[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
…the negotiation resulted a pretty sizable increase for the middle class. [/quote]
Not in regard to Federal Income Tax rates. Only if you make over $400,000 and that is not middle class. [/quote]
what they call (TODAY) payroll tax . What we used to call Social Security Insurance
[/quote]
Two totally different things. Always have been. [/quote]
you better inform wiki 
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
Why do you care what other countries do compared to us?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
Who cares what the rest of the world spends. His point is that EVEN IF YOU SPENT ZERO ON DEFENSE WE STILL WOULD NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
My vote get rid of the TSA
Ok pitt, down size the military and see what happens in the rest of the world and how it ends up affecting the US.
I also want to say, that on the topic of cutting defense, I agree with Pitt on some levels. It needs to take a hair cut as well. Pretty much everything needs to take a haircut and/or be re-worked in order to get fiscal policy back to sane.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Why do you care what other countries do compared to us? [/quote]
It would establish something that would be normal . Consider all the acronyms , all the countries we give money to , All the industry that other countries do under the heading of military
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
Who cares what the rest of the world spends. His point is that EVEN IF YOU SPENT ZERO ON DEFENSE WE STILL WOULD NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET.[/quote]
Clinton Balanced the budget and we had the military , how do you figure
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok pitt, down size the military and see what happens in the rest of the world and how it ends up affecting the US.[/quote]
We could cut a lot of fat before we got into lean. The whole war on drugs could be shelved we would save a lot of money and a double amount of grief .
Why do we need FBI operating outside US
I understand having bases in key locations , Why are we still in Japan ,Germany .
We have many fine soldiers that are treated like shit because we have more than we can afford yto treat right .
We need a strong defense but World domination is non sustainable
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I also want to say, that on the topic of cutting defense, I agree with Pitt on some levels. It needs to take a hair cut as well. Pretty much everything needs to take a haircut and/or be re-worked in order to get fiscal policy back to sane.[/quote]
We agree
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
Who cares what the rest of the world spends. His point is that EVEN IF YOU SPENT ZERO ON DEFENSE WE STILL WOULD NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET.[/quote]
Clinton Balanced the budget and we had the military , how do you figure
[/quote]
You have to be trolling at this point. You aren’t this dumb.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I also want to say, that on the topic of cutting defense, I agree with Pitt on some levels. It needs to take a hair cut as well. Pretty much everything needs to take a haircut and/or be re-worked in order to get fiscal policy back to sane.[/quote]
This.
Nobody’s gutting defense, or SS, or Medicare, or Medicaid.
We need a booming economy to broaden and deepen the tax base and then we need to cut and/or massage almost everything.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Came from here: I did not check for accuracy
http://nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2012/presidents-budget-fy2013/[/quote]
What is your point ?
[/quote]
My point is national defense is only 18% of the budget or about 1/5th. There are several 1000 pound gorillas in the room aside from the 800 pounder you mentioned. [/quote]
if you add tsa and the pentagon budget , we exceed the rest of the world in defense spending . add all the other aspects of national defense and I bet there is not one that comes close
[/quote]
Who cares what the rest of the world spends. His point is that EVEN IF YOU SPENT ZERO ON DEFENSE WE STILL WOULD NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET.[/quote]
Clinton Balanced the budget and we had the military , how do you figure
[/quote]
You have to be trolling at this point. You aren’t this dumb.[/quote]
OK just for the Republicans Clinton happened to be in office when the budget that he would be faulted for balanced all by it’s self
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I also want to say, that on the topic of cutting defense, I agree with Pitt on some levels. It needs to take a hair cut as well. Pretty much everything needs to take a haircut and/or be re-worked in order to get fiscal policy back to sane.[/quote]
This.
Nobody’s gutting defense, or SS, or Medicare, or Medicaid.
We need a booming economy to broaden and deepen the tax base and then we need to cut and/or massage almost everything.[/quote]
That is true , I could not agree more , But if we cut spending we could pay off the debt and cut the shit out of taxes
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
OK just for the Republicans Clinton happened to be in office when the budget that he would be faulted for balanced all by it’s self
[/quote]
lol, dude no.
I’m saying that as of the 2013 proposed spending, you could change defense to zero, as in spend nothing on it, and we would still run a defict.
People have tried to tell you this like 3 times.
So the fact Clinton and the republicans were actually good statesmen and did their job, and we still had defense spending is moot. Even though it is great and I’m glad it happened, it has nothign to do with you saying, over and over, cut the defense, when in all reality, what you are saying wouldn’t solve the problem.
Yes cutting defense and letting you smoke weed legal would save some govn’t money, but it wouldn’t solve the problem. So people are trying to tell you to expand your ideas beyond just defense.
Nevermind, I think you get it and are fucking with me.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
OK just for the Republicans Clinton happened to be in office when the budget that he would be faulted for balanced all by it’s self
[/quote]
lol, dude no.
I’m saying that as of the 2013 proposed spending, you could change defense to zero, as in spend nothing on it, and we would still run a defict.
People have tried to tell you this like 3 times.
So the fact Clinton and the republicans were actually good statesmen and did their job, and we still had defense spending is moot. Even though it is great and I’m glad it happened, it has nothign to do with you saying, over and over, cut the defense, when in all reality, what you are saying wouldn’t solve the problem.
Yes cutting defense and letting you smoke weed legal would save some govn’t money, but it wouldn’t solve the problem. So people are trying to tell you to expand your ideas beyond just defense.[/quote]
I know we have a category labeled defense but does it include foreign aid ? all the CIA,FBI,TSA, AND OTHER acronymical departments. Does it cover the war on drugs ? I doubt it Half of our law enforcenment would be clasified as National Defense
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I know we have a category labeled defense but does it include foreign aid ? all the CIA,FBI,TSA, AND OTHER acronymical departments. Does it cover the war on drugs ? I doubt it Half of our law enforcenment would be clasified as National Defense
[/quote]
No, most of the acronym agencies you are referring to are not under defense. The CIA is funded through the National Intelligence program, and things like the FBI and ATF are under the Department of Justice. The federal budget is available for all to see, so you can just look it up for yourself. Here is a link to it:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/budget.pdf
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Nevermind, I think you get it and are fucking with me.[/quote]
Nobody is that good of a troll. Not even Ct.Rock/DarkNinja.