GOP offers $3.8T budget that boosts defense, cuts elsewhere

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

 

http://news.yahoo.com/gop-plan-boost-defense-spending-worries-party-070824592--finance.html

To me .. this is just how 'out of touch' with America the GOP really is...

Do these old geezers really think that American's we be better off with increased military spending and reduced social programs....8-/  ????

 

[Supersonic 49,376]

America already is like the country that spends the most on military worldwide. Why even increase the amount, especially in times of relative peace?

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

I agree, they are so out-of-touch.

 

I mean cutting the domestic programs that are helping with the already-extreme poverty we have here would only further exacerbate the issue and make it much worse, especially by cutting it that much.

 

And to think to cut a bunch in education when we already spend so little on it compared to other things is so ridiculous considering how important education is for society.

 

Them always wanting to cut everything so drastically then increase defense spending. How predictable. If anything defense should be cut since we already spend so damn much on it, and make that funding go somewhere that matters.

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

America already is like the country that spends the most on military worldwide. Why even increase the amount, especially in times of relative peace?

​Not really at peace ...  But a lot of the military is unessary and wasteful ... could be better used for domestic isssues.

[Luc 4,776]

If the US got less military it would improve worldwide peace. Russia gets the signal that the west is preparing for a war with Russia like this. And the other money would probably go to fighting IS troops.

A better way for the US to get more power to the West, would be to talk more with European politicians about the 2% defense spending norm for NATO members which most European members don't follow. 

That 3.8 trillion could be invested in healthcare, education, innovation and green energy. 3.8 trillion what the **** even. Isn't that like 25% of the annual GDP?

[Economy 52,844]

EDIT: ok i read the whole article and i think u misunderstood it...

 

the only rise was $36 Billion for "overseas" defence not general defence spending. and only about half of that was "garanteed"

Also the Democrats criticized their spending for failure to invest in "education, infrastructure and defence". That means defence spending cant possibly go up that much if they are criticizing it... Plus we know that Democrats have actually been favouring more spending on defence than Republicans

 

I think when it says "favour the pentagon" the article simply meant cuts to military (if any) would not be as major as cuts to other things

 

Although still, cuts to military should come first

 

 

 

[Economy 52,844]

If the US got less military it would improve worldwide peace. Russia gets the signal that the west is preparing for a war with Russia like this. And the other money would probably go to fighting IS troops.

A better way for the US to get more power to the West, would be to talk more with European politicians about the 2% defense spending norm for NATO members which most European members don't follow. 

That 3.8 trillion could be invested in healthcare, education, innovation and green energy. 3.8 trillion what the **** even. Isn't that like 25% of the annual GDP?

​yeah its 25% of GDP... thats a little less than the 26% of GDP Government spending has been at if im not mistaken

When u factor in State spending and Munincipal spending, The US spending as a % of GDP really is not that low. and their taxes pretty high

 

Hardly the Capitalist America it once was and hardly the Capitalist America people still think America is. People dont realize how much taxes, regulation and spending has actually gone up in America

 

Of course, too much of that spending goes to military. But read the comment i made above, i dont think wolfsmck understood the article well. There was nothing in the article that suggested military spending would actually rise over-all. It only suggested military wouldnt get cut to the same level other programs would

[socotra 3,357]

It's confusing to me how some parts of the United States continually believe and elect these idiots. I can't stand any of the Republican leadership. The two-party system needs the boot. 

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

It's confusing to me how some parts of the United States continually believe and elect these idiots. I can't stand any of the Republican leadership. The two-party system needs the boot. 

​Its a mud slinging contest ... Republicans get elected when everyone is pissed off at the stupid Liberal leadership....

At the end of Bush's stint, everyone was pissed  at the Replicans, so   ... we got Obama...

Nobody looks at the Politicians and thinks, I am gonna vote becasue I think he has the best ideas.

 

 

[Economy 52,844]

It's confusing to me how some parts of the United States continually believe and elect these idiots. I can't stand any of the Republican leadership. The two-party system needs the boot. 

Seriously respect other peoples opinions. The average person in my view understands very little about economics and gets all kinds of myths mixed up and common beliefs ALL the time its not even funny. Its frustrating but i dont call people idiots

 

i personally favour Republican economic policies more than Democrats (even if i dont agree with everything). Now im an idiot? Theres all kinds of reasons i think Democrats are worst but most ppl here are so stuck with the idea of equality that i dont even bother to explain half the time how it often backfires and doesnt really work cuz ppl dont even wanna listen

 

i could call u the idiot for rejecting ANY republican  from my point of view

 

wanna discuss it? PM me and ill give u one huge essay as to how Democrats are destroying the economy far more than Republicans would

 

that being said, i agree America shouldnt only have 2 major pRties. Most Countries have at least 3, some even more!

