For Jonballs

Oh, he made it sound like the reason defense spending fell is because Obama is a communists. Whatever that means. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

SWEET OLIVIA...LOL!! thats just how me and Doove communicate!!!LOL!!not saying that I dont think Obama has communist slants.....

Oh, he made it sound like the reason defense spending fell is because Obama is a communists. Whatever that means. I pointed out that his argument didn't hold water since Obama was took office in early January '09. Defense spending was stayed high for his first two years in office. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

But defense spending hasn't fallen - at least not to my knowledge. The graph only concerns lobbying dollars spent. Am i missing something?

Personally it's my opinion that if we'd get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, we could cut a great deal more of the defense budget and divert the money to other programs or pay down debt.

First, even in an ideal scenario, getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan would only lower the deficit - so i don't think putting it towards the debt is really a feasible goal. At least under current circumstances. And even with that, the non-ideal, and thus, more likely scenario, is that the monies saved would only be diverted to other defense programs. Let's face it, cutting defense is an anathema (look it up, JB ) in this country...on both sides of the aisle....mostly because of how it would be used as a political football against anyone voting to do it.

What i find most ironic is that the same people who revere Reagan for bringing down the Soviet Union, in part by ratcheting up defense spending and forcing Russia to over spend in an effort to keep up, they are the same ones who would scream the loudest over any proposed defense cuts here, now. Well, helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyyyyy!

liberals always resort to "poor" use of grammer when they cant handle the MESSAGE, and have no legitamit response.If They REALLY CARED, they would figure out how to advance inner city schools except for just padding the teachers union contracts.THATS the real MORAL FAILING of the left..YOU ASSHOLES have total control over a system that in the year 2011 is graduating students that cant even perform basic math skills and to say difrent is a bold face lie.No worries about my use of grammer, I actually support myself.Grammer doesnt seem to be sooo important to the libs where it would matter most ..in THE CLASSROOM!!!LOL!! Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Are you seriously that demented to believe what you wrote? Bush started his deterioration of our school system here in TX, where your bullshit about teachers unions doesn't hold water. It's a sound bite used to deflect the issue from the real problem, which you do quite well. Bush's no child left behind and standardized testing handcuffed teachers from actually teaching and forced them to teach kids how to pass the tests. Teacher's salaries and and jobs depend on how well their students do on these tests. Under Bush TX went from the mid 20's in state rankings to 49th. He then took his wonderful education policies to the nation, where the US began it's decline in world rankings and all you can bitch about is teachers unions. They're a problem in NY and the northeast, but no child left behind is our nation's problem, thanks to Dubya and the republicans who passed it. I'd say your grammar skills are a reflection of it, but I think it's really to hide the lack of depth in your arguments, or I should say rants.

Are you seriously that demented to believe what you wrote? Bush started his deterioration of our school system here in TX, where your bullshit about teachers unions doesn't hold water. It's a sound bite used to deflect the issue from the real problem, which you do quite well. Bush's no child left behind and standardized testing handcuffed teachers from actually teaching and forced them to teach kids how to pass the tests. Teacher's salaries and and jobs depend on how well their students do on these tests. Under Bush TX went from the mid 20's in state rankings to 49th. He then took his wonderful education policies to the nation, where the US began it's decline in world rankings and all you can bitch about is teachers unions. They're a problem in NY and the northeast, but no child left behind is our nation's problem, thanks to Dubya and the republicans who passed it. I'd say your grammar skills are a reflection of it, but I think it's really to hide the lack of depth in your arguments, or I should say rants. Originally Posted by surcher

I really want to see that LINK

49th is reserved for OK and Mississippi

that being said, GW was just trying to establish a way to judge teachers, my ex was one, so I heard all about it

and Doovie

Religion is a convenient means by which millions dispose of reality.
----
They're not booing, they're saying Doooooooooooooove!!
-----
Nothing I say is intended to be a factual statement.
that is the best line on this board

and Doovie

-----
Nothing I say is intended to be a factual statement.
that is the best line on this board Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

Isn't it though?

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...ned-parenthoo/

Are you seriously that demented to believe what you wrote? Bush started his deterioration of our school system here in TX, where your bullshit about teachers unions doesn't hold water. It's a sound bite used to deflect the issue from the real problem, which you do quite well. Bush's no child left behind and standardized testing handcuffed teachers from actually teaching and forced them to teach kids how to pass the tests. Teacher's salaries and and jobs depend on how well their students do on these tests. Under Bush TX went from the mid 20's in state rankings to 49th. He then took his wonderful education policies to the nation, where the US began it's decline in world rankings and all you can bitch about is teachers unions. They're a problem in NY and the northeast, but no child left behind is our nation's problem, thanks to Dubya and the republicans who passed it. I'd say your grammar skills are a reflection of it, but I think it's really to hide the lack of depth in your arguments, or I should say rants. Originally Posted by surcher

