@dannym3141
well said mate,and i agree that @radx is the man who can best explain this situation,though @RedSky is quite adept as well.

@bobknight33
don't let those fearmongers get to you man.
the deficit hawks use household analogies to make their point and this is not only a fear tactic but a disingenuous one at that,or just plain dishonest.

how you and i run our households is NOTHING like how a government runs finances.yet that is the comparative example they use over and over and over.so it is no surprise that many people may be a tad freaked out when they look at those massive numbers.

if we compare republican vs democrat over the past few decades,democrats have proven to be the better pick in regards to fiscal responsibility.

we live in bizzarro universe where rhetoric has the exact opposite outcome when applied to reality.

what i would really like to know,and not ONE candidate will even mention it:military spending.

the budget keeps going up.
by some estimates the military counts for 25% of all tax revenue but when you factor in ALL military/defense/intelligence it is closer to 50%.

YET....

soldiers benefits keep decreasing.
their health care harder and harder to obtain.(never mind the mental health care of our soldiers,which is criminal).
soldier suicide is at an all time high in over a century.
homelessness of our veterans is an embarrassment.

yet the military budget keeps getting higher and not one politician will even dare breath a word.even sanders record is not exactly stellar in this regard.

maybe if our political class stopped engaging in the practice of empire,we could re-invest in our own country.

IMO it's not all, strictly speaking, military spending.

A very large chunk of that money is earmarked for projects which are impractical in the extreme so uber-wealthy plutocrats who complain about how much they pay in taxes can siphon off billions into their own pockets and spend millions of the siphoned cash on managing their political influence.

Perhaps in your mind, not mine. I have consistently said Carter was my favorite recent president, just the least popular. He did what he saw as right (and in my eyes he was correct at nearly every turn, like adopting solar BEFORE it's too late, and using less oil and gas by turning down your thermostat and putting on a sweater if it's cold inside for military, economic, and ecologic reasons), and was called wishy washy for it. He was a nuclear submarine commander, HARD CORE military, yet he was called weak on the military/defense (rather than insightful). I also disagree that Obama was the worst, in my lifetime Bush caused WAY more damage to our country, Obama has taken 6 years to dig out of the Bush hole, so he's no hero for me either...but he's certainly not the villain you wish to label him...we haven't even had a domestic terrorist attack on his watch.

Regan policies include raising taxes on the rich and limiting military spending (true, not by choice or often, but he did do both) If that's what you mean, perhaps you're correct...but I think you mean his trickle down economics, which were a clear proven disastrous failure and didn't even work for the rich...it made the top few % more dollars, but less wealth in the end because those dollars were worth far less, as @dannym3141 said above.

Odd, you have no trouble changing facts....why can't I? ;-)

Personally I feel that they system should be that you get 10 years of pension time. Use it for retirement or a year when you are 30 having a kid, which would leave you 9. Or some other issue like loosing your job.
But this off time should be roughly equal to you current pay. Retirement should be looked at a little differently because you are looking at a lifespan of work. But if you are 20 and want to go to school for 2 years and you quit your minimum wage job then you get subsidized 2 years at minimum wage.

You will look at entitlements a lot differently and also will look at how others squander theirs and run out early.

I don't care if you are 20 and suck 5years of minimum wage to buy dope, drink and other stupid stuff. When your 10 years are burned through then you are cut off.

Never underestimate the value of tough love.

Conversely, you would greatly consider when you retire. If I burned up 3 years of entitlements and only have 7 left then I'd better keep on working into the 70's.

Granted this is a grand pie in the sky idea but I do think it is some what workable.
And yes there should be a cap of say $100k.

To address you point about general Right leaning ideas:
Us on the Right don't hate poor people. We just don't want to continually hand out a free lunch. We do want all to have the same opportunity in life, a level playing field.

However corporations and government slice and dice the rules knowing that Americans have no clue of the intent of the Founders, or the Constitution. When the Right brings up the Constitution the Left points the finger and says that the Right wants to bring back slavery. No we don't. WE want all to have a level playing field. We don't hate Obama for being "black" we hate him for the policies and decisions that he puts forth. No more, no less.

Also the Right has no problems for a black man in a leadership role. But when we ( the Right) hold a man of color in high esteem ( Ben Carson) the Left cuts them down as an Uncle Tom and quickly dismiss any positive values that the man brings forth.

