Proof Spending Isn't Out Control

It's shown by the following chart:



It's the military spending that has grown.

Narrative Here:

pbrauer said:

It's shown by the following chart:

It's the military spending that has grown.

Narrative Here:

Click to expand...

Well if Obama didnt have 5 wars going on at once.............
.
.
.

:roll: please. the ten year cost of Afghanistan is roughly comparable to the Stimulus.


oops. looks like your argument is bunk:

Whatever the current spending differences may be from 2011 to 2001. The Medicare, Medicaid and SS cost projections going forward dwarf any number you can give me about the military. It's simply unsustainable.

And it's really down to a lack of cost control devices, which is the fault of both parties.

Either you nationalize the health industry, or you privatize the whole thing and allow everyone to get butt ****ed in the ass by HMO's...

Both options present severe challenges to the government and to the populace, but who am i kidding, the debate is really about "winning" not actually implementing effective policy which is where you get stuck with unconstitutional pieces of **** like the health care mandate, and let's not forget that congress, both democrats and republicans have already been bought and paid for by the HMO's.

Mr speaker, jet boogieman wishes to adopt new measure, entitled "showing what dick heads all of congress are" or the "D.I.C.K. 69 act".

Requiring all members of congress to wear patches of all the various companies that give them campaign contributions, not unlike a NASCAR... Car.

This is the only war so far in American that hasn't been supported by a tax increase, it seems pretty obvious to me if you increase spending on ANYTHING because a dollar spent anywhere costs a dollar every time and don't match it with tax revenue it will led to a deficit.

I find it surprising many people think the more important argument is "What is most responsible for our debt?" And generally its a question between defense and health-care spending, fact of the matter is that if you only cut one you still have a debt which is increasing growing, and regardless of how slowly or fast you arrive a debt-default you're going to arrive there sooner or later. Thats the important question, how to we avoid this kind of debt and how do we reduce our debt over time into the future. It doesn't matter where the spending comes from, its all responsible for the debt, no rain drop is individually responsibly for the flood as they say.

So stop worrying about where the money is spent, a dollar spent on defense costs the same as a dollar spent on healthcare costs the same as a dollar spent anywhere else. Focus instead on how it can be reduced through a reduction of all government spending, across the entire range of government spending and yes accept that at this point some kind of tax increase will be required.

Going to say this in complete honesty. What do you suppose is going to happen if you squeeze small businesses any tighter on taxes? Because they do create a majority of the jobs in the US.

Secondly, we have half the tax payer base that has no income tax burden and in fact make money back from tax time. We going to tax them?

Thirdly, when you tax those evil rich corporations, what happens to the prices of everything you use every day?


Last, hey PB what the hell is up with a graph that adjusts everything for population except the defense spending? LOL fudge the math much?

Whether or not spending is out of control is a matter of opinion. You can't prove or disprove an opinion with facts and figures, but they can help support an opinion. These #s support the opinion that spending IS out of control. The pic shows big increases and no decreases.

pbrauer said:

It's the military spending that has grown.

Click to expand...

Horsepucky.

FY2000-2009, military spending grew by almost exactly the same percentage as entitlement spending.
FY2000:
Military: $295.5B
Entitlements: $1031.8B
FY2009
Military: $655.8B + 121.9%
Entitlements: $2288.7B = +121.8%

Of course, in raw numbers, FY2000-2009, entitlement spending increased 3.5x more than defense spending.

Historical Budget Data

aw, lookit that. bipartisan cooperation in declaring the OP to be dead-wrong.

pbrauer said:

It's shown by the following chart:

It's the military spending that has grown.

Narrative Here:

Click to expand...

people are overlooking something significant here .... people were screaming and the media was lambasting the little Bush because there was not enough ARMORED vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq

... because Clinton paid down the debt by shredding the military funding!

So now who wants us vulnerable AGAIN? ... as everything is getting worse people start pointing to the cost of military?

LoudAmerican said:

people are overlooking something significant here .... people were screaming and the media was lambasting the little Bush because there was not enough ARMORED vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq

... because Clinton paid down the debt by shredding the military funding!

So now who wants us vulnerable AGAIN? ... as everything is getting worse people start pointing to the cost of military?

Click to expand...

