[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;30439256]you rated almost every post here dumb[/QUOTE]
I did? :raise:
EDIT: Apparently I did. Wat.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;30439282]I did? :raise:
EDIT: Apparently I did. Wat.[/QUOTE]
i forgive you
[QUOTE=Lambeth;30439220]It isn't impossible[/QUOTE]
Yeah it isn't impossible in several decades.
Man debt or not I'm glad no one ITT is regulating public policy, Republicans have said smarter things than some stuff in here.
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;30439298]i forgive you[/QUOTE]
Probably my brother. He does stuff like that.
I get up from the computer to get a drink, and he messes with it.
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;30439274]what possible effect could that have on you if you were in another country :downs:[/QUOTE]
so rather than wanting my country to be goverened properly and stop carving it's initials into the middle eastern landscape with bombs, i should move away?
nice 'dont like it, leave' logic. dont bother trying for change when you can just run away
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;30439274]what possible effect could that have on you if you were in another country :downs:[/QUOTE]
Is this a joke?
[quote]Shit guys looks like this dude has it all sorted out we should put him in a position of authority.[/quote]
Some of the best and most used technology we have now originated from DARPA and it seems like every week you hear about something awesome they've come up with so yeah, I'm glad you agree.
[QUOTE=TH89;30439325]Is this a joke?[/QUOTE]
yes? that's why I put the downs
Remember how we the West won the Cold War? It was by convincing the Soviet Union to inflate its military production into bankruptcy. Now that we've learned that lesson, the United States seems to be applying that tactic vigorously to themselves.
[QUOTE=Meatpuppet;30439371]yes? that's why I put the downs[/QUOTE]
Downs can also mean "I am right and you are stupid" so ymmv
[QUOTE=TH89;30439405]Downs can also mean "I am right and you are stupid" so ymmv[/QUOTE]
sorry
so if it was a joke, what was your point?
[QUOTE=Kopimi;30439552]so if it was a joke, what was your point?[/QUOTE]
That you were right, I guess.
I. Hate. My. Country.
I wish the founding fathers had included a method of dissolving the government, similar to the English method of dissolving Parliament.
[QUOTE=DarkendSky;30444664]I. Hate. My. Country.
I wish the founding fathers had included a method of dissolving the government, similar to the English method of dissolving Parliament.[/QUOTE]
i really don't think dissolving the government is going to accomplish very much
i think thomas jefferson was the one that said we need a violent overthrow of the government every 20 years
thomas jefferson wasn't always right
guys youre forgetting one thing
most of america doesnt even know half the things he said. thats right! just garbled sentence fragments that make no sense...
...maybe that's how the GOP appeals to so many US citizens
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30438298]I'm pretty sure any economist will tell you that the bailouts prevented another great depression
They'll also tell you that more regulation in the first place would have prevented it but bygones[/QUOTE]
No, no, no. There's so many people who disagree with that view you're either ignorant of it or are just ignoring them.
[QUOTE=Lazor;30444960]thomas jefferson wasn't always right[/QUOTE]
He was right about many things, of course, that wasn't one of them. That statement is just an attempt to rectify the inherent problems of a Democratic republic, putting far too much faith in people that they'll resist any action by the government that isn't in their best interest which if the last 10 years are any indicator, is bullshit.
[QUOTE=s0beit;30445174]No, no, no. There's so many people who disagree with that view you're either ignorant of it or are just ignoring them.[/QUOTE]
Letting the banks collapse would have been disastrous, I don't see how anyone can say that the world would be better off today if it happened.
The only thing stopping progress with the United States is the two party system. Obama wants x, but can't get it because the Republicans are able to block it, and at the same time the Republicans effectively create propaganda that Obama and the Democrats do nothing.
Fuck two party systems, supporting it means supporting a lack of progress (oh wait, conservatives like that). Countries should have at least 3 major parties offered for elections. That way if a bill is presented, either 1 party is going to attempt to block it (and fail), or two parties are going to block it (meaning the bill sucks anyways).
I don't really know if the United States allows this (or not), but the United States should allow Independant political parties in the House of Representatives and Senate. Here in Australia at my local elections I can vote for a Liberal representative, Labor representative, Nationals Representative, Greens and Independants as well. We currently have 3 or 4 Independants in Parliament right now.
Anyways if progress was allowed, the United States should remove its operations from other countries (such as bases in Japan and elsewhere around the world). This cuts down spending and should aim to create peace not through who has the biggest nuke, but building foundations of trust between nations. Soldiers currently serving abroad should be sent back home (although at least given something from a Military pension). Money saved should be invested in programs to educate the un-educated to get them jobs, and help circulate the economy. Of course some money shouldn't be spend so the United States doesn't go further in debt.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30445262]Letting the banks collapse would have been disastrous, I don't see how anyone can say that the world would be better off today if it happened.[/QUOTE]
Well first, the banks wouldn't have had to collapse in the first place if we hadn't put into practice these insane monetary policies in the late 90s and early 2000s.
I mean really, when you have some people who say the housing market collapsing from 2001, you have to begin to question some of the merits of the system as it is right now.
I don't deny that things would have been bad if the banks collapsed, they might have been pretty bad, much worse than if we didn't fuck up during the 90s and early 2000s and just swallowed the medicine back then, of course we didn't and we ended up in the hole we're in now and I also don't deny things would have been bad if the banks collapsed.
The problem is, and what you're ignoring is, this didn't "prevent" anything, just another jolt to a broken system of monetary policy and government policy.
