• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

$700 Billion Going to Defense/Military out of a $1.3 Trillion budget

cuban smokes

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
10,023
Reaction score
3,470
Location
Midwest USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................
 
We actually spend more than $4 trillion per year.

But the point is a good one. We give $700 billion to corrupt bankers, but we can't get $25 billion for a wall?
 
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

Same picture we've always seen. Eisenhower very clearly said "Don't do it". But we don't listen.

The Military Industrial Complex has reached it's goal OF - too big to fail.
 
why? There is nothing that important that requires the military use of force, if we can lower taxes and not raise them to, necessary and proper, military use of force levels.
 
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

It's expensive to maintain an empire. All those corporations out there colonizing the world for you.

It's even more expensive to maintain your hedonistic Life-Style and Standard of Living.

The costs of not implementing this strategy are clear. Failure to meet our defense objectives will result in decreasing U.S. global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living.

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf
 
We actually spend more than $4 trillion per year.

But the point is a good one. We give $700 billion to corrupt bankers, but we can't get $25 billion for a wall?

Check back in a year or two....if we still have a comparable constitutional government..... Master the facts, research
comparisons, GET A GRIP, avoid being too reactionary.... Sane national US healthcare policy would be helpful but that
is not a conservative priority, they believe in US exceptionalism and a health fairy, pixie dust market driven, invisible hand
health insurance solution.

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_spending_chart
.....Total US Government Spending, federal, state and local, was increasing briskly, year on year, in the mid 2000s from $4.4 trillion in 2005 to $6 trillion in the depths of the Great Recession in 2009. For several years after the end of the recession total government spending leveled out at $6 trillion. But in 2015 spending started to increase again. per year.

SpendingFEDVsGDP2017.jpg


SpendingVsGDP2017.jpg


https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/5326/economics/government-spending/
UKspendingVSgdp.jpg


https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/government-spending-to-gdp
GermanSpendingVsGDP.jpg
 
Last edited:
We actually spend more than $4 trillion per year.

But the point is a good one. We give $700 billion to corrupt bankers, but we can't get $25 billion for a wall?

A wall? Really? You really think that was ever going to happen?
You probably think Trump is still going to lock up Hillary Clinton. And repeal and repace the ACA.
 
In my last post, I supported the fact that two of our closest allies that are also major countries, the UK and Germany, spend more in combined
local, state and federal outlays, even without supersized military spending, than is spent in the U.S.. They do not engage in the subterfuge of a hidden tax paid to for profit
health insurers who take a 20 percent cut of those payments and represent that they are paying a portion of the health care costs of some of the
population.

Instead, a portion of total taxation is devoted to public payment of the costs of healthcare of their entire populations and is reflected in the total
of public expenditure. There is no compartmentalization and the associated bookkeeping of shoe horning healthcare expense to veterans, medicaid recipients,
medicare recipients, the uninsured, the privately insured, the car accident injured, those injured or made ill on the job, etc., etc. Litigation and administrative
costs in the U.S. associated with all of that, "who is the responsible party for this healthcare cost," shoe horning does not exist in other ODCs!

US military and intelligence gathering and analysis expenditures over and above the percentage of gdp of those expenditures, compared to the outlays for
similar expenditures by the UK or Germany are a diminishment of the quality of life of Americans, compared to the residents of all other ODCs.

Germany: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gm.html
........
Mother's mean age at first birth:
29.4 years (2015 est.)

Maternal mortality ratio:
6 deaths/100,000 live births (2015 est.)

country comparison to the world: 168
Infant mortality rate:
total: 3.4 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 3.7 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 3.1 deaths/1,000 live births (2017 est.)
country comparison to the world: 205

Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 80.8 years

United States: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html
......
Mother's mean age at first birth:
26.4 years (2015 est.)

Maternal mortality ratio:
14 deaths/100,000 live births (2015 est.)
country comparison to the world: 138

Infant mortality rate:
total: 5.8 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 6.3 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.3 deaths/1,000 live births (2017 est.)
country comparison to the world: 170

Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 80 years....

All other factors being equal, German mothers would be expected to have a poorer average outcome than American mothers.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_maternal_age
........
Advanced maternal age is associated with adverse reproductive effects such as increased risk of infertility,[4] and that the children have chromosomal abnormalities.[5] The corresponding paternal age effect is less pronounced.[6][7]
.......
Examples
In the USA, the average age at which women bore their first child advanced from 21.4 years old in 1970, to 25 years old in 2006.[9]

The German Federal Institute for Population Research claimed in 2015 the percentage for women with an age of at least 35 giving birth to a child was 25,9%. This figure rose from 7,6% in 1981.[10]
 
Last edited:
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

we have a 4 trillion dollar budget

maybe you need to lay off the smokes?
 
we have a 4 trillion dollar budget

maybe you need to lay off the smokes?

well, I'm so ****ing sorry to step on your ****ing toes ................... a '$1.3 trillion spending measure' .................. ****ing happy, now?
 
Where we have been and where we are going. The same politics motivating ever outsized US military and intelligence activity spending while
at the same time dismantling progressive taxation (see latest tax legislation as compelling example), resulting in destabilizing GINI level,
have a distorted sense and memory of what actually would be useful, coherent MAGA priorities.

