Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Overall I agree. Although I would the military industrial complex should be dealt with before social programs. 

Huh? What topic are you on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Huh? What topic are you on?

@SERWIN suggested US should balance the budget by cutting welfare programs. I in turn suggested that 30 years of excessive military spending after the cold war effectively ended was maybe a bigger part of the problem. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

@SERWIN suggested US should balance the budget by cutting welfare programs. I in turn suggested that 30 years of excessive military spending after the cold war effectively ended was maybe a bigger part of the problem. 

Okay, see where you are coming from now. The chronology of the posts had me confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

@SERWIN suggested US should balance the budget by cutting welfare programs. I in turn suggested that 30 years of excessive military spending after the cold war effectively ended was maybe a bigger part of the problem. 

Why not cut both?

Legitimate question, no sarcasm intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Why not cut both?

Legitimate question, no sarcasm intended.

I believe in social programs and wealth re-distribution. There is, however, rightly, a discussion to be had around levels and how. 

However, try to imagine what the world would ahve looked like if the US had cut military spending massively post cold war. Europe would have been forced to invest in defense capacity; there would be fewer US military adventures around the world.... My point was just that the US would get more bang for their buck by dismantling the military indsutrial complex than by cutting social programs.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I believe in social programs and wealth re-distribution. There is, however, rightly, a discussion to be had around levels and how. 

However, try to imagine what the world would ahve looked like if the US had cut military spending massively post cold war. Europe would have been forced to invest in defense capacity; there would be fewer US military adventures around the world.... My point was just that the US would get more bang for their buck by dismantling the military indsutrial complex than by cutting social programs.. 

This is true but the US would not have been able to flex its considerable muscles and influence other countries in the way it has done if it had a significantly weaker military 

I’m sure Marcin would agree

Edited by Rob Plant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob Plant said:

This is true but the US would not have been able to flex its considerable muscles and influence other countries in the way it has done if it had a significantly weaker military 

But wouldn't that be a good thing? Generally I tend to think that Western military adventures have not brought anything positive them... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Why not cut both?

Legitimate question, no sarcasm intended.

Good point!

In my opinion the welfare programs have been abused and need to be tightened up.

The military spending is a bit different as it actually creates jobs. I know that sounds odd, but think about it. Building a nuke carrier or sub keeps a shipyard open for years as well as employs all the tradesmen required for the build. It also keeps two crews of sailors employed.

The knock-on effect is that all these tradesmen and sailors require housing, food, transportation, etc... If you multiply the expenditure by the number of times each dollar changes hands, this is a Godsend to the community.

The same rationale applies to a plant that builds say aircraft or tanks. The benefit to the community, whether the tanks ever fire a round, the aircraft ever fly or the ship ever sails is astronomical and has nothing to do with military action.

That said, as the events of the past week show, there are many in the world that would love to do us harm. A overwhelmingly strong military, in both equipment and well trained soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines is necessary for our foreign policies as well as, perhaps, our survival. Keep in mind that this ‘defense budget’ also keeps our military personnel employed.

Lastly, history has shown us that weakening our military after WW1, WW2 and the Korean War had seriously negative effects when the next conflict began...and there has always been a ‘next’.

Just my opinion, nothing else...

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

That said, as the events of the past week show, there are many in the world that would love to do us harm

But why do many want to harm the US? Could it have something to do with military adventures and overthrowing governments ? 

 

11 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

A overwhelmingly strong military, in both equipment and well trained soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines is necessary for our foreign policies as well as, perhaps, our survival

which foreign policies? MAD should be able to keep the US Safe... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

But why do many want to harm the US? Could it have something to do with military adventures and overthrowing governments ? 

 

which foreign policies? MAD should be able to keep the US Safe... 

Do you think MAD is applicable in asymmetric warfare? These are the conflicts we are now involved in. Do you think MAD would have prevented any of the conflicts in the Middle East? MAD was a mechanism used to prevent war between nuclear armed combatants. You have a unique concept of MAD and how, why or when it is an applicable option.

How many times has the US actually utilized military might to overthrow governments when they were not provoked? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Muslim extremists/jihadis REQUIRE a target to remain relevant and toattract  recruits.The Great Satan has been, and will be, that target whether we pull out of everywhere and emasculate our military. The only difference is that they could kill Americans, anywhere on the planet, without fear of repercussion. 
As an American overseas, I do not find that acceptable.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 1/11/2020 at 1:03 PM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Overall I agree. Although I would think the military industrial complex should be dealt with before social programs. 

This is an interesting problem.

Question is what is better for overall economy and development in US, cutting welfare programs or defence spending by the same amount, long-term 20 years perspective ?

Edited by Marcin2
typo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

An interesting observation

Edited by Marcin2
typo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

But wouldn't that be a good thing? Generally I tend to think that Western military adventures have not brought anything positive them... 

Maybe for the rest of the world but not USA

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

Welfare programs on the other hand decrease inequalites in the society

Nope.  Exactly the opposite.  Large scale welfare encourages people to not work, to not be productive, and to expect a "free" handout from government (all that "free" stuff is taxpayer money).

