How do you even spend that much?

[billvon 3,120]

>Normally the miltary gets anywhere between a 3-4% annual pay increase
>to try and match the private sector. This year he is proposing a 1.4%
>increase instead.

And here we see why spending always, always goes up. Everyone wants taxes cut, but everyone wants more spending on their own favorite government project. Multiply that by 300 million, and you have the mess we're in todau.

[skipbelt 0]

interestingly provide for common derense is one of the very few responsibilities expressly provided for in the constitution . that would lead logical people to presume it has one of the highest priorities.

[billvon 3,120]

>interestingly provide for common derense is one of the very few
>responsibilities expressly provided for in the constitution.

So is providing for the general welfare. Lots of things are there in the Constitution, but there aren't too many details (like amount of money that should be spent on each one.)

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

>interestingly provide for common derense is one of the very few
>responsibilities expressly provided for in the constitution.

So is providing for the general welfare. Lots of things are there in the Constitution, but there aren't too many details (like amount of money that should be spent on each one.)

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[champu 1]

Quote

well I can tell you one way obama is cutting down the deficit. Normally the miltary gets anywhere between a 3-4% annual pay increase to try and match the private sector. This year he is proposing a 1.4% increase instead. I'm sorry but thats a huge slap in the face for all the things you go through being in the military.

"To try and match the private sector" is the operative clause.

There will come a time in every person's life when they don't make more money in a given year than they did the year before. You might even make less and [gasp] your world will not automatically come to an end. Much like one's first year of not going to school anymore it's a "welcome to real life" [/spaceballs] moment that people need to stop pretending that they're so special as to deserve immunity from it. It doesn't matter if you're a professional, a teacher, in the military, or a union worker.

Quote

In order for this country to turn around, what has been taken from the working class needs to be returned.

I fully agree that protectionist measures should be taken to get our working class and manufacturing base healthy again not just for them but for the overall economy as well. However, as I've said before, be careful of going too far down the "house, two cars, a dog, white picket fence, and 2.4 kids on one 9-5 no matter what career you pursue" road. There may have been a time when that seemed like the way things were, but don't assume that anything is sustainable just because it's a pleasant thought.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

a lot of people would like to have a house even worth 100k , your whining about your loss is only a paper loss , unless you're forced to sell and actually take the loss !

See there IS a reason I decided long ago to escape the cheap seats and opt for a nicer neighborhood.

It is fun going to visit the area's of America that resemble the third world shitholes that the military sent me to though. Its a whole lot less flight time.

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

US government debt is out of control. It does not matter if it is a Donkey or an Elephant in the White House. Both parties are out of control. It would be nice if you took off your partisan blinders for once and recognized that your Messiah is not here to save the world as Hollywood told everyone he would. Obama actually makes GWB look like a fiscal conservative and non-partisans know GWB was no fiscal conservative.

You really do not know how budgets here work do you. Perhaps if you actually LOOKED at the data you would take off those blinders that supported the fringe right ... right down the toilet. I realize you guys LOVE taking those trickle down showers.. but remember this... when Carter was in office the debt was $800 BILLION. When Reagan lied his way into office... even GHW Bush called it VOO DOO Economics. Here we are 30 years later.. and even THIS budget can still be laid at the feet of the Reagan-Bush Cabal. oh and by the way... before you TRY to claim I have blinders again... I voted for Reagan till he proved to be a spendthrift and fiscal responsibility was beyond his grasp.

You make it sound as though presidents spend the money. All the executive can do is propose a budget.

The real blame lies with Congress for squandering the economic boost that deficit spending created under Reagan. There would have been a surplus, a big one, but Congress, after passing the budget, turned around and hiked the spending, resulting in a huge deficit. You can thank Tip O'Neill, not Reagan, for that.

Later efforts to curtail spending, led by the Republican Congress, resulted in a government shutdown, which Clinton blamed on Congress, and most notably, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and of course the liberal media went along with the lie.

We're not all as ignorant or myopic as we are made out to be.

mh
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

interestingly provide for common derense is one of the very few responsibilities expressly provided for in the constitution . that would lead logical people to presume it has one of the highest priorities.

but nation building in Iraq isn't really an example of providing for our common defense. Afghanistan is a reach too, beyond the time it took to punish the Taliban for support al Queda. That was done in 2002.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

US government debt is out of control. It does not matter if it is a Donkey or an Elephant in the White House. Both parties are out of control. It would be nice if you took off your partisan blinders for once and recognized that your Messiah is not here to save the world as Hollywood told everyone he would. Obama actually makes GWB look like a fiscal conservative and non-partisans know GWB was no fiscal conservative.

You really do not know how budgets here work do you. Perhaps if you actually LOOKED at the data you would take off those blinders that supported the fringe right ... right down the toilet. I realize you guys LOVE taking those trickle down showers.. but remember this... when Carter was in office the debt was $800 BILLION. When Reagan lied his way into office... even GHW Bush called it VOO DOO Economics. Here we are 30 years later.. and even THIS budget can still be laid at the feet of the Reagan-Bush Cabal. oh and by the way... before you TRY to claim I have blinders again... I voted for Reagan till he proved to be a spendthrift and fiscal responsibility was beyond his grasp.

You make it sound as though presidents spend the money. All the executive can do is propose a budget.

The real blame lies with Congress for squandering the economic boost that deficit spending created under Reagan. There would have been a surplus, a big one, but Congress, after passing the budget, turned around and hiked the spending, resulting in a huge deficit. You can thank Tip O'Neill, not Reagan, for that.

Later efforts to curtail spending, led by the Republican Congress, resulted in a government shutdown, which Clinton blamed on Congress, and most notably, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and of course the liberal media went along with the lie.

