(12-30-2021, 09:07 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2021, 09:38 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You're not going to see me pretending there isn't massive waste in the military. I was just curious how much it was by today's standards. I do think we should be spending a lot on our military.... even more than what we did, but there is obviously bloat and people skimming from the taxpayer in our current system. It also doesn't change the point of the original post. We are taxed too much because there are too many people with their hands in the cookie jar.
(12-30-2021, 02:39 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]Spend wisely on the Military, but keep up with China and Russia. At this point, we are not doing either.
Are you guys for real?
![[Image: countries-with-the-highest-military-spending.jpg]](https://www.statista.com/graphic/1/262742/countries-with-the-highest-military-spending.jpg)
I should have elaborated. 'Keeping up' was meant to convey battle-readiness. We are rated behind China in that category. Though I would question any spending number reported on China.
I'm for real. A lot of our money spent on the military goes to make the military industrial complex rich. Imagine if all that money was actually spent wisely. It never hurts to be battle ready. Our way of life may depend on it.
(12-30-2021, 09:07 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-29-2021, 09:38 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You're not going to see me pretending there isn't massive waste in the military. I was just curious how much it was by today's standards. I do think we should be spending a lot on our military.... even more than what we did, but there is obviously bloat and people skimming from the taxpayer in our current system. It also doesn't change the point of the original post. We are taxed too much because there are too many people with their hands in the cookie jar.
(12-30-2021, 02:39 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]Spend wisely on the Military, but keep up with China and Russia. At this point, we are not doing either.
Are you guys for real?
You fail to realize that every country on this graphic, besides China and Russia, rely on the United States to not only keep international sea lanes open, but supplement their militaries in some form or another. Whether that be with direct support or alliances.
(12-31-2021, 01:17 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-30-2021, 09:07 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Are you guys for real?
You fail to realize that every country on this graphic, besides China and Russia, rely on the United States to not only keep international sea lanes open, but supplement their militaries in some form or another. Whether that be with direct support or alliances.
I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
Yes. If it were done with integrity.
(12-31-2021, 10:17 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Yes. If it were done with integrity.
Then I hope I never hear anything from you about debt or deficit again, because there's nothing more wasteful than spending borrowed money to make sure other countries can take American jobs.
(12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 01:17 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]You fail to realize that every country on this graphic, besides China and Russia, rely on the United States to not only keep international sea lanes open, but supplement their militaries in some form or another. Whether that be with direct support or alliances.
I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free,
for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
(12-31-2021, 11:12 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free, for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
Very well said HB, I agree with the entire thing but I feel thsat the last line brings it all together. It's the truth, the rest of the world knows it's the truth, it's just the American Commie Leftist that
REFUSE to see it!
Someone has to be on top, and we should do anything we have to i order to keep us there.
(12-31-2021, 11:12 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free, for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
If my argument is simplistic then yours is ridiculously misguided. Free enterprise means shipping american manufacturing jobs to China.
Are you serious? Russia already invaded Ukraine.
Why does the United States have to pay to keep sea lanes open so that iPhones can be made in China instead of Nebraska? The Europeans are wealthy enough to take on a much larger share.
Why are you bringing up leftists anger at Donald Trump? To me you're looking a lot like the leftists, just with a different set of social issues and things you want to tax and spend on. I never came here to complain about Donald Trump calling out NATO. If course if he really wanted to make a difference he'd have shrank the military budget and started closing European bases.
As for what the world wants, I have no doubt most of it wants to keep loaning us money that your grand kids will have to pay off to let them take our jobs.
Wow!
(12-31-2021, 11:12 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free, for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
That is what Trump said, but the NATO allies never owed the United States any money. They were supposed to be spending more of their own money on their own armies and navies, so that we could spend less of our money. Nearly every country in NATO decreased their defense spending under Obama and increased it under Trump. But time will tell if Trump's posturing had any lasting effect. Hopefully Biden not only keeps up the pressure on our allies, but finds ways to spend more wisely at home.
(12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 01:17 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]You fail to realize that every country on this graphic, besides China and Russia, rely on the United States to not only keep international sea lanes open, but supplement their militaries in some form or another. Whether that be with direct support or alliances.
I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
If spending that money assures their opportunity to grow up in a country free of tyranny, then yes.
(12-31-2021, 12:54 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 11:12 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free, for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
If my argument is simplistic then yours is ridiculously misguided. Free enterprise means shipping american manufacturing jobs to China.
Are you serious? Russia already invaded Ukraine.
Why does the United States have to pay to keep sea lanes open so that iPhones can be made in China instead of Nebraska? The Europeans are wealthy enough to take on a much larger share.
Why are you bringing up leftists anger at Donald Trump? To me you're looking a lot like the leftists, just with a different set of social issues and things you want to tax and spend on. I never came here to complain about Donald Trump calling out NATO. If course if he really wanted to make a difference he'd have shrank the military budget and started closing European bases.
As for what the world wants, I have no doubt most of it wants to keep loaning us money that your grand kids will have to pay off to let them take our jobs.