There's a reason why we're "double dipping" right now and there's a reason we aren't going to see it getting much better. Ring me when things start going well again.
Also, if the purpose was to avoid another "great depression", i suggest you look at the figures.
[editline]e[/editline]
[QUOTE=Antdawg;30445931]The only thing stopping progress with the United States is the two party system. Obama wants x, but can't get it because the Republicans are able to block it, and at the same time the Republicans effectively create propaganda that Obama and the Democrats do nothing.
Fuck two party systems, supporting it means supporting a lack of progress (oh wait, conservatives like that). Countries should have at least 3 major parties offered for elections. That way if a bill is presented, either 1 party is going to attempt to block it (and fail), or two parties are going to block it (meaning the bill sucks anyways).
I don't really know if the United States allows this (or not), but the United States should allow Independant political parties in the House of Representatives and Senate. Here in Australia at my local elections I can vote for a Liberal representative, Labor representative, Nationals Representative, Greens and Independants as well. We currently have 3 or 4 Independants in Parliament right now.
Anyways if progress was allowed, the United States should remove its operations from other countries (such as bases in Japan and elsewhere around the world). This cuts down spending and should aim to create peace not through who has the biggest nuke, but building foundations of trust between nations. Soldiers currently serving abroad should be sent back home (although at least given something from a Military pension). Money saved should be invested in programs to educate the un-educated to get them jobs, and help circulate the economy. Of course some money shouldn't be spend so the United States doesn't go further in debt.[/QUOTE]
Please show me where any Democrat is advocating removing it's operations from other countries, I've heard nothing of the sort. Also, it just seems you want more parties as a means to give your favored party more power, what if those new parties sided with conservatives?
[QUOTE=s0beit;30446061]Please show me where any Democrat is advocating removing it's operations from other countries, I've heard nothing of the sort. Also, it just seems you want more parties as a means to give your favored party more power, what if those new parties sided with conservatives?[/QUOTE]
You have heard nothing of the sort, because no Democrat has proposed such a thing. But if the United States is going to scale back its defense budget, probably the first aspect to be taken care of would be bases in other nations. Considering the fact that some may even be redundant. Of course operations could continue to help stabilise security in the Middle East, but the US has military bases all around the world.
Coalitions do form in multi-party systems, but even if there was a conservative majority, there will still be progress. You may or may not like that progress, but something is actually happening. It's also up to the American people to decide what they think is best, if a coalition is going to run the country into the ground then you should still have faith that voters will make sure that coalition barely has a standing the next election.
Instead of thinking and choosing what's good for themselves, people become passive when someone else just decides things for them all the time. This is the world of today.
Also they could cut the military budget and lay off the stupid as fuck war on terror, it's a tool to instill fear and "need" for security and a strong leader in the people.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;30439128]Yeah lets crash a huge industry with more highly specialized highly paying highly exclusive jobs than you can shake a stick at in one short decade makes perfect sense our economy would be so great after that one.
I could see it decreasing by 20% over the decade from ending the wars but any more isn't happening. I don't get why people would ever think Republicans or Democrats would agree to that.
Shit guys looks like this dude has it all sorted out we should put him in a position of authority.[/QUOTE]
The military budget is like 600 billion, cutting that in half still leaves a whopping 300 billion which is STILL more than every other country's military budget on Earth put together. Besides, you can use 100 billion of that to create more jobs to replace the old ones lost. You're still looking at a flat 200 billion cutting down the debt per year.
War is what fuels America's economy. If the military budget was cut in half, half the people would lose their jobs too.
[QUOTE=Stopper;30447051]War is what fuels America's economy. If the military budget was cut in half, half the people would lose their jobs too.[/QUOTE]
I know it's not as simple as cutting the budget in half but jesus, if you want to budget cut something, cut the military budget, not the schools, or the police, or health care, just cut the military
[QUOTE=ThePutty;30438151]Cut military budget in half, use it to pay off debt
Gone in 10 years
Throw in 100 billion for NASA and we've got ourselves progress[/QUOTE]
actually cutting the current defense budget in half to pay for the deficit would take 40 years
[QUOTE=ThePutty;30447536]I know it's not as simple as cutting the budget in half but jesus, if you want to budget cut something, cut the military budget, not the schools, or the police, or health care, just cut the military[/QUOTE]
I completely agree that America is overspending in the military department, I was just pointing out that it's not that easy. Relax.
[QUOTE=ThePutty;30446514]The military budget is like 600 billion, cutting that in half still leaves a whopping 300 billion which is STILL more than every other country's military budget on Earth put together. Besides, you can use 100 billion of that to create more jobs to replace the old ones lost. You're still looking at a flat 200 billion cutting down the debt per year.[/QUOTE]
You can't just create jobs to replace defense industry jobs, as I said those jobs are high paying and so highly specialized that they can only be in the defense industry. Still, you can cut 200 billion by ending the wars, something Obama is in the process of doing. Not only that, but the military has pledged to cut 70 billion of alleged waste from itself because Congress won't. I can see all that happening over the next 10 years at most.
[editline]14th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;30447676]actually cutting the current defense budget in half to pay for the deficit would take 40 years[/QUOTE]
Which means the cuts have to be across the board including welfare.
[editline]14th June 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=ThePutty;30447536]I know it's not as simple as cutting the budget in half but jesus, if you want to budget cut something, cut the military budget, not the schools, or the police, or health care, just cut the military[/QUOTE]
Schools, police, and a lot of health care are controlled and funded by state governments. They cut their budgets, not the federal, the federal can't do anything about it as far as I can tell.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
