It is to laugh.

"Realist" links to an opinion piece in a Chinese periodical (Xinhuanet) which declares the US is spending too much on defense.

Now, I wonder why the Chinese would be interested in US cutting our defense budget?

Focus on the important stuff, Clavos. Perot is only telling you up front what your government will do to you behind your back - and that big sucking sound - it took a while to hear, but even in the mountains of Samaria, I can hear it.

And it's not Debbie doing Dallas, either.

Clav, this I guess is where we diverge back to our normal positions. I suppose the Chinese periodical is not the best support Realist could have mustered, however, I do support the point of his post.

You are one of the most vocal regarding government waste and ineptitude. Do you believe that the amount of military expenditures by the U.S. are justified, or in line with the return on the dollar? Isn't it likely that the American people suffer more "fleecing" from mis-spent military money than anywhere else in the budget - even including wasted dollars in entitlement programs, disaster relief, etc.?

Actually, when it comes to the Chinese, they are currently far more intent upon world domination through commerce than through military might.

B-tone

Ruvy and B-tone,

I was not addressing the central point of "Realist's" article.

I was only pointing out that the Chinese, if they had their druthers, would be delighted for the US to dismantle its military establishment entirely, as would Iran, N. Korea, etc.

Therefore, to me, the opinion regarding our defense expenditures expressed by any nation inimical to US is of no consequence whatever; I find it laughable that "Realist" would use the opinion of thew Chinese to buttress his argument.

That was the only point I was making.

We spend way too much money on bad defense projects, thus depriving good projects of funds. Unfortunately, defense contracts have turned into a sort of congressional welfare. Welfare which goes primarily into the congressmens pockets and their business constituents rather than the general citizen, worker and consumer.

If Perot wants to save money he should attend to the excesses of the Defense Budget. That and the tax code.

Looting Social Security and Medicare will be a one-time boost for Wall Street but will quickly disappear under a wave of rising prices manipulated by The Monopolies. The binge will be followed by the hangover of widespread economic distress after the Hedge Fund managers have taken their massive profits and disappeared with their well-laundered proceeds.

Oh yeah, a lot of people will be ruined, but then, who cares about them?

One of Bush/Cheney/Rove's top priorities(indeed, a neocon goal since Bush I) has been to spend all the money they could on things they like, so that they can one day soon drastically cut or eliminate those programs they have no use for, in the only viable way;they just can't be funded any more.

They like unlimited defense spending, faith-based initiatives, and corporate welfare, but not so much protecting the defenseless, funding unbiased science, or aiding the working class. (And before anyone tells me how wrong I am, you first need to defend the record-breaking national debt, Bush's love affair with deficits, the unimagineable waste in Iraq, and the deline of the dollar in the world.)

Their blatant plan to spend us into neocon heaven even got Perot fired up again.

I have to say it again, without the wars, Bush would be running a surplus, so he's not necessarily spending us into oblivion in any way other than on a war which he believes to be a matter of survival for the nation.

Oh, and as for 'aiding the working class', the best way to do that is to make sure they have jobs, an area in which Bush has done relatively well.

Dave

Dave, plant a nice leafy shade tree over your aluminum batty-brat cave! The sun is baking your brain to the point you wouldn't know your own seared visage in a mirror, much less recognize the economic calamity your Chimpion has caused!

I know you don't want to see this, but others might.

Now go back to sleep.

without the wars, Bush would be running a surplus....

Dave, If it were not for his wasteful little wars that are flushing the lot of you down History's toilet, Bush wouldn't even be president! The man is a certifiable idiot, a coward, a draft dodger, a bad manager who needed Daddy's rich Arab friends to bail him out of his bad business decisions, and a wannabe tyrant to boot.

He's needed these little wars to keep him in office when he richly deserved to be tossed out for sheer incompetence. And if you happen to know the SOB personally, tell him all this from me. He deserves to hear it - again.

Took a look at your patchwork nation index, Realist. I generally have little use for the Christian Science Monitor - in addition to being the mouthpiece for a dangerous practice of ignoring medicine, they are anti-Jewish and anti-Israel.

But in this instance, they are not talking about Jews or Israel, and in looking at their map - particularly that of Minnesota, where I hailed from - I see that only the Twin Cities metro area fares well in the present economy. An island of prosperity in a state facing increasing economic distress.

The service sector - where Burger King managers generally find themselves - seems to be suffering badly. The owner of the store I worked in probably has sold out to the Pakistani fellow with the biggest franchise in the area, and my former colleagues are being forced to produce profits or leave - bad economy or no bad economy. That's how th big guys get to afford the gated estates with the electrified fences - by not giving a damn for anything but the bottom line and the quarterly numbers.

Dave, that surplus would've been built on the one that Clinton started originally. The "right" just can't let it go that Clinton was found guilty of only one thing-lying about cheating on his wife... something every redblooded redneck in American would've done in the same situation.

Everything else is just hearsay. And he was found innocent of all charges by a REPUBLICAN congress, that had tried every dirty and twisted trick to get him out of office AND FAILED.

Give the man credit where credit is due.

Bush would've killed this economy by handing out huge contracts to build aircraft carriers in his father's name, airports in Reagan's name, hundreds if not thousands of multi-billion dollar bombers and fighter jets, and god knows what else.