Finally there should be no sacred cows when it comes to cutting spending. Cut Military spending, Redo social security, entitlements. put everything on the table.
We are going broke point fingers at each other and not getting anything done.


Have a good day Newtboy

While on one hand, I've always known that foreign aid is barely a drop in the bucket of our budget, but on the other, I'd still be hesitant to increase foreign aid to be completely honest.

so much shit that needs fixing and investment here domestically.

If we really could make a decent dent in military spending...then I'd be more comfortable with more foreign aid.

hate to say it but don't these people need to overthrow their own dictators and overlords? I'm ok with giving them some aid and giving them intel and other kinds of non-hardware military support. but they do need to fight their own damned battles.

I don't feel compelled to provide concrete data because I never took a concrete stance for or against scientific spending. Even when referencing military research it was because some people commented about cutting military spending as though that would have no effect on research funding.

My posts were to point out that the question of research with merit is a very difficult one to answer especially if "the greater good" is used as a criteria because "greater good" encompasses things outside of science and which may be much more immediate than the results of research (ie healthcare, employment, international affairs, etc.)

Those things being high impact and immediate could have a negative impact when using "greater good" in a simplified way because each person's cost-benefit analysis of research will vary depending on their circumstances. I can only assume that the greater good is some kind of aggregate so you cant ignore the individual.

In fact, in order to use the greater good as a measuring stick to even START this debate in a "concrete" way as you say, the following would have to be answered and I don't think you could get a room of people to agree on the answers to them much less a nation or planet.


Who is affected by the greater good?
What do we mean by greater good (greater outcome, greater meaning, greater support)?
How is it measured?
Over what period of time?
In what way and to what are we comparing it?
What terms is the final measure of the cost-benefit analysis? Dollars? Happiness? Health? Opinion?

You said your reaction is not fanatic, yet you're attacking me as a foe despite the fact I never actually rallied against ur stance.

This entire time I'm essentially saying "people need to be more aware of the larger picture when trying to answer this question because both sides seem to focus on the smaller parts that support them (and therefore come across semi-fanatic). Furthermore if a proper analysis is used then ud likely find some research doesnt cut the mustard and some is not as insignificant as it might have first seemed."

To which you've promptly replied each time explaining about how mistaken I am in my understanding of the importance of scientific research. I left a piece of your last post so you can see how aggressively you address me directly despite me never having said I disagree with, but only with the vigor of which people will argue scientific research even when the other side has a valid point...or in this case were not making the point ur arguing against to begin with.

As someone who loves science and believe research is absolutely important, I think both sides do a horrible job of trying to address the issue. To say that seemingly insignificant research is obviously unnecessary is wrong, as much of science is built upon research never intended for the purpose at hand.

However the opposite is not always true either. Not all science and research brings enough value to the table to justify the spending to do it.

If you're trying to use "the greater good" as a measure for what solutions to use or what problems are most important, then you have to accept that even some things like ecological research or environmental issues may not cut the mustard if their scope or impact are not large enough.

I also find it interesting when people clamor to cut military spending as if they didn't understand that a lot of current technology and research is piggy backing off research done for military purposes (and some of which may be funded by military spending).

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

1. Bring troops home from Afghanistan
2. Cut military spending by 25 %
3. Profit!

Pre-bush tax cuts had one of the most prosperous era's in modern history.
Post-bush tax cuts...welp.....that fucked us over severely....

Im all for killing military spending and rich pricks getting kickbacks (how is this not effectively the same as raising taxes??)

Military Spending cuts?, OF COURSE NOT!.

I guess there were more minorities getting "gifts" from Obama then there were whites who were looking forward to Romney's gift of tax cuts, not to mention the gift he wanted to bestow upon defense contractors by way of increased military spending.

>> ^alcom:

If Reps have a better sense of "how the world works," then why didn't they anticipate the mortgage-backed security crisis? Regulation is necessary, taxation is necessary and the freedom to marry who you want to marry is necessary to build a balanced and prosperous society. The Rep contradictions of "less gov = more freedom EXCEPT for marriage rights, women's bodies and more military spending" have been exposed to the majority as the fraud that they are. Obama endured relentless personal attacks, pointless filibustering and not a small amount of outright racism, lies and disrespect in a futile attempt to make him out to be the "worst president in history."
The people have spoken. Obama still came out on top, consistent to his values and gracious as he congratulated Romney on a hard-fought campaign. Taxing the top earners in the country a little more and cutting spending would be an effective way if paying down the deficit. How is this an illusion?
The Republican party needs to regroup. Their tactic of leaning further and further to the right (except in the last weeks) has soured too many right-of-center voters. If they argue now that they would have won "if only they had someone MORE conservative running," then they will surely lose again and again.



