Want to make a deal on cutiing defense spending?

[Goobieman]

This is directed mostly for those on the left who (supposedly) care about the federal deficits and the national debt, but all may feel free to respond...

FY2009
Total defense spending was $655.8B
Total spending on entitlements was $2288.7B

How much do -you- want to cut defense spending?

-I'll- agree to cutting defense spending by any amount -you- care to specifiy, so long as -you- then agree to cut entitlement spending $3.48 for each $1 cut from defense.

Further, I'll let YOU choose what programs are cut from defense, so long as I get to choose what programs are cut from entitlements.

Are you willing to make that deal?

If so, how much to you want to cut...?

 

[The Mark]

This is directed mostly for those on the left who (supposedly) care about the federal deficits and the national debt, but all may feel free to respond...

FY2009
Total defense spending was $655.8B
Total spending on entitlements was $2288.7B

How much do -you- want to cut defense spending?

-I'll- agree to cutting defense spending by any amount -you- care to specify, so long as -you- then agree to cut entitlement spending $3.48 for each $1 cut from defense.

Further, I'll let YOU choose what programs are cut from defense, so long as I get to choose what programs are cut from entitlements.

Are you willing to make that deal?

If so, how much to you want to cut...?

I want to point out that the "entitlement spending" you mention probably includes a tiny bit for roadways and transportation systems.

I am 100% sure that at least some roadways are used for transportation purposes by the military, and I'm fairly sure that the various defense contractors use them as well.

I'm not as sure, but it seems quite likely that other transportation methods are used as well.

So perhaps adding the transportation spending to the defense spending is warranted?

 

[digsbe]

I wouldn't make this deal. I believe we should increase defense spending and vastly decrease entitlement spending. We also need to reform government employment and cut out waste/pork.

 

[Hatuey]

Is the point of this thread is to demonstrate that military spending is just as important or wasteful as social spending even though the overwhelming majority of the industrialized world disagrees?

 

[Goshin]

We need a new amendment:

Entitlement spending cannot exceed Defense spending. :mrgreen:

 

[rathi]

In the fiscal year 2009 budget Department of Housing and Urban Development medicaid, medicare and unemployment/welfare totaled $1031 million. The defense budget, off budget spending, GWOT, homeland security and army core of engineers cost about $741 billion. The War is both Iraq and Afghanistan were considered appropriations and were not included in the defense budget. Social security costs $953 billion. I fail to see where you obtained 2288 billion in "entitlement" spending from. Social security has its own revenue stream, so you can't use it to fix our deficit problems. Even if you include it, your numbers are still off by around 300 billion.

I would support a spending plan that cut every single one of the programs I just mentioned, but that doesn't excuse your inaccurate figures.

2009 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Deuce]

Yeah, I was about to say, your numbers are way off, OP!

 

[cpwill]

We need a new amendment:

Entitlement spending cannot exceed Defense spending come from the federal government. :mrgreen:

fixed it for you.

In the fiscal year 2009 budget Department of Housing and Urban Development medicaid, medicare and unemployment/welfare totaled $1031 million. The defense budget, off budget spending, GWOT, homeland security and army core of engineers cost about $741 billion. The War is both Iraq and Afghanistan were considered appropriations and were not included in the defense budget. Social security costs $953 billion. I fail to see where you obtained 2288 billion in "entitlement" spending from. Social security has its own revenue stream, so you can't use it to fix our deficit problems. Even if you include it, your numbers are still off by around 300 billion.

the idea that social security has it's own revenue stream is, at best, a polite fiction masked by naming a tax after it.

 

[fredmertz]

I want to point out that the "entitlement spending" you mention probably includes a tiny bit for roadways and transportation systems.

I am 100% sure that at least some roadways are used for transportation purposes by the military, and I'm fairly sure that the various defense contractors use them as well.

I'm not as sure, but it seems quite likely that other transportation methods are used as well.

So perhaps adding the transportation spending to the defense spending is warranted?

I believe roads are entitlement spending that would be better off in the private industry.

 

[samsmart]

This is directed mostly for those on the left who (supposedly) care about the federal deficits and the national debt, but all may feel free to respond...

FY2009
Total defense spending was $655.8B
Total spending on entitlements was $2288.7B

How much do -you- want to cut defense spending?

-I'll- agree to cutting defense spending by any amount -you- care to specifiy, so long as -you- then agree to cut entitlement spending $3.48 for each $1 cut from defense.

Further, I'll let YOU choose what programs are cut from defense, so long as I get to choose what programs are cut from entitlements.

Are you willing to make that deal?

If so, how much to you want to cut...?

How about we make this deal instead? We'll make no-bid contracts for entitlement programs illegal along with no-bid contracts for defense spending. Is that fair?

 

[Deuce]

I believe roads are entitlement spending that would be better off in the private industry.

I think defense spending is an entitlement, then. Why is it my responsibility to make sure that YOU are protected? Or the state of Ohio? I don't even like Ohio. Charge me like 30 bucks to drive across your flat, boring, forever-lasting state....

 

[peepnklown]

Did you include how much is spent per month on the 2 wars?

 

[d0gbreath]

No, because I think we should double the spending in both categories. It's just cloth/paper and ink.

