To raise and support Armies.… To provide and maintain a Navy.… To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.”

The appropriate uses for the military—directed and commanded by the President—mentioned in the Constitution were to “provide for the common defense,” “insure domestic tranquility,” and “punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations.”

To keep the new Congress centered on the priority of national defense, President George Washington cautioned them in his 1790 address to Congress:


Among the many interesting objects which will engage your attention, that of providing for the common defence will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace. A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well digested plan is requisite.

In the first year of Washington’s Administration, Congress established the War Department, confirmed Major General Henry Knox as Secretary of War, and raised the first peacetime military regiments. Since Washington’s Administration, the United States has had a standing army as well as a navy.

During the early years of the republic (despite intense congressional debates, severe miscalculations about foreign risks, and a few explicitly anti-war and isolationist Congressmen), military spending for the common defense was the clear priority at the federal level.

Yet today, at a time of massive spending, this constitutional priority is being increasingly neglected. With defense spending already at historic lows, if sequestration occurs, it would indiscriminately force the defense budget to absorb 48 percent of the overall cuts. That means cutting defense by anywhere from $500 billion to over $1 trillion from projected long-term spending, thereby severely undermining the ability of the U.S. military to accomplish its current and anticipated operational tasks.

This is the potentially fatal side of the rise of America’s welfare state and its endless benefits and programs. There is no excuse, however, for persisting in upended spending priorities and neglecting constitutional functions that are the core, exclusive responsibility of the federal government.


http://dailysignal.com/2011/11/18/th...ense-spending/
Posts: 4,290
Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 06:21 PM   #32
FishingRod FishingRod is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Casino cash: $5757
As a percentage of the federal budget it seems reasonable but in comparison to the spending of the rest of the world the budget is huge.
Posts: 3,222
FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.FishingRod Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 07:05 PM   #33
Brainiac Brainiac is offline
Veteran
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lenexa, KS
Casino cash: $6025
Quote:
Originally Posted by FishingRod View Post
As a percentage of the federal budget it seems reasonable but in comparison to the spending of the rest of the world the budget is huge.
You just won't let it go, will you? I just destroyed the argument that you and the other libs were making, and you respond with "but, but, it's still too much!".

If you want to argue that the United States shouldn't have a strong military, then at least own it and make the argument. But the fact is that our out of control spending is NOT due to too much military spending. The numbers prove it.

It's not about guns versus butter. It's about bread and circuses.
Posts: 4,290
Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 08:01 PM   #34
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is online now
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $8521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
You just won't let it go, will you? I just destroyed the argument that you and the other libs were making, and you respond with "but, but, it's still too much!".

If you want to argue that the United States shouldn't have a strong military, then at least own it and make the argument. But the fact is that our out of control spending is NOT due to too much military spending. The numbers prove it.

It's not about guns versus butter. It's about bread and circuses.
No it doesn't.
You're arguing that because spending as a % of GDP has dropped that means there is not too much military spending? Surely you don't believe that is a logical argument. And what the founding fathers said this about this is pretty irrelevant.
Posts: 18,326
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 08:11 PM   #35
Dayze Dayze is offline
Resident Glue Sniffer
 
Dayze's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Overland Park
Casino cash: $8102
shouldn't it be a % of our deficit?

I have no idea what it is, but I'd bet it's astonishing.
__________________
Life is 99% inspiration, 1% Perspiration, and 1% Attention to Detial.
Posts: 25,885
Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.Dayze is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:06 PM   #36
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
No it doesn't.
You're arguing that because spending as a % of GDP has dropped that means there is not too much military spending? Surely you don't believe that is a logical argument. And what the founding fathers said this about this is pretty irrelevant.
1. It does strongly suggest that defense spending isn't the cause of our spending problem though.

2. Similarly, the fact that we outspend everyone else in the world when it comes to defense doesn't prove we spend too much.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:22 PM   #37
Brainiac Brainiac is offline
Veteran
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lenexa, KS
Casino cash: $6025
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
No it doesn't.
You're arguing that because spending as a % of GDP has dropped that means there is not too much military spending? Surely you don't believe that is a logical argument. And what the founding fathers said this about this is pretty irrelevant.
That's exactly what it means. That is of course assuming that the argument is that military spending is the cause of the budget crisis. Why is that so hard to understand? If we are spending at historically LOW levels as a percentage of GDP, we are not overspending.

Now if you want to argue that we spend too much on the military and you base that on a completely different set of criteria, that's an entirely different argument. I was simply DEBUNKING the bullshit argument that we have a budget crisis because we spend too much on the military. You can stick your head in the sand and deny it all you want, but the numbers DO prove it. It doesn't matter if you "feel" that we spend too much on the military. The numbers say we don't.
Posts: 4,290
Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Brainiac is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:25 PM   #38
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8078
What should matter is not the numbers, but how much is needed to defend the country. So we don't need to be in over 140 countries, starting aggressive wars or policing every single conflict or engaging in regime change because we don't like a govt. None of these things is what this country was ever supposed to be about. Such things are not defense and some are offense.

