New american budget: more money for defense
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4686684.stm


I think you really need to consider another option other then putting more and more money on defense. Americans have not grabbled the idea of the military industrial complex, and its really unfortunate.

We need more tax cuts!

rolleyes:

rock:

[quote:3e0e9]Americans have not grabbled the idea of the military industrial complex, and its really unfortunate.[/quote:3e0e9]

Yes yes, TOO BAD Americans dont think like you Machette - if only they did theyd be SOOOO much better off. The mantra of the Moral-Thought-Police-Facist.

The defense budget has ALWAYS been a priority of EVERY administration - even when Clin-T0N reduced it, it STILL took precedence.

We thank you for your input into the financial affairs of the United States government, but millions of employed Americans, and lawful R&D companies kindly request you save the sanctimonious preening for local poli-sci meetups.

Thanks a bunch.

It indeed has been a priority for every adminstration. I remember reading that jimmy carter promised to cut it significantly but he raised it instead. I'm just saying Americans need to stop this military industrial complex from getting out of hand, which is what Eisenhower warned you guys in his farewell address. It's cutting important programs such as education, health etc. Are these not important programs or is building a bomb or a fighter jet?

We thank you for your input into the financial affairs of the United States government, but millions of employed Americans, and lawful R&D companies kindly request you save the sanctimonious preening for local poli-sci meetups.


lol.

we don't need some national health care. We just need to get rid of frivolous lawsuits in this country. Once those are chopped at, the prices of things go down significantly. Doctors wouldn't have to be worried about being sued up the ass for something petty--lowering rates for healthcare.

Bush did some great work on it when he was Gov of Texas and it worked pretty well.

[quote="TGB!":53be3][quote:53be3]

We thank you for your input into the financial affairs of the United States government, but millions of employed Americans, and lawful R&D companies kindly request you save the sanctimonious preening for local poli-sci meetups.
[/quote:53be3][/quote:53be3]

So let's all go to war!

too bad we didn't listen to George Washington.

That to...and I quote "Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to Republican liberty" Geroge Washington's Farewell address, september 17, 1796

i don't think you can use any of those quotes with any susbstatial meaning. It doesn't carry over into our times even though GW was one cool cat, heh

We didn't listen to a lot of things he said in his farewell address. Such as

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world, so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it, for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs that honesty is always the best policy."

gj TGB. I agree.

and Lockheed Martin owns, my dad works there.

Have all the jobs in defense is a priority now since most of your companies are moving offshore, however outsourcing would/could be a problem in the future for defense contractors, but since they are making so much money I don't see it being an issue..

Now you're talking! Go dig up some more terrorist rhetoric.

Re: New american budget: more money for defense
 

I've tried introducing it in some of my classes. They just don't care or just don't understand and never will. annoy:

[quote="TGB!":6c7c9]

[quote:6c7c9]cutting important programs such as education, health etc.[/quote:6c7c9]

No its not.
[/quote:6c7c9]

Did you actually read the article?

[quote:6c7c9]To keep plans to cut the fiscal deficit on track, big cuts have been proposed in healthcare spending.[/quote:6c7c9]

Besides they could spend that £1,6bn on improving the education and many other more important fields. Homeland security I could probably agree with, but 6.9% rise on the military I dont agree with.

They could just withdraw the troops and equipment, then we wouldnt have a defence problem.

not surprised with all the profits that the Military Industrial Complex gets from wars that should not happen.



Capitalism.

"Capitalism sucks" is not a valid argument.

Hitler loved using Capitalism to his advantage. Hell...it was the thetoric used to build Germany into the Military Power they were...but not so good for the domestic economy in the end.

We need more wars...it is what we were made for... rolleyes:

yeah, well Hitler probably did have some success there considering his audience was poor. Offering them a new economic way out would probably peak the people's interest and get their attention. The fact that Hitler used capitalism doesn't mean that capitalism is wrong.

in your narrow eyes then yes.

you can call me narrow all you want, but really, you are the one who looks like an idiot on these forums, posting random, unfounded shit that basically boils down to opinion and anti-American rhetoric while claiming the opponents views are narrow, dismissing them because you actually know little to nothing about the issues we talk about.

i can see the world with an open mind (arguable) rather than then the eye of a needle view of the world people like yourself have which is narrow. You post as much "unfounded shit" as anyone else, its just you choose to view it as founded but anything that apposes what your own view is, is actually "unfounded", but please go off subject again and ignore that the budget will help these military defence contracted companies profit from a continuing questionable War in Iraq, coincidence. Dismiss it.