Actually, we don't need to be all over the world. The military is bloated, and cuts need to be made there as well. As for taxes, we can take a look at what level it needs to be at, but taxes by themselves are not a bad thing. They pay for projects that can prevent this from happening too many times:



We are going to need some level of taxation. However, our spending must be prudent, and corporations must pay their fair share too. GE paying no taxes, and getting government welfare money on top of it, while ordinary Americans are paying taxes, is a travesty.

Jetboogieman said:

Whatever the current spending differences may be from 2011 to 2001. The Medicare, Medicaid and SS cost projections going forward dwarf any number you can give me about the military. It's simply unsustainable.

And it's really down to a lack of cost control devices, which is the fault of both parties.

Either you nationalize the health industry, or you privatize the whole thing and allow everyone to get butt ****ed in the ass by HMO's...

Both options present severe challenges to the government and to the populace, but who am i kidding, the debate is really about "winning" not actually implementing effective policy which is where you get stuck with unconstitutional pieces of **** like the health care mandate, and let's not forget that congress, both democrats and republicans have already been bought and paid for by the HMO's.

Mr speaker, jet boogieman wishes to adopt new measure, entitled "showing what dick heads all of congress are" or the "D.I.C.K. 69 act".

Requiring all members of congress to wear patches of all the various companies that give them campaign contributions, not unlike a NASCAR... Car.

Click to expand...

I'm with ya!!!

OpportunityCost said:

Secondly, we have half the tax payer base that has no income tax burden and in fact make money back from tax time. We going to tax them?

Click to expand...

Then it's a good thing that income tax is only about 40% of the revenue! You going to be a dishonest POS or be honest about total government revenues?

danarhea said:

We are going to need some level of taxation. However, our spending must be prudent, and corporations must pay their fair share too.

Click to expand...

So instead of corporations paying their employees 35% more, who are then taxed at similar tax rates, corporations should pay 35% to the government, leaving lower salaries to employees, which lowers income tax revenues? Doesn't the money that for-profit companies don't pay to government end up as some individual's earnings, part of which is then forked over to government? What really is the difference?

GE paying no taxes, and getting government welfare money on top of it, while ordinary Americans are paying taxes, is a travesty.

Click to expand...

Among those taxpayers were the 287,000 GE employees who paid income taxes, right?

I guess what I'm saying is don't get your panties bunched... FedGov gets its hands on all the same money one way or another.

danarhea said:

Actually, we don't need to be all over the world. The military is bloated, and cuts need to be made there as well. As for taxes, we can take a look at what level it needs to be at, but taxes by themselves are not a bad thing. They pay for projects that can prevent this from happening too many times:

We are going to need some level of taxation. However, our spending must be prudent, and corporations must pay their fair share too. GE paying no taxes, and getting government welfare money on top of it, while ordinary Americans are paying taxes, is a travesty.

Click to expand...

I agree - we have to deal with more taxation.

However; the problem we have are in the entitlement mentality

It would be more prudent to consider that for every penny of tax an American pays on a dollar - EVERY AMERICAN should pay the same.
If it is good for some - it should be good for all!
Look at ObamaCare ... what the heck is that? WAIVERS?? ... so it isn't good ... it's just a way to rip of America ....

Nearly 20 percent of new Obamacare waivers are gourmet restaurants, nightclubs, fancy hotels in Nancy Pelosi’s district - (STORY SOURCE)

Click to expand...

We need to end JUST US and must get back to justice!

Anytime I see a chart with some sort of dollar figure related to the cost of war/defense etc I remind myself of statements made by Sec. Rumsfeld and Sen. Byrd, which I have provided below in part(sorry for the poor transcript).

Robert Byrd:

"I seriously question an increase in the pentagon budget in the face of the departments recent inspector generals report, how can we seriously consider a 50 billion dollar increase in the defense budget when DOD's own auditors, when DOD's own auditors say the department cannot account for 2.3 Trillion dollars in transaction in one year alone"

Click to expand...

Donald Rumsfeld:

"I doubt to be honest that people inside the department are going to be capable of sorting this out, I have a feeling it's going to take some folks from outside to come in and look at this and put in place a process that over a period-and I regret to say but I have seen how long things take-I think it's going to take a period of years to sort it out and I think it will probably take the cooperation of the congress to try and get the system so that you can actually manage the financial aspects of that institution rather than simply report on things that have happened imperfectly."

Click to expand...

The above quotes can be seen and heard in the video below.


The below images speak for themselves I guess.




Maybe no one really knows how much is spent, I sure as heck am confused.