So 'eff your numbers.
__________________
Posts: 57,390
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:29 PM   #39
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $8078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
The amount of dumbassery by some posters never fails to amaze me.
Percents are used to make large numbers look less bad. It's even worse when used against GDP. That makes it a double scam since GDP includes govt spending. Just because the govt spends too much money overall, doesn't make defense spending a non issue. It just becomes a percent of too much spending. LOL!

Bottom line is we can afford some military cuts and still have the most powerful military in the world.
__________________
Posts: 57,390
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:41 PM   #40
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
The amount of dumbassery by some posters never fails to amaze me.

You dumbassery astounds me.

Quote:
Despite what antigovernment conservatives say, non-
defense discretionary spending on areas like foreign aid, education and food safety was not a driving factor in creating the deficits. In fact, such spending, accounting for only 15 percent of the budget, has been basically flat as a share of the economy for decades. Cutting it simply will not fill the deficit hole.

The first graph shows the difference between budget projections and budget reality. In 2001, President George W. Bush inherited a surplus, with projections by the Congressional Budget Office for ever-increasing surpluses, assuming continuation of the good economy and President Bill Clinton’s policies. But every year starting in 2002, the budget fell into deficit. In January 2009, just before President Obama took office, the budget office projected a $1.2 trillion deficit for 2009 and deficits in subsequent years, based on continuing Mr. Bush’s policies and the effects of recession. Mr. Obama’s policies in 2009 and 2010, including the stimulus package, added to the deficits in those years but are largely temporary.

The second graph shows that under Mr. Bush, tax cuts and war spending were the biggest policy drivers of the swing from projected surpluses to deficits from 2002 to 2009. Budget estimates that didn’t foresee the recessions in 2001 and in 2008 and 2009 also contributed to deficits


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/op...sun4.html?_r=0
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,920
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:45 PM   #41
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
That's exactly what it means. That is of course assuming that the argument is that military spending is the cause of the budget crisis. Why is that so hard to understand? If we are spending at historically LOW levels as a percentage of GDP, we are not overspending.
.
The two wars and tax cuts are exactly the reason we have budget crisis, and trying to use a percent of GDP to say it isn't is dishonest or just plain stupid. Since it is you, I'm going with stupid.
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,920
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:49 PM   #42
GloucesterChief GloucesterChief is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Jan 2013
Casino cash: $6304
The Clinton-GOP "surpluses" are a myth. The total national debt increased in all those years. Doesn't mean that Bush wasn't a profligate spender, just that Clinton was as well.

Also tax cuts shouldn't be considered a cost.
Posts: 1,539
GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.GloucesterChief would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:53 PM   #43
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is online now
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $8521
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
1. It does strongly suggest that defense spending isn't the cause of our spending problem though.

2. Similarly, the fact that we outspend everyone else in the world when it comes to defense doesn't prove we spend too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brainiac View Post
That's exactly what it means. That is of course assuming that the argument is that military spending is the cause of the budget crisis. Why is that so hard to understand? If we are spending at historically LOW levels as a percentage of GDP, we are not overspending.

Now if you want to argue that we spend too much on the military and you base that on a completely different set of criteria, that's an entirely different argument. I was simply DEBUNKING the bullshit argument that we have a budget crisis because we spend too much on the military. You can stick your head in the sand and deny it all you want, but the numbers DO prove it. It doesn't matter if you "feel" that we spend too much on the military. The numbers say we don't.
You are both essentially arguing that you can't be overspending on something if that spending, when expressed as a % of something else, goes down. That's silly.
Posts: 18,326
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:54 PM   #44
morphius morphius is offline
World's finest morphius
 
morphius's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $5620
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloucesterChief View Post
The Clinton-GOP "surpluses" are a myth. The total national debt increased in all those years. Doesn't mean that Bush wasn't a profligate spender, just that Clinton was as well.

Also tax cuts shouldn't be considered a cost.
The whole Clinton thing cracks me up, the internet bubble, Enron, MCI Worldcom and the begining of day traders were the entire reason that happened. Not really something you build a stratigy for the future on.
__________________
Herm Edwards neutering offenses one QB at a time.
Posts: 24,576
morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.morphius would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2014, 09:54 PM   #45
Loneiguana Loneiguana is offline
Veteran
 
Loneiguana's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $6120
Quote:
Originally Posted by GloucesterChief View Post
The Clinton-GOP "surpluses" are a myth. The total national debt increased in all those years. Doesn't mean that Bush wasn't a profligate spender, just that Clinton was as well.

Also tax cuts shouldn't be considered a cost.
Spending a couple trillion in wars while cutting taxes is the fiscal conservative thing to do, am I right?
__________________
"Most of us can, as we choose, make of this world either a palace or a prison."
–John Lubbock
Posts: 3,920
Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.Loneiguana would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.