Who are you voting for?

[Mudderoy]

I think there are some serious problems with the numbers you posted above, and no links to your sources.

According to what you said, "roughly only 7.0% of the GDP was spent by the government" and "military budget was 626.1 billion in 2006 or 3.7% of the GDP" that means that 3.7/7.0 = 52.857% of the what the government spent was on the military budget. ????? But then you said earlier that "According to the G.S.A (the dept that handles most non military procurement) the government spends about 200 billion a year or aprox 3.0% of the GDP" and yet it spent "The military budget was 626.1 billion in 2006 or 3.7% of the GDP" according to your post.

I did some digging and found some links to some easy to follow data at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

But getting back to my original point, I probably was not clear enough earlier, if you look deep and close enough at the results of everyone stopping paying their taxes (the original point of my comment), huge amounts of money would stop flowing to major businesses whose customers get their cash from the government, not just direct government contracts to large companies, but social security and medicare, medicaid. Retired, social security dependent people would have no SS cash flow to spend or would cut back due to the lack of monthly checks, and much of what they spend affects the bottom line of major corparations (medical industry which is over 10% of GDP now IIRC). Government employees would be laid off, so they would stop spending money, another big hit. Banks and countires like Japan and China would no longer value the dollar, and they (Japan and China) hold the 2 largest quantities of US debt right now, so the dollar value would plummet, and gaslone would quickly rise to say $100/gallon and keep going as the dollar became worthless, all becuase tax payers stopped paying taxes and stopped the government from servicing it's debt.

The entire US (and eventually world wide banking system) would collapse. You would be broke and out of work in no time with prices doubling weekly.

No US coproration in its right mind would allow that. Probably has something to do with why US employeers are required to withhold taxes and pay them to the government for you.

I would rather my taxes go to the military fighting a war(s) than some suck ass liberal who'd take it, increase the size of governement and entitlements to people who are able to work.

I may be stupid, and I may not know how to spend my money but I'll be damned if some liberal is going to tax me and spend it the way they and their college professor decide it should be spent.

If you want your money given to people then give it, don't take mine and do "the right thing" with it. Why do all you liberals feel so guilty that you have to take my money to fix things? Maybe you just need to start taking personal responcibility like marriage before sex, no sex unless you are willing to raise the child. Monogamous relationships, etc...

Oh and Christmas, damn it! :smsoap: :laugh3:

 

[Ecomike]

They only pumped you in the butt and took your money?

Give me a break. Next you'll say bad things don't happen to good people.


I guess the UN should have handled Iraq.

They were not after money.

One was an ex con with a hand gun, who was an ex employeer of mine at the time, a close friend, a mechanic who taught me auto mechanics when I was 18. I still have fond memories of the guy. One day he and his wife were drunk and a group of us were all having something like a labor day party, weekend barbaque at the apartment complex. His wife got pissed off at him and did some real stupid stuff in front of everyone that really pissed him off, something like slapping in the face when their argument went south. He proceeded to grab her by the hair (she had very long hair) and draged her across the concrete parking lot back to his apartment. I was the only one out of about 20 peaople that intervened. I got them seperated and calmed down, but a few minutes later he came after me with a hand gun. All I had was calm nerves and calm words to keep him from shooting me.

The next day he apologized to me.

Fear is the source of anger, take away that fear and the anger goes away, along with one of the the reasons for war and fighting. Fear is usually caused by miss understandings that leed to the fear. Exception to that is probalby outright greed and lust for power, but on a personal individual level people that have an uncontrolable lust for power, and uncontolable greed still have deep psycological problems with fear of something driving them.

 

[Ecomike]

If we are in Iraq b/c of oil (most of which is sour crude anyway, except for the Basra reserve, IIRC), then why is Iraq selling 38% of its oil to China and India? You'd think if we were there b/c of oil, we'd be getting all of it....

