Donald Trump running for president

[youngandfree]

It seems to stem from this 2014 article he wrote: Invalid Link Removed

And now that he's an advisor to the current administration on the repeal/replace/overhaul/whatever they're trying to do, he was interviewed by Fox News. I can certainly see it playing out like you outlined, though it remains to be seen if it makes it that far. The carriers appear to just be exiting the ACA marketplace rather than imploding - but time will certainly tell.

The carriers are exiting Obamacare, which will cause Obamacare to implode, nit the insurance companies. The fewer choices inside the Obamacare exchange, the higher the premiums for those forced into buying an Obamacare plan. Remember millions of newly insured aren't insured in employer plans, because they didn't get insurance with their part time job. They were forced to buy it in the exchange, or enrolled into medicaid. When the house of cards collapses, as designed, single payer is the fix, according to the dems.

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

Democrats sponsoring single payer bill. Not surprising.

 

[Ari Gold]

Invalid Link Removed

Democrats sponsoring single payer bill. Nit surprising.

Doesn't surprise me that Bernie would be back at this at all. For me (again, I'm looking at this as a self employed person), this still doesn't even come close to making sense - and may even be worse than the ACA is for me. A lot of people don't understand how Medicare is funded. It's the FICA deduction on your paycheck. You pay 1.45% of your salary into it and your employer pays the other 1.45% of your salary into it. It's us paying for the people who currently draw Medicare benefits, just like those people drawing it now paid into it when they were in the workforce. As a self employed person - IF they followed the same percentages - that would equate to me paying an additional 3% tax on my wages, and still only have 80% of my health care needs covered, with a 20% coinsurance due on every doctor visit, prescription, etc - plus the dreaded "donut hole" in coverage for people that actually use it. Not to mention the $150/month or so that Medicare recipients have taken out of their social security check for Part B. Presumably this would be the same under single payer, meaning my wife and I would have to pay $300 a month into it (and presumably even more if you count my 2 kids) plus the 3% tax. IF the same percentages were in play, it might ALMOST be somewhat feasible. But in reality, I think the tax percentage would need to be much, much higher since a vastly larger amount of people would be drawing on it. Under current Medicare taxes, we have a majority of the workforce paying into the system that a minority of the population (those over 65) actually uses. Under a single payer system, we have everyone under 65 paying into it, but also everyone under 65 receiving benefits from it. I'm no expert in the field, but I just can't see that math working out.

 

[Ari Gold]

AND you're also assuming that all of your doctors would stay in network for this type of insurance (unless the government forced them to). I have a few very good friends that are surgeons, etc. who tell me that if they had to live on just what Medicare pays them for procedures that they would be out of business very quickly.

 

[thebigt]

an idea I have been thinking about is a floating pay rate for medical services based on ability to pay...as long as you have totally free medical care there will be abuses---a co-payment even if it is a small amount would discourage many from needless trips to the doctor---when I was a kid people went to doctor's, emergency rooms far less than today!!!

I truly believe there needs to be personal accountability of some kind!!!

 

[youngandfree]

AND you're also assuming that all of your doctors would stay in network for this type of insurance (unless the government forced them to). I have a few very good friends that are surgeons, etc. who tell me that if they had to live on just what Medicare pays them for procedures that they would be out of business very quickly.

My father in law was losing money being in private practice at the end of his career because all his patients were old and on Medicare.

One in 5 doctors quit accepting new Medicare patients according to 2015 study.
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Ari Gold]

My father in law was losing money being in private practice at the end of his career because all his patients were old and on Medicare.

One in 5 doctors quite accepting new Medicare patients according to 2015 study.
Invalid Link Removed

This coincides with what my friend told me. His practice only continues accepting new patients because it is a large practice and they all have physicians assistants. Smaller practices and standalone docs simply cannot afford to stay open on Medicare approved payments. He gave one example of a particular minor surgery he does in older patients. For roughly 4-5 hours of his time (including pre op, op and post op visits), Medicare pays him roughly $180. Once you calculate the costs associated (malpractice insurance, office rent, supplies, surgical center fees etc.) it's hardly worth the time.

 

[thebigt]

as a veteran I am happy with the improvements trump is making!!!


the VA really suffered under Obama, imo!!!

 

[ax1]

This coincides with what my friend told me. His practice only continues accepting new patients because it is a large practice and they all have physicians assistants. Smaller practices and standalone docs simply cannot afford to stay open on Medicare approved payments. He gave one example of a particular minor surgery he does in older patients. For roughly 4-5 hours of his time (including pre op, op and post op visits), Medicare pays him roughly $180. Once you calculate the costs associated (malpractice insurance, office rent, supplies, surgical center fees etc.) it's hardly worth the time.