I wonder where we would be if Ross had won those elections. (Yeah, I voted for him both times.) There's something to be said for being fiscally responsible. Governments aren't always concerned with keeping the costs down. They can always "manufacture" some money from somewhere else.

Look at our state, Michigan. The government doesn't have any money. Instead of cutting costs and being efficient, they tax and spend some more.

I agree that there are some contractors getting paid more for their items than you can get elsewhere. That's the nature of the beast, and it doesn't just happen at the Department of Defense. When I worked at the Post Office, I saw the same wasteful stupidity.

It has to start somewhere, but the problem is so massive, I'm not sure where it should start.

From the charts it appears that defense spending is and has been decreasing with respect to GDP. I'm sure there's pork to be found there but it is not the major problem. The problem is clearly social security. Now we have Obama pledging he will openly and willingly increase the SS tax on those that WILL RECEIVE NO FURTHER BENEFIT FROM IT. Where I come from that's called charity. In fact that tax will eat into available charitable donations. SS needs to be severely curtailed now and hopefully eliminated some day soon.

If we really want fiscal responsibility (I mean really, really want it, we should elect someone with a plan to eliminate Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.

The entitlements are what will ultimately kill this economy, far more than the Iraq war or any other war we might get involved in, for as the boomers age, entitlement payments are going to swell to levels no economy, not even the US's, can sustain.

But, of course, no one wants their own ox gored, so that ain't gonna happen.

By the time my nephew, who turned 14 two days ago, is middle aged, he'll be paying, as some of my cousins in Sweden already are, 90% of his income in taxes (not a typo), and the economy, what's left of it, will still be dying.

How on Earth are your cousins contriving to pay that much in income taxes, Clav?? I had a quick poke around online and as far as I can tell taxation in Sweden, even for top earners, is nothing like that high.

What I'm told, Doc, is that taxation in Sweden is not just on income, but on net worth as well.

The family I'm speaking of own a very large estate (hundreds of acres; I don't know how many) on the Baltic (therefore waterfront), most of which they lease to a paper company which grows trees on the farm land. That is their primary source of income.

My wife and I visited them a few years back, and my cousin explained that he's taxed not only on the above income, but also on the value of the property. The government sends an appraiser around every year. On his property he has his own home, built in the early nineteenth century, and appropriately sized for the estate; most of it closed because they can't afford the help necessary to keep all of it open. They also have the ruins of a medeival castle on the property, which is appraised for its historical value, though it's not restored nor exhibited, and even a small church, still in use by the local village.

On a side note: The castle ruins included some period statuary in relatively good condition. Years ago, the state came and seized (without recompense) the statues under the guise of their being historical artifacts "belonging to and to be enjoyed by, all the people." They were taken to the Museum of National Antiquities in Stockholm and put in storage in the basement, where they have lain ever since, unseen by anyone.

My cousin is property rich, but cash poor, and all those taxes amount to 90% of his income.

Tax rates in Sweden are so onerous that the now-defunct Swedish group, ABBA, long ago moved to the UK and began to try (unsuccessfully, obviously) to shelter their substantial income from the Swedish government.

Here, I believe, is a new approach to taxation. In addition to being a wonderful new source of Government revenues, it would doubtless curb carbon dioxide emissions and therefore limit man-made global warming. It is very simple, to boot:

We all breathe air, and what we inhale has less carbon dioxide than what we exhale. SO, let's impose a breathing tax. Devices could easily be fitted to each of us to measure and record our carbon dioxide emissions and transmit the quantities to the IRS, so that we could be taxed on them. Perhaps similar devices could be attached to cows and other domestic animals, although there might be opposition from PETA.

Although perhaps a hot air meter could also be devised, that would never pass the Congress and so is not worth even considering.

Dan

Dan, that is a fantastic idea and I propose should be thrown in with the other carbon tax legislation comming up. What better way to generate government income than to tax the gas we exhale. This will also go a long way to curb those who are breathing more than their fair share.

Based on the title of this piece, then, Realist is going to get taxed up the yin-yang!

Solution to overbloated military budget:

Scrap the DoD ENTIRELY. If we must have a standing army/navy, them let them only be based in the US. That would convince me that they are serving their country instead of the higher ups in government's business interests. How about a Department of Peace, whose primary mission is to keep and promote Peace, instead of war, destruction and needless violence?

Citizens everywhere and always complain about taxes. It doesn't sound to me that Clavos' cousins are suffering.

I, too, have cousins in Sweden and while they say that the favorite sport of Swedes is to complain about taxes they wouldn't give up anything, least of all Housing, Health Care and Pensions.

Frankly, they are amazed that Americans pay anything in taxes given the poor services that the government provides to USA citizens.

"It doesn't sound to me that Clavos' cousins are suffering."

Never said they were, did I bliff?

"Frankly, they are amazed that Americans pay anything in taxes given the poor services that the government provides to USA citizens."

Couldn't agree more. Let's quit...

Hilarious link, Realist. "Hardship". Nothing like using the historical, established hardship index. Dark red means high hardship.

Lots of dark red on the map! Things must be hard!

I didn't say you did, clav.