yah,,I'M demented.....LOL!!..something like that..http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...te-worst-Big-4..this article comes from the slantist liberal rag D&C and they cant even spin it.guess Im not the ONLY one in NEW YORK with POOR POOR GRAMMER!!!!LMFAO!!Now bear in mind I may be bias only having paid into this system in excess of $10,000. in school taxes.Granted, that was on evil so called "income" property, but it is real money that comes from my efforts and I have a RIGHT to atleast an OPINION regardless if you like me or not.Bear in mind I live in the area and witness the results DAILY,but Im probably too demented or uneducated to whitness what is happening in my own neighborhood.

Now lets follow the BOUNCING BALL known as JONBALLS, SURCHER..http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/...c-schools.html..This is an article of our FABULOUS school superintendant being awarded for what? Suck cess?Obamas right hand MAN sure knows how to pick them!!LMFAO!!Please note the "NO CONFIDENCE VOTE" from rochester teachers union and most importantly the SALARY of $230k and CHANGE and HOPE!!!!!LOL!!! Now , If its an uneducated , demented hick like me making over $200k you libs HEADS POP OFF YOUR SHOULDER!!! ADMIT IT!!!LOL!!

property tax rates where I live for your comparrison , you might get upset too if HIGH TAXATION really comes your way, so keep WISHING for it cause you JUST MAY GET IT... then youll be sayin ..GEE??? maybe JONBALLS wasnt really bitching just to bitch?http://www.cityofrochester.gov/artic...?id=8589936228 and heres the rates for houston texas, and remember also that Texas also has no individual income tax on top of that chart, New York does.http://www.westurealestate.com/taxes.htm ohh yes, then youll say, well , Thats just NY State, we already KNOW that the northeast has HIGH TAXES...Well yah, hopefully for all you "tax the RICH" crowd it will be coming to a city near you soon. I honestly hope Obama gets another 4 year term to work his hope and change in EVERY STATE. IM very used to living in a place that is soo regulated and taxed that it NEVER grows, Im not so sure that alot of the country really lives high taxes enough to truely FEEL the effects, and I would be more than happy to see how people
react to "winning the future" and the REAL LIFE effects to your lifestyle..he he..

rochester ny city school tax rate /100% assessed value = 14.220 per $1000.
houston tx school tax rate per $100k value=1.15670
if Im reading these tables correctly?
if you want to dispute my rants for your area , just google city school tax rates for your own city, make a comparrison to see where we stand.But its probably more convenient to just keep attacking me as some right wing extremist.I do not believe the argument that MORE money taken from people to give to this system is the answer and if that makes me "demented" than I guess..

Ya think maybe this has something to do with why we spend so much money on defense? And why the deficit is so huge?



Yet, no complaints from you and your kind. Originally Posted by Doove

That is an interesting graph. There is a little more homework you might want to do though.

According to opensecrets.org (the site you referenced), Center for Responsive Politics, the total amount of money being spent on lobbying is here. Oh, don't get me wrong, I believe that's a lot of money, but in the grand scheme of things, it's a pitance.

To break it down for you from 1998 to 2011 the defense industry is on the bottom of the industry list. Instead of trying to make this out to be something that it's not, I suggest researching before you make accusations about something when you are obviosly bleeting 'farting' points. How hard is it to breath when you are that far up the arses of the left?

To break it down for you from 1998 to 2011 the defense industry is on the bottom of the industry list. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Actually, it's on the bottom of the "Top Industries" listed on the site. 20th out of 121 overall. But even with that, 20th is Defense/Aerospace, which is only one sector of Defense. Just as #1 on the list, Pharmaceuticals/Health Products is only 1 sector of Health.

Breaking it down even further, looking solely at 2010 numbers, Defense, in aggregate, spent $406,857 per Client Reported. ($145.66 Mil and 358 clients). Health, in aggregate spent less than $320,000 per Client Reported ($520.77M and 1628 clients). So the relative size of the industry would seem to have a bearing on the ranking you link to. And just an FYI: Defense/Aerospace (20th) would also actually be higher than "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products (1st) if your list were broken down on a "per capita" basis.

Instead of trying to make this out to be something that it's not, I suggest researching before you make accusations about something when you are obviosly bleeting 'farting' points. How hard is it to breath when you are that far up the arses of the left?

I'm not going to run the numbers for every industry, but your point isn't made with your post any more than my point was made with my original post.

Nevertheless, my larger point is we grossly (and disgustingly so) over-spend on defense. If you wish to dispute the why's of that, i don't really care.