We're not all as ignorant or myopic as we are made out to be.

mh
.

Well when the Alzheimer’s Patient in Chief.. promises a balanced budget and goes off and huts up with TRILLIONS in spending that made a LOT of defense contractors very wealthy... who is kidding who.

The So called Republican Revulsion of 1994 was more of the same and brought us more of the same MORE DEBT.. it was Clintons policies that had started to turn it around... but OH NO.. that pissed off those who profited so much from fiscal irresponsibility


When the No Nation Building Imbecile in Chief goes off and starts a discretionary war in an oil rich country that destabilizes the world oil markets so that the THOUSANDS of wells in the Intermountain West owned by small oil companies that are marginal at $20 a barrel oil, but making BILLIONS for their buddies when the prices go near $100 a barrel, who is fooling who... all of the time???


You may not be as ignorant or myopic as the rest... but a whole bunch of the fringe right certainly is.

The policies set by those SUPPLY SIDE Economists practicing in their VOO DOO DOO Churches need to OWN that fucking deficit... Fiscal responsibility my fucking ass.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You make it sound as though presidents spend the money. All the executive can do is propose a budget.

And veto.

The Democrats attempted to force a timetable on the spending bills for Iraq. Bush vetoed it. Faced with the options of trying to force Bush to go along, or be blamed for stranding the troops, Pelosi and company caved.

But that spending certainly cannot be blamed on them alone.

[skipbelt 0]

in this country more than any other adults are in the situations they want to be in !
to OP last 2 years of GWB bela pelosi and grimy harry held the pursestrings with veto proof majorities . then they quit complaining about debt defecit and added to them !

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

to OP last 2 years of GWB bela pelosi and grimy harry held the pursestrings with veto proof majorities . then they quit complaining about debt defecit and added to them !

veto proof majorities?

man, find a fucking book already and read about the US government. Which wingbat told you this "fact" about the prior session of Congress?

[billvon 3,120]

>to OP last 2 years of GWB bela pelosi and grimy harry
>held the pursestrings with veto proof majorities.

Uh, no, they didn't. Google can be your friend!

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

The same vapid generalization works for conservatives. Money is magic, and will magically multiply due to the economy boost that comes with spending it on the defense budget while taking in less.

Sounds just as silly, doesn't it?

Wendy P.

If Bush's spending was bad, this sh*t is off the hook. Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did, all while claiming the economic policies of the 8 years before his election "got us into this mess". If Bush's spending "got us into this mess", how the hell can Obama spend 10 times as much and believe it won't take us further down the same road?

Oh wait - I know why. Obama is spending money on "shovel-ready projects".

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20019468-503544.html

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[billvon 3,120]

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

claiming he increase spending 10 fold is about as stupid as saying Pelosi had a 2/3rds majority in 2007.

It would be amazing, and rather impossible, for the US government to spend 25-30T in a year.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

claiming he increase spending 10 fold is about as stupid as saying Pelosi had a 2/3rds majority in 2007.

It would be amazing, and rather impossible, for the US government to spend 25-30T in a year.

Just wait we're only half way through the first half of his only term.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

claiming he increase spending 10 fold is about as stupid as saying Pelosi had a 2/3rds majority in 2007.

It would be amazing, and rather impossible, for the US government to spend 25-30T in a year.

My bad. My 10 fold reference should have been about the deficit. See the link. Of course you libs will just question the source (a source notorious for using the government's own figures)

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

claiming he increase spending 10 fold is about as stupid as saying Pelosi had a 2/3rds majority in 2007.

It would be amazing, and rather impossible, for the US government to spend 25-30T in a year.

My bad. My 10 fold reference should have been about the deficit. See the link. Of course you libs will just question the source (a source notorious for using the government's own figures)

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

actually, we can just read the source, and again note that you're talking out of your ass with the 10x claim. The 2008 deficit was 400B. 10X that would be 4T. If you want to say he quadrupled the deficit, that would be a factual statement, and others can choose to argue that it was necessary. If you take 2007, the lowest deficit of the Bush Administration (yet aided by the SS surplus), then the 10x is about right. But only 2 of his 8 years did so well.

It isn't by accident that people confuse spending versus deficit versus debt. It's much nicer sounding scare to say he is spending 10x as much. If people take the statement at face value, that's pretty bad. But it's of course quite false. Difference in spending isn't even 2x, or close to it.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>Big O is spending 10 fold what Bush did

Cool, another lie! Think anyone will buy it?

Bill drinks the Kool-Aid. Film at 11.

claiming he increase spending 10 fold is about as stupid as saying Pelosi had a 2/3rds majority in 2007.

It would be amazing, and rather impossible, for the US government to spend 25-30T in a year.

My bad. My 10 fold reference should have been about the deficit. See the link. Of course you libs will just question the source (a source notorious for using the government's own figures)

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/

actually, we can just read the source, and again note that you're talking out of your ass with the 10x claim. The 2008 deficit was 400B. 10X that would be 4T. If you want to say he quadrupled the deficit, that would be a factual statement, and others can choose to argue that it was necessary. If you take 2007, the lowest deficit of the Bush Administration (yet aided by the SS surplus), then the 10x is about right. But only 2 of his 8 years did so well.

It isn't by accident that people confuse spending versus deficit versus debt. It's much nicer sounding scare to say he is spending 10x as much. If people take the statement at face value, that's pretty bad. But it's of course quite false. Difference in spending isn't even 2x, or close to it.

New math. Too much kelp, maybe. I gotta cut back.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[skipbelt 0]

you and bill aren't counting rino's , bad faith chastisement !