 

PS: if this is about military, Democrats have actually been the ones wanting to increase military spending while Republicans have wanted cuts/freezes on it. This budget only asks for an increase on a specific part of military (over-seas military operations) not the general defence budget as a whole

[socotra 3,357]

Seriously respect other peoples opinions. The average person in my view understands very little about economics and gets all kinds of myths mixed up and common beliefs ALL the time its not even funny. Its frustrating but i dont call people idiots

 

i personally favour Republican economic policies more than Democrats (even if i dont agree with everything). Now im an idiot? Theres all kinds of reasons i think Democrats are worst but most ppl here are so stuck with the idea of equality that i dont even bother to explain half the time how it often backfires and doesnt really work cuz ppl dont even wanna listen

 

i could call u the idiot for rejecting ANY republican  from my point of view

 

wanna discuss it? PM me and ill give u one huge essay as to how Democrats are destroying the economy far more than Republicans would

 

that being said, i agree America shouldnt only have 2 major pRties. Most Countries have at least 3, some even more!

 

PS: if this is about military, Democrats have actually been the ones wanting to increase military spending while Republicans have wanted cuts/freezes on it. This budget only asks for an increase on a specific part of military (over-seas military operations) not the general defence budget as a whole

​I'm perfectly respectful of Republican ideology, nothing in my post would say otherwise. I'm criticizing the current leadership of the party and the fact that most people are likely voting them in without truly understanding what their leaders stand for. Beyond that, I am COMPLETELY against the two-party system. George Washington warned us of it, and yet we still wandered into that territory. I think it divides us, it takes away from democracy, and it makes politics politics. People are more dedicated to their party than to their country and to creating a fluid, compromising government that encompasses the views of everybody (a government which I believe wholeheartedly can be created, especially in the United States in the future) without switching between conservative, liberal, back to conservative, more conservative, another liberal, another liberal, and so on. Unfortunately, the two-party system does exist and because voting independently garners such a small percentage, it leaves the sole option of voting for either a Republican or a Democrat, and I personally believe the current Republican LEADERSHIP and leading senators/representatives (Boehner, McConnell, Cruz, Rubio, Graham, McCain etc.) are morons. I truly cannot stand them. Largely everything that leaves their mouths I find myself disagreeing with. 

On the flipside, while I disagree with several aspects of the Democratic Party platform, I do see myself as more in-line with their policies and the people they allow to represent the party. I CANNOT support an organization like the Republican Party that tolerates people like Rick Santorum, Debbie Riddle, Sally Kern, Michelle Bachmann, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Lindsay Graham, Ted Cruz etc. who are so adamantly against gay marriage, who are so adamantly against abortion, who are so adamantly against peoples' rights. Regardless of their economic policies, I cannot support a party that does not support me on the most basic level. 

To address your economic argument, I personally feel the hardline capitalism that Republicans promote hurts the average worker and truly does benefit the wealthiest Americans. I'm not sure how a lack of regulations helps the little guy. The nice mixture we have right now works, and I hope the United States will continue to surge forward economically. Laissez-faire just doesn't work.

[Economy 52,844]

​I'm perfectly respectful of Republican ideology, nothing in my post would say otherwise. I'm criticizing the current leadership of the party and the fact that most people are likely voting them in without truly understanding what their leaders stand for. Beyond that, I am COMPLETELY against the two-party system. George Washington warned us of it, and yet we still wandered into that territory. I think it divides us, it takes away from democracy, and it makes politics politics. People are more dedicated to their party than to their country and to creating a fluid, compromising government that encompasses the views of everybody (a government which I believe wholeheartedly can be created, especially in the United States in the future) without switching between conservative, liberal, back to conservative, more conservative, another liberal, another liberal, and so on. Unfortunately, the two-party system does exist and because voting independently garners such a small percentage, it leaves the sole option of voting for either a Republican or a Democrat, and I personally believe the current Republican LEADERSHIP and leading senators/representatives (Boehner, McConnell, Cruz, Rubio, Graham, McCain etc.) are morons. I truly cannot stand them. Largely everything that leaves their mouths I find myself disagreeing with. 