I really want to see that LINK

49th is reserved for OK and Mississippi

that being said, GW was just trying to establish a way to judge teachers, my ex was one, so I heard all about it

and Doovie

Religion is a convenient means by which millions dispose of reality.
----
They're not booing, they're saying Doooooooooooooove!!
-----
Nothing I say is intended to be a factual statement.
that is the best line on this board Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

I don't need a link, I lived through it and live with a teacher. It was on the local news quite often in the late '90's and early 2000's. It shocked and pissed off so many people off when we fell below Mississippi, which was 48 at the time. You don't have the union problem here.

Dubya trying a way to judge teachers is a cop out. It was used to evaluate teachers by lowering the best one's standards. Not only were they handcuffed by what they could teach, it also was a way of setting funding for schools. The ones with the better test scores got better funding. Teachers were forced to compromise teaching and made to teach students how to pass those tests. How's that working on the national level?

I happen to agree with the statement on religion. Hell, we now have two who are saying God is telling them to run for president, Bachman and Rick Perry!

Here's a link for you on TX http://shapleigh.org/system/reportin...documents3.pdf.

You do not hear me bitching about taxes when they are at their lowest point in fifty some odd years. To further compound your ignorance you then bitch about the deficit. They go hand in hand. Idiots like you that drape yourself in the flag and act like your ignorance is patriotic is wtf is taking this country down the shitter.

It is not SS breaking this country, it has a surplus, it is the military. We spend more than all other countries combined. Do you understand that lil fact. We police the world for free.

I do not expect your ignorant ass to understand those facts.....soooooooooooooooo I will just keep pointing out the irony of someone naming themself JonBalls when you have none. Originally Posted by WTF

Actually, it's on the bottom of the "Top Industries" listed on the site. 20th out of 121 overall. But even with that, 20th is Defense/Aerospace, which is only one sector of Defense. Just as #1 on the list, Pharmaceuticals/Health Products is only 1 sector of Health.

Breaking it down even further, looking solely at 2010 numbers, Defense, in aggregate, spent $406,857 per Client Reported. ($145.66 Mil and 358 clients). Health, in aggregate spent less than $320,000 per Client Reported ($520.77M and 1628 clients). So the relative size of the industry would seem to have a bearing on the ranking you link to. And just an FYI: Defense/Aerospace (20th) would also actually be higher than "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products (1st) if your list were broken down on a "per capita" basis.

I'm not going to run the numbers for every industry, but your point isn't made with your post any more than my point was made with my original post.

Nevertheless, my larger point is we grossly (and disgustingly so) over-spend on defense. If you wish to dispute the why's of that, i don't really care. Originally Posted by Doove

You've completely overlooked the fact that there are 19 other industries above the combined sectors of defense for a 10 year period. You'd have a lot more credibility if you showed as much interest in the 19 industries above the listed defense. But then you don't care about the others, because defense is the only thing you have really read about in the 'farting' points from left-wing blogs, isn't it?

The fact that we need to keep abreast of technology for defensive programs when countries like China may be developing directed energy weapons obvioulsy doesn't concern you. It's ok, we know you don't like this country, so lets just mortgage the future of the country away by raising the debt ceiling and borrowing more money from a country who never really liked us to begin with. Just fuck those other industries which look a lot like big business to me who look like they are buying a lot more influence than defence.

Cut out the waste, but dont' cut out our countries defence. Your priorities are most definately left-wing. That US Constitution must really be wrong when it says provide for the common defence, but not Pharmacueticals or Big Insurance or Electric Utilities or Business Associations which include, dare I say, Unions. Get real, Doofus!!! there are a lot bigger fish to fry especially since defence is only 3% of the top 20 industries.

You've completely overlooked the fact that there are 19 other industries above the combined sectors of defense for a 10 year period. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

No i didn't. Apparently you missed the part where i said:

And just an FYI: Defense/Aerospace (20th) would also actually be higher than "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products (1st) if your list were broken down on a "per capita" basis.

You'd have a lot more credibility if you showed as much interest in the 19 industries above the listed defense.

And you'd have more credibility if you didn't lie about what i did or didn't say, as you quote me, no less.

But then you don't care about the others, because defense is the only thing you have really read about in the 'farting' points from left-wing blogs, isn't it?

Tell ya what, show me some other industries where we spend 8X more in tax dollars than any other country, and i'll care about how much lobbying money is involved in those industries.

The fact that we need to keep abreast of technology for defensive programs when countries like China may be developing directed energy weapons obvioulsy doesn't concern you.

No less so than it concerns me that we need to spend 8X what they do in order to do so.

It's ok, we know you don't like this country,

Excuse me while i take a minute to stop laughing.

so lets just mortgage the future of the country away by raising the debt ceiling and borrowing more money from a country who never really liked us to begin with.