 

[Goobieman]

I want to point out that the "entitlement spending" you mention probably includes a tiny bit for roadways and transportation systems.

Not accroding to the numbers I have. Transportation is listed seperately under "domestic" spending.

I am 100% sure that at least some roadways are used for transportation purposes by the military, and I'm fairly sure that the various defense contractors use them as well.

Yes... but that doesnt mean the funds for them come out od the defense budget.

 

[Goobieman]

Is the point of this thread is to demonstrate that military spending is just as important or wasteful as social spending even though the overwhelming majority of the industrialized world disagrees?

The point was to present an issue that you would refuse to address in any meaningful way, as is your custom. Good to see you contine to live up to your reputation.

 

[Goobieman]

In the fiscal year 2009 budget Department of Housing and Urban Development medicaid, medicare and unemployment/welfare totaled $1031 million.

This information is all from the CBO historical budget data tables.
Historical Budget Data

The $2288.8B entitlement figures include:
Soc Sec, Medicare, Medicade, unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, foster care, and miscallaneous government retirement programs not otherwise specified.

The defense budget, off budget spending, GWOT, homeland security and army core of engineers cost about $741 billion.

All defense spending, includng supplemental wartime spending bills, totalled $655.5B

I would support a spending plan that cut every single one of the programs I just mentioned, but that doesn't excuse your inaccurate figures.

My figures are accurate.

 

[Goobieman]

How about we make this deal instead? We'll make no-bid contracts for entitlement programs illegal along with no-bid contracts for defense spending. Is that fair?

I'll take that as a "no deal".
Whatsamatter?

 

[Goobieman]

I think defense spending is an entitlement, then.

This only means you dont understand what an entitlement is, and you're trying to avoid the issue put to you.

 

[Gray_Fox_86]

This is directed mostly for those on the left who (supposedly) care about the federal deficits and the national debt, but all may feel free to respond...

FY2009
Total defense spending was $655.8B
Total spending on entitlements was $2288.7B

How much do -you- want to cut defense spending?

-I'll- agree to cutting defense spending by any amount -you- care to specifiy, so long as -you- then agree to cut entitlement spending $3.48 for each $1 cut from defense.

Further, I'll let YOU choose what programs are cut from defense, so long as I get to choose what programs are cut from entitlements.

Are you willing to make that deal?

If so, how much to you want to cut...?

Goobie,
The last individual I would want to make a deal with is someone with a signature like yours.

 

[Goobieman]

Goobie,
The last individual I would want to make a deal with is someone with a signature like yours.

Yeah.... the truth is often a difficult thing.

 

[Gray_Fox_86]

This information is all from the CBO historical budget data tables.
Historical Budget Data

The $2288.8B entitlement figures include:
Soc Sec, Medicare, Medicade, unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, the refundable portion of the earned income and child tax credits, Food Stamps, family support, child nutrition, foster care, and miscallaneous government retirement programs not otherwise specified.


All defense spending, includng supplemental wartime spending bills, totalled $655.5B


My figures are accurate.

Child credits we need. Obviously because we need a population to keep growing or to remain consistent. But should we offer child credits to whoever has them? No. Child credits should be given to the couple or individual who can support their children without government assistance. Now you may say but then what is the point of child credits? Easy, child credits makes the burden less on the supporter of the child. He or she or they are supporting their own, so their burden to society as a whole should be less.

 

[Gray_Fox_86]

Yeah.... the truth is often a difficult thing.

It is not the truth because you say it or feel that way. The truth is the whole species is weak and was never strong so we take that truth in order to make life less difficult for all is not a bad thing.

 

[Goobieman]

It is not the truth because you say it or feel that way.

No... it is the truth becuse it must be.

Resources -are- limited. Spending them on those less able to contribue effectively to the furtherance of the species takes them away from thoise who are more able to contribue more effectively - thus weakening the species by arificially supporting those that would naturally be weeded out.

Nature doesnt hold the human race in some higher regard just because we've been to the moon.

The truth is the whole species is weak and was never strong...

It is not the truth because you say it or feel that way

 

[Gray_Fox_86]

No... it is the truth becuse it must be.

Resources -are- limited. Spending them on those less able to contribue effectively to the furtherance of the species takes them away from thoise who are more able to contribue more effectively - thus weakening the species by arificially supporting those that would naturally be weeded out.

Nature doesnt hold the human race in some higher regard just because we've been to the moon.

No. Resources are not really limited. Right now we are throwing away more food and clothing to the garbage or to the oceans not because they are rare but because they are too common.

It is not the truth because you say it or feel that way

It is closer to the truth then blanket statement like your own. I am not trying to offend you or anything. But what I am asking for is that you change your thinking in that believing we have limited resources. Resources are limited but that does not mean we are not providing enough for the world or that the rest of the world can't catch up on.

 

[Goobieman]

No. Resources are not really limited.

Yes they are. There is only so much food, so much water, so much fuel, so much medicine, so many educators, etc. Each of these items are -absolutely- finite; our present (and situational) state of plenty in no way changes this.

It is closer to the truth then blanket statement like your own.

Thus far, you havent shown this to be the case.