:banghead:

Simple, we get most of our junk from China now. China needs oil to make the junk we buy from them with US dollars. Then they buy the oil with US dollars fromn Iraq. Also I think the trip from Iraq to China is shorter, cheaper than the trip to the US, So we get more of our oil from Mr. Chaves (sp?), Venesuala, which is closer that Iraq. In case anyone has forgoten there was a UN embargo against Iraq which limited their oil exports, so increase Iraq oil exports, and reduce the world oil supply demand problem we needed to get rid of SH in order to end the oil export embargo. Does not matter if Iraq oil goes to China, Japan, or USA, not in global market, but the supply demand issue is the real reason, to keep prices low, but it, keeping oil prices low, and supplies up, backfired on Bush-Cheney, or did it????????

 

[Ecomike]

I would rather my taxes go to the military fighting a war(s) than some suck ass liberal who'd take it, increase the size of governement and entitlements to people who are able to work.

I may be stupid, and I may not know how to spend my money but I'll be damned if some liberal is going to tax me and spend it the way they and their college professor decide it should be spent.

If you want your money given to people then give it, don't take mine and do "the right thing" with it. Why do all you liberals feel so guilty that you have to take my money to fix things? Maybe you just need to start taking personal responcibility like marriage before sex, no sex unless you are willing to raise the child. Monogamous relationships, etc...

Oh and Christmas, damn it! :smsoap: :laugh3:

How about you pay for the bloated military budget and unnecessary wars, while I pay for the social progams (not including social security and unemployment insurance), and we will see who goes broke first. :looser:

 

[Ecomike]

We are in Iraq because dumbass Hussain wouldn't allow inspections.

Other good reasons to be in Iraq:

1. Iran - So they don't control the oil in the middle east
2. Iran - Being very close may make them play better with others.
3. Iran - A nice big FAT U.S. base next door to them.
4. Free people that have had a foot on their collective necks for what 80 years?
5. Fight the terrorist in the Middle East and not in America.

I think there are several good reasons for us to spend 100's of billions of dollars in Iraq. Surely you can see past the simple "we're fighting for oil" idea?

Clinton was willing to trade with anyone in a skirt, including a few Scotts I hear.

1. Unless you plan on invading Iran, forget that one, as Iran already has the second largest oil reserve in the world (IIRC). Really piss them off, and they turn off the oil tap, and then see where prices go.

2. Or it may make them more militant and provide Al quida the fodder it needs to get a foot hold in Iran and the Middle east.

3. Iraq seems to other plans.

4. They are free, they just want to kill each other.

5. If you want to CREATE and fight terrorists in Iraq be my guest, just please don't do it in my name. There were no terrorists in Iraq until we showed up.

 

[Ecomike]

Frankly I still just don't see the math in spending over 1 trillion dollars on an unnecassary war, loosing thousands of good american troops, letting over 100,000 good american troops get injured, many permanently disabled, just to fight terrorists in Iraq, that were not there to begin with, just becuase the Republicans let their guard down and let a handfull of insane idiots steel some planes and fly them into 2 buildings.

That money could have been much better spent right here tighening up our own internal security, and finshing the job we left undone in Afganistan, which is biting our ass again right now.

I can't see puting a republican that believes Bush was right, in office for 4 more years of the same BS.

 

[red91]

If you want to CREATE and fight terrorists in Iraq be my guest, just please don't do it in my name. There were no terrorists in Iraq until we showed up.

Good point.

Oh wait...Sadam used a PLASTIC SHREDDER to throw LIVE people in that didn't like the way he did things.

His male relatives regularly raped and killed whoever they wanted with impunity.

But I'm sure that didn't scare the SHIT out of any Iraqi's, or terrorize them in the least.



Pass the Bong.

 

[Deadman 94 xj]

They were not after money.

