Obama Lays-Out $1.5T in New Taxes

[mrplunkey]

I wish we could defeat more world superpowers by just spending money without firing a shot. Sounds like a helluva bargain

Hard to imagine how much money Reagan saved us over the long term. Probably at least a couple trillion.

 

[Mr. dB]

Hard to imagine how much money Reagan saved us over the long term. Probably at least a couple trillion.

How has the end of the Cold War resulted in any savings? Seems to me we've more than made up for it with spending on The War On Terror, especially the enormous black budget.

 

[redsamurai]

Hard to imagine how much money Reagan saved us over the long term. Probably at least a couple trillion.

First off, this is without a shadow of a doubt the stupidest thing I have ever heard from anyone about any subject. You couldn't be more dense if someone paid you. It's like you're trying to rewrite reality, it doesn't work, well at least not for you.

Second, this is the dumbest statement i've ever read from you....did I already mention that?

Third, what a retarded statement. The man who spent trillions of dollars to outspend a communist country that was destined to fail anyway, right? I mean we all know communism doesn't work right? So Reagan blew up our military spending for what? Ego in the end was all it was about. So no he did not save us trillions he is in part responsible for the world as it is today. How did arming the afghans work out for us susan? Did we get a good ROI there? <return on investment> for the idiots.

no we didn't by the way. And there are other reaganesque remnants that we have to deal with, like a bloated military industrial complex that is so rife corruption they make ACORN look like eagle scouts. Skeptical? Check out the flying humvee....
Pentagon Chooses Two Companies To Build Flying Humvee | Fox News

And right now they say they've only spent 40m on it, as if that's some pittance. But anyway, that's 40m given to someone to design it...basically make a motorized toy. And for a weapons system that will never see the light of day because it's a bad idea on so many levels you can't even begin to discuss without getting angry. Every soldier that's ever had to weld armor plates to a humvee will go AWOL before he gets in one of those things and goes on a patrol. One good strafe with an AK47 and that thing is comin down, end of the line for anybody inside. And why does shit like this get funded when there isn't a soul in washington that thinks a working model will ever see the light of day in the armed services..??? Cause it's a piece of Reagan trash designed to hand out american tax payer money to a defense contractor who's done their time in the lobbying wings. Somebody probably spent 10-20m in lobbying to get that contract and will spend maybe a 1m to make some mockup of the vehicle, it will be summarily rejected but the contractor will pocket somewhere around 30m. Thank you Ronald Reagan. Thank you for putting in place one of the biggest fleece operations in recorded human history. All the govt largesse you complain about plunky was absolutely put on steroids during Reagans tenure. Whether you acknowledge it or not anymore is irrelevant. Of course no president since Reagan has peeled back the size of govt cause, gasp, the aim/goal of both parties is to continuously increase the size of govt till one day we all wake up and feel something large and full in our ass that we can't extract.

 

[mrplunkey]

How has the end of the Cold War resulted in any savings? Seems to me we've more than made up for it with spending on The War On Terror, especially the enormous black budget.

The Cold War and the War on Terror are separate military actions. Or are you suggesting we would have been in the war on terror even if we hadn't been attacked on our own soil?

 

[mrplunkey]

First off, this is without a shadow of a doubt the stupidest thing I have ever heard from anyone about any subject. You couldn't be more dense if someone paid you. It's like you're trying to rewrite reality, it doesn't work, well at least not for you.

Second, this is the dumbest statement i've ever read from you....did I already mention that?

Third, what a retarded statement. The man who spent trillions of dollars to outspend a communist country that was destined to fail anyway, right? I mean we all know communism doesn't work right? So Reagan blew up our military spending for what? Ego in the end was all it was about. So no he did not save us trillions he is in part responsible for the world as it is today. How did arming the afghans work out for us susan? Did we get a good ROI there? <return on investment> for the idiots.

no we didn't by the way. And there are other reaganesque remnants that we have to deal with, like a bloated military industrial complex that is so rife corruption they make ACORN look like eagle scouts. Skeptical? Check out the flying humvee....
Pentagon Chooses Two Companies To Build Flying Humvee | Fox News