Chicago is a great example.  The number of people in Chicago on welfare keeps increasing, decade after decade.  If welfare actually worked, the number of people on welfare should steadily decrease, and not increase.

 

animals.jpg.ca14c011b4e03c197849a2a2a467a53c.jpg

 

welfare-please-do-not-feed-the-birds-feeding-creates-a-6937597.thumb.png.4681baffcd990b8cff00926fd9720d1d.png

 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

An interesting observation.

Edited by Marcin2
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

This is an interesting problem.

Question is what is better for overall economy and development in US, cutting welfare programs or defence spending by the same amount, long-term 20 years perspective ?

It would be very difficult to calculate.

Defence spending has multiplying effects on domestic consumption, investment, research and development progress, and at the same time external effects of the increased global hard power. This gives you petrodollar, better "fat" deals for your companies given by foreign governments, many external effects.

Welfare programs on the other hand decrease inequalites in the society, and at some level of inequality like in South Africa it has significant harmful effect on economy. Better access to education, healthcare, lower crime rate. But reserach shows that standard deviation of life expectancy is higher in US due to economic reasons than in EU, but it is never the less too low (like 4 years between 15,000 USD earner and 200,000 USD earner) that is has no practical effect on economic activity. The same is with the crime rate, no significant impact on GDP even at US rates, 5 times the EU rates. Large % of inmates in US society is also not that bad for economy, it is only 0.7% of population and prisons are great business. Impact on education i do not know but tertiary education levels in US are very high so impact of 20% educationally impaired black and latino population may be not very high.

Difficult to tell and calculate, this is mainly democratic political choice in EU societies to have high redistribution levels.

 

I am not advocating cutting welfare programs, what I am advocating is policing these programs to make sure that they are actually providing a safety net for those it was intended to.

When you see well dressed women paying for sirloin steaks and Oreo cookies at the Safeway check out with one of these welfare cards, it is obvious that the system is being abused.

To provide a safety net for those in need is one thing, when I see these people living off the taxes of others and eating better than my parents can on social security, I get annoyed. We need to prevent people from gaming the system.

I have heard similar comments from British citizens and the ‘dole’. It is not a uniquely American phenomena. 
 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 
”But why not leave them with their usual, preferred target of other islamists ?”
 
Do the attacks, both of them on the World Trade Center, as well as the attack in Paris and elsewhere in Europe and the UK ring a bell with you?
 
These attacks, and many others like them, were not carried out against “other islamists”, they were carried out against infidels who chose not to follow Islam.
 
You really should pull your head out of your butt and pay attention...
  • Great Response! 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

12 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I have heard similar comments from British citizens and the ‘dole’. It is not a uniquely American phenomena. 

Yes we are just as stupid in the UK

people actually try and have as many kids as they can with no means of providing for any of them, then the government steps in and gives them a load of cash and a mansion to live in!!

meanwhile honest hard working idiots like you and me struggle to get by and are taxed to keep these layabouts in a lifestyle they don’t deserve!

Douglas you are 100% correct on this one!

Edited by Rob Plant
  • Like 3
  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

9 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I am of the opinion that if you cannot identify a lumbering commercial airliner climbing out of an international airport, on one of the known runway headings of that airport, then perhaps you should not be given sophisticated ground-to-air missiles to play with. 

Just imagine these bozos with nuclear missiles

Whoops i see I'm late to this party and Tom (of course) had a good meme besides. 

What good might come of this? They're already having protests oh the streets demanding the head of the top cleric. That's a good start and with Solemeini dead, less likely to have a bloodthirsty boss ordering troops to murder their countrymen. 

Edited by Ward Smith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for those who are not faint of heart, this 4chan thread linked below is loaded with Iranian Twitter URLs, discussing and showing the current protests in Iran.  Iran is currently shooting protesters.

Do NOT click the 4chan /pol/ link below if you have thin skin or are easily offended (although this /pol/ thread (politically incorrect thread) is pretty tame compared to the usual chan threads).

After debating about it, the reason I decided to post a 4chan thread here is because it is loaded with Iran Twitter links, which Twitter is making pretty dang difficult to find right now.  Shadowbanning and such.  And these Twitter links blow apart the MSM disinformation about the Iran people fawning over their government leaders.  Iran is in turmoil, big time.

Anyway, here's that 4chan thread: https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/239256020

For background info, I was a part of an Anonymous initiative back around 2009, to help Iranian students bypass government censorship online and get videos of their resistance out for the world to see, via YouTube.  Hope this time the Iranian students fare better than a decade ago.  

 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Just imagine these bozos with nuclear missiles

Given that President Trump's actions have provided renewed impetus for Iran to accelerate its nuclear program how can you think the point you made was funny?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, remake it said:

Given that President Trump's actions have provided renewed impetus for Iran to accelerate its nuclear program how can you think the point you made was funny?

Accelerate what nuclear program? Oh would that be the existing nuclear program? 

Now might be the time for you to get a reboot. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.