I always thought Hitler used a Keynesian approach in his economic model..."Prime the pump" theory. Basically means that a government will spend its way out of a depression by building roads etc..making more jobs avaliable thus making a boom in the economy.

so can we make the same assumption about WWII then? We were in a depression, and we went to war and things got better, companies got money? Are you telling me that the steel industries MUST have been behind WWII because they profited from it? And now, you don't post founded stuff, you hardly post any facts or references at all. I can at least respect Machette, ninty, and others for their opinions because they base it from things they have learned, you seem to just spout out stupidities and when you think about some of them, they make absolutely no sense. This is a great example, what EVIDENCE do you have that the defense contractors had any part in generating the War in Iraq? I'm asking for evidence because you seem to be sure of it, so there must be a reason...at least there SHOULD be one. If Machette, ninty, or some of the others in this forum had posted that, they would have included some sort of reasoning and evidence, not just fact. Are you just bad at making arguments? or did you just pull this stuff out of you ass?

calling other people narrow to prove your point in an argument is really stupid, because the world isnt seen through just one eye. What may seem narrow to you isn't to someone else.

As for questionable war, I don't see how it is. The point was to disarm Hussein of his nuclear weapons and to bring democracy to the Middle East. While there were no nuclear weapons found it doesn't mean that there were none. I.E. if you hide your weed in your computer case and your parents check your room (but never think of checking your comp case), it doesn't mean that the weed isnt there. Democracy was brought to the middle east, and with these new elections, the people got to choose who they wanted, which was apparently HAMAS.

I'm not sure about the Keynesian approach in the American economy. So I won't say anything further about it.

America is following the keyensian approach. The government regulates the economy.

what I find ironic is that America was "Fighting" Communism from the 50's to the early 90's, claiming that communism was bad etc.etc., when if you look at it, the American economic system is watered down communism. (Tarrifs, Price controlls, etc.).

America's economy is not as government controlled as you make it seem. There are taxes, anti-trust laws, and the SEC, that's pretty much it...

if you check my post i didnt say anything about the defence contractors generating the War in Iraq.

but that they are benefiting from it and that is questionable.

[quote:e7fba]
'There are also uncomfortably cosy ties between the government and the defence industry. Mr Rumsfeld''s oldest friend, Frank Carlucci, a former defence secretary himself, now heads the Carlyle Group, an investment consortium which has a big interest in the contracting firm United Defense.

Carlyle''s board includes George Bush Sr and James Baker, the former secretary of state. One programme alone "the Crusader artillery system" has earned Carlyle more than $2bn in advance government contracts. Carlyle''s European chairman is John Major, who may have played a role in the Ministry of Defence''s controversial recent decision to declare Carlyle the "preferred bidder" for a stake in its scientific research division.'[/quote:e7fba]

http://www.why-war.com/news/2002/09/15/warwithi.html
2002 but still relevent to the point and still on subject.

American system at best does not follow a communist economic approach (Canada, EU countries, follow a sort of communist economy), the American system is described by many as a totally hands off economy. But I think we should keep on topic, whatever it was because a flame war is in play.

The Crusader was cancelled in 2002.

and that article snippet isn't evidence, it's a relationship between people, it doesn't say anything of a direct link between the people besides the fact that they know each other...it's pure speculation.

that one article even says that Cheney cashed in his stock options in 2000, before the war started.

The government issued price controlls on gas when there was a shortage in the 80's (if i recall correctly), and it was disasterous.

lets not forget the Fed too, but that is a different topic (That we debated a while ago, if you remember)

Machette: Only immature people start flame wars.

The Fed only regulates loan interest rates.

and the oil thing is only because it was an emergency situation.

Cheney said so on that but the truth actually is:

"He also holds more than 433,000 stock options, all above Halliburton's most recently traded price, according to a report by the Congressional Research Office requested by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat" (2003)

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/ ... rton.memo/
http://money.cnn.com/2003/09/25/news/co ... y/?cnn=yes
http://www.americanprogress.org/Account ... burton.pdf


And with the amount of conflicting interests, the amount of former/current politicians in government who have their hands in stocks of the defence companies or hold/held posistions within these companies something fishy may lie below, speculation yes as we may never know but it does not mean it may be true.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0, ... 57,00.html
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/081705E.shtml
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/ ... 6097.shtml
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0511-07.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11240

so what makes you jump to the conclusion that it is true?

so what makes you jump to the conclusion that it is false?

its a subject that is hard to get the truth from but with all the events happening between these companies and the government it does beg to ask that to some extent its not right.

Let's just come to the conclusion that in the end following any type of structure will still provide the country with struggles and faults...which is why countries need to adopt certain aspects of others to be able to cope with certain problems in their country.

It's not like America is doing a bad job...look at their standing in the world...but they just need aren't favourable in the eyes of others though.