Income inequality in the US by state, ranked - Business Insider
Income inequality is growing across the US — here's how bad it is in ...
Business Insider-Mar 15, 2018
Careers data site Zippia used data from the US Census Bureau's American Community Survey to rank all 50 states by income inequality. The states are ranked by their Gini coefficient, a commonly used metric that quantifies income inequality on a scale from one to 100. The lower the score, the more equal ...

As a country, the US fares pretty poorly when it comes to income inequality: according to the CIA Factbook, the US has the 40th highest level of inequality out of 150 countries — around the same level as Jamaica, Peru, and Cameroon.

......Communist China has 104 billionaires leading the country while Xi Jinping promises to lift millions out of poverty

Student loan debt is now the second highest consumer debt category - behind only mortgage debt - and higher than both credit cards and auto loans. According to Make Lemonade, there are more than 44 million borrowers with $1.3 trillion in student loan debt in the U.S. alone.Feb 21, 2017[h=3]Student Loan Debt In 2017: A $1.3 Trillion Crisis - Forbes[/h]


https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2017/02/21/student-loan-debt-statistics-2017/

https://www.csmonitor.com/1980/1002/100256.html
[FONT=&quot][h=1]Reagan and social issues[/h]

  • [FONT=csm-iconfonts !important][/FONT]
  • [FONT=csm-iconfonts !important][/FONT]
  • [FONT=csm-iconfonts !important][/FONT]
[h=3]By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor OCTOBER 2, 1980[/h]
[/FONT]

SACRAMENTO, CALIF. — One of the chief campaign issues for Ronald Reagan in his 1966 race for governor was the growing troubles on California's college campuses.......

With a unique and extensive system of public colleges and universities and free tuition, higher education in California was more "political" here than in most other states. And in the mid '60s, the increasingly comfortable and conservative "silent majority" began to wonder why it should be paying for the education of "ungrateful troublemakers."
The University of California's mother campus in the north symbolized all of this, and gubernatorial candidate Reagan promised to "clean up the mess at Berkeley." He proposed a special commission headed by former CIA director John McCone to "investigate charges of communism and blatant sexual misbehavior." A plague over his new door as governor head, "Obey the Rules or Get Out"

Among his first acts as governor was an attempt to slash higher education budgets and impose a partial tuition requirement for the first time in the system. Taxpayers should not be asked "to subsidize intellectual curiosity" and the "user of the service [students] should pay for the service," he said....

This is also a hidden tax.:

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/student-debt-rising-worldwide
TuitionChamieMay182017-800x800.jpg
 
Last edited:
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

Infinity War takes a lot of money to fund.
 
well, I'm so ****ing sorry to step on your ****ing toes ................... a '$1.3 trillion spending measure' .................. ****ing happy, now?

maybe instead of getting pissed off, you could actually post about what you are rambling about

some form of an article, or some information...so us lesser informed people who cant read minds, might actually be able be able to converse on the subject

or maybe not...up to you....
 
We actually spend more than $4 trillion per year.

But the point is a good one. We give $700 billion to corrupt bankers, but we can't get $25 billion for a wall?

Nobody in their right mind wants the wall. All it will accomplish is to cement American xenophobia in the rest of the world. We will become the next East Germany and hated for it. Even the conversation about the wall could cost us more than 25 billion in lost political capital and international disdain.
 
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

Here's my plan: Federal Vegan Program; schools, military, retirement homes; anything getting federal dollars; gut the meat industry, why should my tax dollars pay for this?

With less violence at home we will have a more peaceful planet planet and cut our military budget in half.

With a healthier diet, we can cut our medical costs in half.

The Green Party's stance on war won't work without these measures, so I can't vote for them, and because they would just give everything to the Unions which I would tolerate if they had the rest of a program that would work.

Write your Green Party and tell them to take up the Exquisitor Federally Vegan Program.
 
i dont have any issues with putting in money in our millatary... You people do comprehend that our millitary is about the only thing keeping America on the map right? We dont have much left in terms of power if we arent leading the world in millitary power....All you left wingers that are constantly bringing up the russians that are about to invade us should be happy here right? Out of all the crappy things we can throw our money on, having a strong millitary is not one of them
 
More funding for the military than the next 12 nations combined.

Yet Omnibus funding for the State Dept. is $4 billion short of the 2017 level.
 
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

I hope you take the time to look at China’s long term plan. Google “one belt, one road”. China seeks to corner the economies of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East to market its excessive capacity. As a matter of fact they are hard at it making loans, building ports, etc., And they are going to use their military to push us out of the way.

Our commercial and military vessels may be denied access to the South China Sea, one of the worlds busiest sea lanes. Good luck trading with India without a navy for security.

So why do we need a military if you are willing to accept being an economic has-been?

But it won’t affect you. It will affect the other guy. That’s how they sell the bull****.
 
what is wrong with this picture America?

A $1.3 trillion budget with $700 billion going to the military :roll:

what a ****ed up nation we live in ................

I'm starting to look forward to WWIII .....................

Seeing all the unnecessary crap we have to maintain in order to keep allies baited for assistance. This is rather usual and seeing the sheer size of our military. Not to mention the quality of it.

This price is actually rather rational.
 
Back
Top Bottom