One was an ex con with a hand gun, who was an ex employeer of mine at the time, a close friend, a mechanic who taught me auto mechanics when I was 18. I still have fond memories of the guy. One day he and his wife were drunk and a group of us were all having something like a labor day party, weekend barbaque at the apartment complex. His wife got pissed off at him and did some real stupid stuff in front of everyone that really pissed him off, something like slapping in the face when their argument went south. He proceeded to grab her by the hair (she had very long hair) and draged her across the concrete parking lot back to his apartment. I was the only one out of about 20 peaople that intervened. I got them seperated and calmed down, but a few minutes later he came after me with a hand gun. All I had was calm nerves and calm words to keep him from shooting me.

The next day he apologized to me.

Fear is the source of anger, take away that fear and the anger goes away, along with one of the the reasons for war and fighting. Fear is usually caused by miss understandings that leed to the fear. Exception to that is probalby outright greed and lust for power, but on a personal individual level people that have an uncontrolable lust for power, and uncontolable greed still have deep psycological problems with fear of something driving them.

I see your point, I really do. I think everyone wishes life was so simple, accept for those that seek to truely destroy it.

You are missing a big pont in my opinion. There are people (if you so choose to call them that) that do not listen to reason. I know you know this and have seen it in the news or in person. What are we to do about them? It would be nice if we could pay off our enimies and tell them "it'll be ok" but what happens after that?
I believe in principle and standing up for whats right, just like you did in that situation. Unfortunately wars are fought. But in a position of leadership or just plain love you have to play the game the same way your opponent plays it.
Do you think Saddam wouldn't have nuked us if given the chance? If not he sure as hell wasn't very convincing.
If your buddy that had the gun pointed it at that girls head and said he wasn't going to shoot, all the while loading bullets into it, would you have believed him?

Is Israel supposed to have a "good talk" with the palestinians in hopes to end things?

It is the way it is. And it's been that way for as long as humans have walked the earth.

Every one always looks at things as some sort of big conspiracy. It's really very simpe and not that complicated.

By the way, is your last name Moore ?:gee:

 

[red91]

Every one always looks at things as some sort of big conspiracy. It's really very simpe and not that complicated.

Yup one group.... THE ILLUMINATI.

BEWARE!!

 

[Ecomike]

Do you think Saddam wouldn't have nuked us if given the chance?

No. But he might have nuked Israel. Unless you know something I don't know he was a far cry away from ever making a nuke.

Is Israel supposed to have a "good talk" with the palestinians in hopes to end things?

It has worked before, one example is Egypt and Israel, something good President Carter did acomplish. I think he was a democrat.

 

[DrMoab]

Mike, you take "Bag of Hot Air" to a level never before seen.

Albuquerque doesn't see that much hot air during the big Balloon festival.

 

[Deadman 94 xj]

It has worked before, one example is Egypt and Israel, something good President Carter did acomplish. I think he was a democrat.

I never said anything about Egypt. I suggest you stick to the context of what's being discussed if you want your arguments to have any merit.

We all know you read a lot, that doesn't mean you can start spouting off irrelavent information in hopes to gain ground.

Typical Lib. I suppose you'll start defining the meaning of the word "is" next. Clinton did it. :thumbup:

 

[Ecomike]

I never said anything about Egypt. I suggest you stick to the context of what's being discussed if you want your arguments to have any merit.

We all know you read a lot, that doesn't mean you can start spouting off irrelavent information in hopes to gain ground.

Typical Lib. I suppose you'll start defining the meaning of the word "is" next. Clinton did it. :thumbup:

So just why is that the prior middle east wars between Egypt and Israel are irrelevant to trying to get Iran and Israel talking about lasting peace in the middle east? Perhaps because a Democratic president brokered that peace treaty?

I was simply giving a good historical example of an answer to your question rather than just saying yes to your prior question below:

"Is Israel supposed to have a "good talk" with the palestinians in hopes to end things?".