Apparently you have reading comprehension problems. I didn't say anything about republicans having a better sense of how the world works. I said that propaganda dictates how most people in this country seem to think. That if you talk to anyone they have no idea what Obamas real policies are or what they mean. I meant that mostly on the republican sides but it's true for democrats as well.

But go ahead, read what you want.

If Reps have a better sense of "how the world works," then why didn't they anticipate the mortgage-backed security crisis? Regulation is necessary, taxation is necessary and the freedom to marry who you want to marry is necessary to build a balanced and prosperous society. The Rep contradictions of "less gov = more freedom EXCEPT for marriage rights, women's bodies and more military spending" have been exposed to the majority as the fraud that they are. Obama endured relentless personal attacks, pointless filibustering and not a small amount of outright racism, lies and disrespect in a futile attempt to make him out to be the "worst president in history."

The people have spoken. Obama still came out on top, consistent to his values and gracious as he congratulated Romney on a hard-fought campaign. Taxing the top earners in the country a little more and cutting spending would be an effective way if paying down the deficit. How is this an illusion?

The Republican party needs to regroup. Their tactic of leaning further and further to the right (except in the last weeks) has soured too many right-of-center voters. If they argue now that they would have won "if only they had someone MORE conservative running," then they will surely lose again and again.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Actually, far from stupid I found him really on the point here.
Candidate A will "Give them things" ie. make their lives better.
Candidate B says, "Screw you, my rich friends need MORE!" ie. make their lives worse.
Why did anyone vote for Romney again? It's been shown time and again, Democratic Presidents have a better record on the economy, AND debt levels than Republicans. Yet this illusion remains that somehow by focusing 90% of their energy on helping 5% of the population the Republican will magically shrink the debt and make everything work, in spite of the fact that it's been tried numerous times, and it's failed every single time.

If you hear people talk about Obama and his policies they are simply uninformed about them. They're uninformed about everything whether it's what the deficit means to history to how the world even works. The PR industry works hard on producing massive amounts of propaganda and it does work. This is how you do things when you do not have the big stick like in a Totalitarian society, you have to manufacture everyone's consent.

>> ^shagen454:

Fuck that, dont vote and lets just let the republicans do what they want ; turn America into a fascist military state where we serve the rich as slaves and fight unjust wars that causes wide spread devastation. Lets get it over with so we can start the socialist revolution for real truth and justice in the world.


This would fuck up not only America, but the whole world, as it already did the last time it was tried (viz: Bush administration). And the US is already in full-on 3rd world mode, just look at all the dirty tactics the Rethugs are pulling to keep people from voting democrat. Not to mention the ridiculous disconnect between social spending (education, health, etc.) and military spending, even under Obama; it's like the US is trying to catch up with North Korea or something. At least if Obama gets a second term he'll have no excuse to not get things moving in the right direction.

>> ^Deano:

Does anyone stop to think why the hell are we staring at flags like they're amazingly important and significant. I'm beginning to feel abnormal seeing the number of wide-eyed flag-waving Brits on the tv. They really buy into this nationalistic crap.


Look, you can go the pessimistic route and say that the games are just the Colosseum all over again, placating the masses by entertaining them with a grand spectacle.

OR, you could enjoy it and see it as encouraging some pride in achievement, hopefully showing some good sportsmanship (almost every games there's some great example of someone being a great sport over winning), and getting kids excited about sport. Considering obesity these days, anything that gets kids excited about participating in sports is a good thing.

My kids have been running race after race after race around our house during these games as the eldest is obsessed with Usain Bolt. There's also a lot of basketball being played as the Australian basketball teams are doing well. And the kids are also going extra hard in their swimming lessons the last two weeks.

So lighten up a bit, let yourself get carried away with the moment. I for one have been getting almost tearing over OTHER country's victories, and our competitors close victories moreso than wins by my country (maybe because Australia has had ONE gold only so far... amazing!)...

You can bemoan how much money goes into training these athletes, but I'd take money being spent having people compete in games and at peak physical fitness any day over it being spent on military spending.