Well, we do need to spend 8X what that country spends just to keep abreast of what they're doing militarily, so i would think raising the debt ceiling would be the prudent thing to do.

Just fuck those other industries which look a lot like big business to me who look like they are buying a lot more influence than defence.

Cut out the waste, but dont' cut out our countries defence. Your priorities are most definately left-wing.

8X what they spend? 8X? Are we so incompetent that we need to spend 8X what they do to stay ahead? You seem to think so. Explain yourself, young man!

That US Constitution must really be wrong when it says provide for the common defence, but not Pharmacueticals or Big Insurance or Electric Utilities or Business Associations which include, dare I say, Unions. Get real, Doofus!!! there are a lot bigger fish to fry especially since defence is only 3% of the top 20 industries.

You also seemed to ignore the part where i said:

Nevertheless, my larger point is we grossly (and disgustingly so) over-spend on defense. If you wish to dispute the why's of that, i don't really care.

Now, click.

Cut out the waste, but dont' cut out our countries defence. Your priorities are most definately left-wing. That US Constitution must really be wrong when it says provide for the common defence, but not Pharmacueticals or . Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Defense Spending is a huge problem. We do not need to police the world for free.


Until you understand that fact you are not a libertarian, you are just another right wing ideologue promoting government spending on something that you deem important.

I have already provided you a link that the founding fathers are not what you keep saying. The Constitution was designed to adjust as we grew as a nation. They did not found this country for military purposes....though one could argue they set it up to expand for military purposes as that has been the case.

http://www.warresisters.org/federalpiechartnumbers

"Current military" includes Dept. of Defense ($707 billion) and the military portion from other departments as noted in current military box above ($162 billion). "Past military" represents veterans' benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.* For further explanation, please go to www.warresisters.org.

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the Analytical Perspectives book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds -- such as Social Security -- that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don't pay) by April 18, 2011, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining Trust and Federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion
smaller.

Ya think maybe this has something to do with why we spend so much money on defense? And why the deficit is so huge?



Yet, no complaints from you and your kind. Originally Posted by Doove

No i didn't. Apparently you missed the part where i said:

And just an FYI: Defense/Aerospace (20th) would also actually be higher than "Pharmaceuticals/Health Products (1st) if your list were broken down on a "per capita" basis.

After the fact!!! Take a good look at the OP, YOU singled out defense. Only after your flaw was pointed out did you issue the aside.

And you'd have more credibility if you didn't lie about what i did or didn't say, as you quote me, no less.

It's not a lie when your bias is pointed out. The only lie was your dishonesty about the original post vs the "correction."

Tell ya what, show me some other industries where we spend 8X more in tax dollars than any other country, and i'll care about how much lobbying money is involved in those industries.

Uhmm, maybe you should look at the graphs on YOUR site again. Of the top 6 industries, defense amounts to 6% of the top 6 industries and again 3% of the total.

...

Nevertheless, my larger point is we grossly (and disgustingly so) over-spend on defense. If you wish to dispute the why's of that, i don't really care.

Where is our outrage for the spending on the other industries? Again, you singled out defense in the first post.

Now, click. Originally Posted by Doove

Defense Spending is a huge problem. We do not need to police the world for free.

Hey dumba$$, read the line, it said DEFENCE not offence and if you had really paid attention you would know I'm against all of the wars. There would have been no need for occupation with a few well placed munitions after 9/11. You'll just have to read the archives to see where I've actually suggested that we should bill the countries that want our protection. We pay our local police, I don't see why we shouldn't be paid to defend those requesting the service. If you think about it, just imagine all the revenue the country could generate if this country was being paid instead of paying out. Put that in your pipe and smoke it! Or better yet, put down the pipe because your reading comprehension/retention really sucks.


I have never advocated on this board for an empire. But you obviously have a problem with the clause in the US Constitution that says "provide for the common defence." (paraphrased) Bring them home, put them on OUR border and turn back the flood of teet suckers. And to make it clear, I'm not advocating closing the borders to those that gain entry LEGALLY.

Until you understand that fact you are not a libertarian, you are just another right wing ideologue promoting government spending on something that you deem important.

I have already provided you a link that the founding fathers are not what you keep saying. The Constitution was designed to adjust as we grew as a nation. They did not found this country for military purposes....though one could argue they set it up to expand for military purposes as that has been the case.

http://www.warresisters.org/federalpiechartnumbers

"Current military" includes Dept. of Defense ($707 billion) and the military portion from other departments as noted in current military box above ($162 billion). "Past military" represents veterans' benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.* For further explanation, please go to www.warresisters.org.

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the Analytical Perspectives book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds -- such as Social Security -- that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don't pay) by April 18, 2011, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining Trust and Federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion
smaller. Originally Posted by WTF

.