 

[JNickel101]

Simple, we get most of our junk from China now. China needs oil to make the junk we buy from them with US dollars. Then they buy the oil with US dollars fromn Iraq. Also I think the trip from Iraq to China is shorter, cheaper than the trip to the US, So we get more of our oil from Mr. Chaves (sp?), Venesuala, which is closer that Iraq. In case anyone has forgoten there was a UN embargo against Iraq which limited their oil exports, so increase Iraq oil exports, and reduce the world oil supply demand problem we needed to get rid of SH in order to end the oil export embargo. Does not matter if Iraq oil goes to China, Japan, or USA, not in global market, but the supply demand issue is the real reason, to keep prices low, but it, keeping oil prices low, and supplies up, backfired on Bush-Cheney, or did it????????

Actually the plan backfired on the Dem controlled Congress - apparently. Gas prices were fine til they took the majority in 06...thats when oil prices started to rise.

 

[JNickel101]

just becuase the Republicans let their guard down and let a handfull of insane idiots steel some planes and fly them into 2 buildings.

I'm sorry...I'm still in disbelief that you just said this. You seriously must be joking.

You can blame your good buddy, hero, mentor Mr Clinton for this. He is the one who cut the defense budget and destroyed our intelligence agencies...AND who also had Bin Laden in his sights and didn't pull the trigger. 9/11 was not Bush's fault, or any other Republican....get off it.

You really need to get off your anti-republican, pro-socialism rhetoric bandwagon....

and yes, I do refer to Dems as socialists. Anyone who thinks taxing the upper 50% of the wage earners for 100% of our nation's revenues isn't enough and wants to tax them even MORE, while creating more handouts for the bottom 50%, including illegals who dont even pay taxes in the first place, is a damn Socialist.

EDIT: You also need to separate 9/11 from Iraq. Blah blah blah, yeah yeah yeah, we tried to garner support for it, and there was mis-intelligence saying Iraq was linked to al Qaeda. Point is, Saddam needed to be removed from power, along with his sons, because they were 10 times as bad as Saddam ever would have been. Uday used to feed people to the lions and tigers in their "zoo". You should go find the article written about him in Maxim - yeah, i know - but its actually a very well written article that illustrates how psycho this dude was. Had Saddam been removed from power, i.e., assassination, Uday would have been in charge - and Iraq would have been 100 times worse. There needed to be a complete regime change. Deal with it. Accept it.

 

[Deadman 94 xj]

So just why is that the prior middle east wars between Egypt and Israel are irrelevant to trying to get Iran and Israel talking about lasting peace in the middle east? Perhaps because a Democratic president brokered that peace treaty?

I was simply giving a good historical example of an answer to your question rather than just saying yes to your prior question below:

"Is Israel supposed to have a "good talk" with the palestinians in hopes to end things?".

Because religion has nothing to do with the political views of Egypt and the treaty. This has nothing to do with your throwing roses into the flames theory.
The simple fact the the Palestinians do not have "talks" is what I was getting at and is in the context of the argument.
You seem to look for other examples when I put them right in front of you. It's ok if you can't answer my questions with a yes or no, I didn't think you could.

 

[Ecomike]

Because religion has nothing to do with the political views of Egypt and the treaty. This has nothing to do with your throwing roses into the flames theory.
The simple fact the the Palestinians do not have "talks" is what I was getting at and is in the context of the argument.
You seem to look for other examples when I put them right in front of you. It's ok if you can't answer my questions with a yes or no, I didn't think you could.

:huh:

 

[Deadman 94 xj]

:huh:

Whats the matter? Is that all you have?

 

[The Hard Struggler]

I think there are some serious problems with the numbers you posted above, and no links to your sources.

According to what you said, "roughly only 7.0% of the GDP was spent by the government" and "military budget was 626.1 billion in 2006 or 3.7% of the GDP" that means that 3.7/7.0 = 52.857% of the what the govenment spent was on the military budget. ????? But then you said earlier that "According to the G.S.A (the dept that handles most non military procurement) the government spends about 200 billion a year or aprox 3.0% of the GDP" and yet it spent "The military budget was 626.1 billion in 2006 or 3.7% of the GDP" according to your post.