And right now they say they've only spent 40m on it, as if that's some pittance. But anyway, that's 40m given to someone to design it...basically make a motorized toy. And for a weapons system that will never see the light of day because it's a bad idea on so many levels you can't even begin to discuss without getting angry. Every soldier that's ever had to weld armor plates to a humvee will go AWOL before he gets in one of those things and goes on a patrol. One good strafe with an AK47 and that thing is comin down, end of the line for anybody inside. And why does shit like this get funded when there isn't a soul in washington that thinks a working model will ever see the light of day in the armed services..??? Cause it's a piece of Reagan trash designed to hand out american tax payer money to a defense contractor who's done their time in the lobbying wings. Somebody probably spent 10-20m in lobbying to get that contract and will spend maybe a 1m to make some mockup of the vehicle, it will be summarily rejected but the contractor will pocket somewhere around 30m. Thank you Ronald Reagan. Thank you for putting in place one of the biggest fleece operations in recorded human history. All the govt largesse you complain about plunky was absolutely put on steroids during Reagans tenure. Whether you acknowledge it or not anymore is irrelevant. Of course no president since Reagan has peeled back the size of govt cause, gasp, the aim/goal of both parties is to continuously increase the size of govt till one day we all wake up and feel something large and full in our ass that we can't extract.

That was an entertaining rant.

I give it three out of five stars.

 

[75th]

Hard to imagine how much money Reagan saved us over the long term. Probably at least a couple trillion.

Just so we're all clear, Reagan's only two options were:

1) Spend a shit load of money
2) War

Literally nothing else between the two? Ok.

 

[mrplunkey]

Just so we're all clear, Reagan's only two options were:

1) Spend a shit load of money
2) War

Literally nothing else between the two? Ok.

Naw, he had three real options:

1) Spend a lot of money, and hope the USSR gets too far behind and loses hope (as well as losing the ability to extend its sphere of influence). Expensive on the front end, but possibly less expensive in the long run.

2) Spend a moderate amount of money and exchange tit-for-tat advances in technology and posture. That's probably the longest-lasting solution, but it's also by far the most stable.

3) Spend little to no money. The USSR would have undoubtedly expanded its scope of influence, but in retrospect it's also highly likely they would have over-extended and bankrupted themselves.

Option 3 would have been the most clever, but at the time we just didn't know how fragile their grip actually was. I also wonder what would have happened if we hadn't fought them via the surrogate war in Afghanistan. What would the middle east have looked like today?

I'm guessing my views on the Cold War are a little slanted though, since I grew-up about 30 minutes from Oak Ridge National Laboratories. We had to be within the top 10-20 targets if a war ever did break out.

 

[Mr. dB]

The Cold War and the War on Terror are separate military actions. Or are you suggesting we would have been in the war on terror even if we hadn't been attacked on our own soil?

I'm suggesting that ending the Cold War left the field wide open for penny-ante operators to strike out at the big boys. This shit didn't happen when Mutual Assured Destruction was the order of the day, it kept the rest of the world in line.

What I'm saying is that if the Cold War were still going, the huge War on Terror budget would not exist.

 

[mrplunkey]

I'm suggesting that ending the Cold War left the field wide open for penny-ante operators to strike out at the big boys. This shit didn't happen when Mutual Assured Destruction was the order of the day, it kept the rest of the world in line.

What I'm saying is that if the Cold War were still going, the huge War on Terror budget would not exist.

So military spending in inevitable and inescapable? I guess cutting the defense budget is off the table.

I'm surprised you feel that way.

 

[redsamurai]

3) Spend little to no money. The USSR would have undoubtedly expanded its scope of influence, but in retrospect it's also highly likely they would have over-extended and bankrupted themselves.

Option 3 would have been the most clever, but at the time we just didn't know how fragile their grip actually was. I also wonder what would have happened if we hadn't fought them via the surrogate war in Afghanistan. What would the middle east have looked like today?

I'm guessing my views on the Cold War are a little slanted though, since I grew-up about 30 minutes from Oak Ridge National Laboratories. We had to be within the top 10-20 targets if a war ever did break out.

lol at plunky answering his own questions as if they're somehow some breath of fresh air that he just conjured up from his anus.