Wow!
Oh good, it seems we're making progress here. It appears you grasp the concept of
free enterprise. In a free enterprise system, consumers and producers are free to make the choices which benefit them the most. Producers of iPhones and myriad other products choose to have them manufactured where costs are much cheaper. At the same time, you benefit from cheaper costs in the prices you pay, but also have the choice to not buy that product. Were our government not supportive of free enterprise and demanded iPhones be manufactured in Nebraska, then you the consumer would be paying far more for that product.
But the best thing about free enterprise is that it introduces the concept of democracy - freedom to choose. It's a dynamic process which doesn't happen overnight, but it presents to consumers the freedom to choose a product and prosperity because they are participating in the free enterprise system of consuming and manufacturing. As witnessed by the histories of the United States, Europe, and several Asian countries, free enterprise also brings about labor and environmental reform.
Yes, Russia invaded eastern Ukraine several years ago but appear to be on the brink of invading again. Surely, you've heard about it. It's in all the newspapers.
I was expressing no anger to the left. Merely pointing out their glaring hypocrisy. Against their own best interest, they chose to cast aside their complaints of defense budget to attack the very person who was working to lower it. Kinda stupid, huh? Btw, we've closed quite a few military bases across Europe in the last two decades. Trump wanted to close down even more. Guess who protested? The countries where the bases are located. Not only do they still provide security, but they are also economic engines. So Trump demanded they pay more of the operation fees for these overseas bases. And the democrats cried. I bet Biden isn't pursuing that strategy.
Lowering the defense budget is doable while still maintaining global dominance for the greater good. Unfortunately, we have lawmakers on one side of the aisle who view doing so with the same meat axe approach of defunding the police. It is possible to pass some of the expense off to our those we have traditionally aided, and Trump was doing just that, which means by default democrats must undo it.
(12-31-2021, 01:02 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 11:12 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, you fail to recognize the "world's police" is a simplistic argument. If the world were stable without geopolitical strife, it would be a valid argument. But it is not. It is a harsh and predatory place.
Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world. At the end of WWII, the U.S. voluntarily shouldered the burden of maintaining open commerce and supporting democracy to benefit the world and prevent the same catastrophic war from which we had just emerged. It hasn't always been a pretty process, but the benefits worldwide far outweigh the negatives.
Who is preventing Russia from invading Ukraine? Who stands as a bulwark between China and Taiwan? Who provided stability in Western Europe post WWII in order for it to rebuild and prosper? Who is ensures sea routes are open and free, for all countries, so that you may receive your Amazon orders in a timely manner? Who trains and allies their might with the militaries of Europe and Asia against aggressiveness from China and Russia?
But an even more important question: Who pilloried Donald Trump when he pushed NATO countries, who are delinquent on their financial obligations in the tens of billions of dollars, to finally (here's that line so endearing to the left) pay their fair share? Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the American left condemned Donald Trump because he had the hutzpah to demand payment for services rendered to our NATO allies.
Yes, we are the world's police because without us it would resemble a major American city with an idiot defund the police democrat mayor. The world needs us on that wall. They want us on that wall. It not only benefits them, but it also benefits us.
That is what Trump said, but the NATO allies never owed the United States any money. They were supposed to be spending more of their own money on their own armies and navies, so that we could spend less of our money. Nearly every country in NATO decreased their defense spending under Obama and increased it under Trump. But time will tell if Trump's posturing had any lasting effect. Hopefully Biden not only keeps up the pressure on our allies, but finds ways to spend more wisely at home.
Six of one, half dozen of the other. We were incurring greater costs because they were knowingly bilking us.
(12-31-2021, 02:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]But the best thing about free enterprise is that it introduces the concept of democracy - freedom to choose. It's a dynamic process which doesn't happen overnight, but it presents to consumers the freedom to choose a product and prosperity because they are participating in the free enterprise system of consuming and manufacturing. As witnessed by the histories of the United States, Europe, and several Asian countries, free enterprise also brings about labor and environmental reform.
Yes, Russia invaded eastern Ukraine several years ago but appear to be on the brink of invading again. Surely, you've heard about it. It's in all the newspapers.
How is government interceding to make it economically feasible for massive multinational corporations to pull jobs out of America through military action paid for via taxation (socialization of cost) in any way democracy?
Good to see you coming back to reality regarding Russia invading Ukraine, what makes you think something more will happen to them coming from the USA should they decide they want to take more of it?
(12-31-2021, 02:16 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 08:10 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I don't fail to realize anything. Do you think spending your grandchildren's money on trying to be the world's police is a reasonable thing?
If spending that money assures their opportunity to grow up in a country free of tyranny, then yes.
What's the connection, John Nash?
(12-31-2021, 02:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-31-2021, 01:02 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]That is what Trump said, but the NATO allies never owed the United States any money. They were supposed to be spending more of their own money on their own armies and navies, so that we could spend less of our money. Nearly every country in NATO decreased their defense spending under Obama and increased it under Trump. But time will tell if Trump's posturing had any lasting effect. Hopefully Biden not only keeps up the pressure on our allies, but finds ways to spend more wisely at home.