I did some digging and found some links to some easy to follow data at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2006

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

But getting back to my original point, I probably was not clear enough earlier, if you look deep and close enough at the results of everyone stopping paying their taxes (the original point of my comment), huge amounts of money would stop flowing to major businesses whose customers get their cash from the government, not just direct government contracts to large companies, but social security and medicare, medicaid. Retired, social security dependent people would have no SS cash flow to spend or would cut back due to the lack of monthly checks, and much of what they spend affects the bottom line of major corparations (medical industry which is over 10% of GDP now IIRC). Government employees would be laid off, so they would stop spending money, another big hit. Banks and countires like Japan and China would no longer value the dollar, and they (Japan and China) hold the 2 largest quantities of US debt right now, so the dollar value would plummet, and gaslone would quickly rise to say $100/gallon and keep going as the dollar became worthless, all becuase tax payers stopped paying taxes and stopped the government from servicing it's debt.

The entire US (and eventually world wide banking system) would collapse. You would be broke and out of work in no time with prices doubling weekly.

No US coproration in its right mind would allow that. Probably has something to do with why US employeers are required to withhold taxes and pay them to the government for you.

I was looking for info on how much money the government paid to corporations for goods or services rendered, not paid as wages to individuals or given as charity.

I'm not very computer savvy, (I don't know how to post links) but I found most at GSA. gov and at "Military budget of the United States" search at Wiki.

Less than 3.0% of GDP paid to businesses by the GSA (paper, ink, 2x4s, office cleaning, tires, and such) and another 3.7% for the military (ammo, planes, tanks, uniforms, mechanics) although the military amount includes wages paid to soldiers.

You said that " huge amounts of money would stop flowing to major businesses whose customers get their cash FROM THE GOVERNMENT" I believe thats where the problem starts. The government doesn't really make any money or wealth, it only has what it takes from us or borrows from other nations. They take from one group and give it to another. The bigger the government gets the more wasteful and inefficient it becomes, that is a fact you cannot argue. The strength of this country comes from the people NOT the government.

You also said that in so many words that there would be bedlam if the government had less money. I disagree, if the government took less, much less, I believe the economy would grow such that government employees would find work immediately.

I also believe that some people would cry because this government can no longer afford to hold their hand in life, in this country and in others. So be it... work or die... I don't care which.

Thats all i'm going to say, let's not clog up this thread with anymore of this dribble.

 

[Ecomike]

Actually the plan backfired on the Dem controlled Congress - apparently. Gas prices were fine til they took the majority in 06...thats when oil prices started to rise.

:huh:

"A recent low point was reached in January 1999 of $16 (all prices are in US$ per barrel), after increased oil production from Iraq coincided with the Asian financial crisis, which reduced demand. Prices then increased rapidly, more than doubling by September 2000 to $35, then fell until the end of 2001 before steadily increasing, reaching $40-50 by September 2004. [2] In October 2004 light crude futures contracts on the NYMEX for November delivery exceeded $53 and for December delivery exceeded $55. Crude oil prices surged to a record high above $60 in June 2005, sustaining a rally built on strong demand for gasoline and diesel and on concerns about refiners' ability to keep up. This trend continued into early August 2005, as NYMEX crude oil futures contracts surged past $65 as consumers kept up the demand for gasoline despite its high price. Crude oil futures peaked at a close of over $77 in July 2006, and in December 2006 at about $63.

Let's see, ((77-16)/16)* 100 % = 381.25% increase in the price of crude oil, before the Dems took back Congress in January 2007, not 2006! Even if I use the 2002 price bottom of about $20/barrel, I get 77/20 = 385% increase.

With oil at about $106 a barrel right now, if I use the dec 2006 price above of $63 I get ((106-63)/63)*100% = 68% since the Dems took back control or the House of reps.

Reference link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_of_petroleum

and:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Price_of_West_Texas_Intermediate_1999_to_June_2008.PNG