On the flipside, while I disagree with several aspects of the Democratic Party platform, I do see myself as more in-line with their policies and the people they allow to represent the party. I CANNOT support an organization like the Republican Party that tolerates people like Rick Santorum, Debbie Riddle, Sally Kern, Michelle Bachmann, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Lindsay Graham, Ted Cruz etc. who are so adamantly against gay marriage, who are so adamantly against abortion, who are so adamantly against peoples' rights. Regardless of their economic policies, I cannot support a party that does not support me on the most basic level. 

To address your economic argument, I personally feel the hardline capitalism that Republicans promote hurts the average worker and truly does benefit the wealthiest Americans. I'm not sure how a lack of regulations helps the little guy. The nice mixture we have right now works, and I hope the United States will continue to surge forward economically. Laissez-faire just doesn't work.

But Democrats go to a worse extreme... I mean high taxes and high regulation do discourage business investment. It also drives business away. Burger King didnt move their headquarters here to Canada for nothing. And all kinds of Corpoations are ditching the US. The US with a Corporate tax rate of 30% (plus whatever States) add is already one of the highest in the Developed world. The Democrats have got to be out of their mind to want to raise it even further

 

Democrat ideology is tax the rich to give the poor assistance. Capitalism is more creating economic growth and actually givig people a job. A person is better off with a job than limited assistance from welfare or food stamps. It also costs the Government less and the economy is more productive...

 

also lets not forget the middle class is the first to suffer when unemployment rises because theres no wage competition along employers. Higher taxes on rich for wealth distribution generally do not make up for the lower wages that result from lower business investment and its effect on the labor market. If higher regulation and taxes on rich worked (which is what the US is getting more of) then why after 6 years of Obama is income inequality STILL rising?

 

and some policies backfire also. Like Obama care. The Republicans warned that it likely would result in costing full time jobs as corporations avoid hiring full time so they dont have to cover their employees. The result???? Despite a recovering economy, this time were not getting as many full-times as usually u get in a refovery... That a coincidence????

 

of course, Republicans sometimes go to an extreme i dot support. Minimum Wage should be a little higher at the National Level. And u cant get rid of support programs entirally

 

but although both parties tend to go to an extreme, i think Democrats do more damage than Republicans.

 

remember a strong economy with compettion is more effective at preventing exploitation than a weak economy with no competition and u try to help poor people by regulating everything, only theres always things regulation wont help  

[Luc 4,776]

Seriously respect other peoples opinions. The average person in my view understands very little about economics and gets all kinds of myths mixed up and common beliefs ALL the time its not even funny. Its frustrating but i dont call people idiots

 

i personally favour Republican economic policies more than Democrats (even if i dont agree with everything). Now im an idiot? Theres all kinds of reasons i think Democrats are worst but most ppl here are so stuck with the idea of equality that i dont even bother to explain half the time how it often backfires and doesnt really work cuz ppl dont even wanna listen

 

i could call u the idiot for rejecting ANY republican  from my point of view

 

wanna discuss it? PM me and ill give u one huge essay as to how Democrats are destroying the economy far more than Republicans would

 

that being said, i agree America shouldnt only have 2 major pRties. Most Countries have at least 3, some even more!

 

PS: if this is about military, Democrats have actually been the ones wanting to increase military spending while Republicans have wanted cuts/freezes on it. This budget only asks for an increase on a specific part of military (over-seas military operations) not the general defence budget as a whole

Yeah, you have only 2 parties. In my country we had elections yesterday and the government consists out of 6 parties probably. The biggest party has 14 out of 75 seats. That's way more democratic, and as a middle-wing progressive I always get what I want considering middle is what you get when left and right compromise.

[Economy 52,844]

Yeah, you have only 2 parties. In my country we had elections yesterday and the government consists out of 6 parties probably. The biggest party has 14 out of 75 seats. That's way more democratic, and as a middle-wing progressive I always get what I want considering middle is what you get when left and right compromise.

Well they have more parties, they just atent popular or talked about and never win

 

here in Canada we also have parties no one talks about like the green party which at best  gets 5% of the votes

We basically have 3 parties that dominate... NDP (socialists), Liberals (Centre Wing) and Conservatives (right winged)

 

the same parties exist at the Provincial Level

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

For me, the party voting block system means you are labeled for some things that you don't necessarily agree with.

For example,  conservative/republican means I am pro life, racist and favor tax breaks for the wealthy and anti gay.....

Being Liberal means I favor taxes and regulations to control the free market, 

 

libritarian an means I promote pot smoking

 

 

i am none of the above.