Six of one, half dozen of the other. We were incurring greater costs because they were knowingly bilking us.
But let's be honest. You seem like an informed individual. Did it not concern you, that he repeatedly insisted that China, Mexico, and NATO all owed money to us, when they didn't? To you it came across as shorthand for them rectifying their own spending, border policies, and trade relationships. But don't you see that you're in the minority, that the majority of those who heard it, literally thought that those countries owe us money, and if that point of view is allowed to go unchallenged, the next President might literally think that they owe us money?
(12-31-2021, 10:24 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 10:17 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Yes. If it were done with integrity.
Then I hope I never hear anything from you about debt or deficit again, because there's nothing more wasteful than spending borrowed money to make sure other countries can take American jobs.
The military alone is not why we are in a deficit. I agree that there is bloat that is being skimmed by federal contractors, who benefit from endless war. I'd like to see that cleaned up, which would result in less expense, obviously. That said. I don't think I would curb the role the US plays in world affairs. It does benefit us to be the dominant superpower. I think an honest America has the kind of values that would make them an acceptable world police force. I think an honest America would do a solid enough job that nations would pay for that protection. I just don't think you're seeing an honest America. I would love to root out the corruption. I wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
(12-31-2021, 04:25 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 10:24 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Then I hope I never hear anything from you about debt or deficit again, because there's nothing more wasteful than spending borrowed money to make sure other countries can take American jobs.
The military alone is not why we are in a deficit. I agree that there is bloat that is being skimmed by federal contractors, who benefit from endless war. I'd like to see that cleaned up, which would result in less expense, obviously. That said. I don't think I would curb the role the US plays in world affairs. It does benefit us to be the dominant superpower. I think an honest America has the kind of values that would make them an acceptable world police force. I think an honest America would do a solid enough job that nations would pay for that protection. I just don't think you're seeing an honest America. I would love to root out the corruption. I wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Or worse throw the baby into a communist tyranny.
(12-31-2021, 03:16 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 02:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]But the best thing about free enterprise is that it introduces the concept of democracy - freedom to choose. It's a dynamic process which doesn't happen overnight, but it presents to consumers the freedom to choose a product and prosperity because they are participating in the free enterprise system of consuming and manufacturing. As witnessed by the histories of the United States, Europe, and several Asian countries, free enterprise also brings about labor and environmental reform.
Yes, Russia invaded eastern Ukraine several years ago but appear to be on the brink of invading again. Surely, you've heard about it. It's in all the newspapers.
How is government interceding to make it economically feasible for massive multinational corporations to pull jobs out of America through military action paid for via taxation (socialization of cost) in any way democracy?
Good to see you coming back to reality regarding Russia invading Ukraine, what makes you think something more will happen to them coming from the USA should they decide they want to take more of it?
(12-31-2021, 02:16 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]If spending that money assures their opportunity to grow up in a country free of tyranny, then yes.
What's the connection, John Nash?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Whose military action?
The Russians seemed to have taken the threat of the U.S. arming the Ukrainians with missiles, along with economic sanctions, pretty seriously. They're withdrawing troops.
(12-31-2021, 03:19 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 02:32 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]
Six of one, half dozen of the other. We were incurring greater costs because they were knowingly bilking us.
But let's be honest. You seem like an informed individual. Did it not concern you, that he repeatedly insisted that China, Mexico, and NATO all owed money to us, when they didn't? To you it came across as shorthand for them rectifying their own spending, border policies, and trade relationships. But don't you see that you're in the minority, that the majority of those who heard it, literally thought that those countries owe us money, and if that point of view is allowed to go unchallenged, the next President might literally think that they owe us money?
Trump said that we had a trade deficit with China, Mexico was costing the U.S. large expenditures capturing and processing the illegal immigrants who streamed through their country to our border, and that NATO countries were bilking the U.S. for billions of dollars by knowingly not paying their obligated share. All of those are true statements.
You're presenting an unsupported hypothetical while also assuming to speak for what others think.
(01-02-2022, 09:53 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-31-2021, 03:16 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]How is government interceding to make it economically feasible for massive multinational corporations to pull jobs out of America through military action paid for via taxation (socialization of cost) in any way democracy?
Good to see you coming back to reality regarding Russia invading Ukraine, what makes you think something more will happen to them coming from the USA should they decide they want to take more of it?
What's the connection, John Nash?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. Whose military action?
The Russians seemed to have taken the threat of the U.S. arming the Ukrainians with missiles, along with economic sanctions, pretty seriously. They're withdrawing troops.
These were your words: "Open sea lanes are critical for the support of free enterprise, and by extension democracy, around the world."
Did you not mean that open sea lanes are a function of United States military presence and action? How does it and how has that action led to democracy? The two are quite unrelated, but the direct cost to Americans yet to be born is directly related.