It's time to stop letting our money go to big government beuracrats and pay the doctors only directly. I wanna pay for medical care not some government facility managing things. It's time to stop letting government tell us how much of the fruits of our labor we can keep and how to spend our own money at gunpoint. Abolish the 16th Amendment, doctors keep their earning to make a better living and people will have more money in their pockets to pay for things. Income tax is an immoral concept.

I do think government can play a regulatory role and put a cap on malpractice suits as they can be ridiculous at times and some oversight on insurance companies.

 

[thebigt]

It's time to stop letting our money go to big government beuracrats and pay the doctors only directly. I wanna pay for medical care not some government facility managing things. It's time to stop letting government tell us how much of the fruits of our labor we can keep and how to spend our own money at gunpoint. Abolish the 16th Amendment, doctors keep their earning to make a better living and people will have more money in their pockets to pay for things. Income tax is an immoral concept.

I do think government can play a regulatory role and put a cap on malpractice suits as they can be ridiculous at times and some oversight on insurance companies.

a cap on malpractice suits is long overdue....but negligence by doctors should not go unpunished, suspension of licenses being easier to get would go a long way, imo.

 

[Jiigzz]

It's time to stop letting our money go to big government beuracrats and pay the doctors only directly. I wanna pay for medical care not some government facility managing things. It's time to stop letting government tell us how much of the fruits of our labor we can keep and how to spend our own money at gunpoint. Abolish the 16th Amendment, doctors keep their earning to make a better living and people will have more money in their pockets to pay for things. Income tax is an immoral concept.

I do think government can play a regulatory role and put a cap on malpractice suits as they can be ridiculous at times and some oversight on insurance companies.

Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport, emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. That's even neglecting military, and other govt run agencies. Your tax dollars helped pay for a multi trillion dollar networking cables that run across the ocean sea bed.

What's your solution?

Also, do you know how much a specialised surgeon costs? Good luck anyone except the top 1%ers affording them. Look at the costs for a double, triple or quadruple bypass

 

[Misfit28]

Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport, emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. That's even neglecting military, and other govt run agencies.

What's your solution?

Privatization of course

 

[youngandfree]

Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. That's even neglecting military, and other govt run agencies. Your tax dollars helped pay for a multi trillion dollar networking cables that run across the ocean sea bed.

What's your solution?

Also, do you know how much a specialised surgeon costs? Good luck anyone except the top 1%ers affording them. Look at the costs for a double, triple or quadruple bypass

Many of those things come from private companies.

 

[Jiigzz]

Privatization of course

Haha, yeah I can see how people would pay the police out of their own back pocket. Would you tip them? Or pay them to stop a burglary?

Who would pay for traffic lights?

privatization would work.. until a non US company bought it out and moved all profits off shore.

 

[Jiigzz]

Many of those things come from private companies.

Who are contracted by whom?

 

[ax1]

Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport, emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. That's even neglecting military, and other govt run agencies. Your tax dollars helped pay for a multi trillion dollar networking cables that run across the ocean sea bed.

What's your solution?

Also, do you know how much a specialised surgeon costs? Good luck anyone except the top 1%ers affording them. Look at the costs for a double, triple or quadruple bypass

There is property and sales tax to cover that...private companies can build infrastruction and charge a toll just like they did for the NYC Subway system for example.

Community college???? lol why should people pay something they may not use? Forget it.

I would abolish the majority of government agencies to a core minimum, get rid of the CIA, FBI, DoE, Homeland Unsecurity, etc......

Military will cost a fraction of the 600 billion I would end the overseas empire and all the wars and failed interventionist policies once and for all.

There are alot of idea's and am a fan of the School of Austrian economics CJNator as you already know which would be a place to study to see how this can all work.

In regards to surgeons, thats what you buy insurance for in case something bad happens. Costs are high parlty due to government interference, intervention, immoral income taxes and fees, etc.....malpractice of course which I mentioned before.

Gotta go to bed sorry if this post is short just got home from a trip but remember, I did said no income tax, not no tax at all.

 

[ax1]

Many of those things come from private companies.

Word, have competition just like the space program and hyperloop and companies can start getting very innovative.

Governments can play some regulatory role at minimum, Im a fan of intellectual property (stealing just kills innovation) and I can see how monopolies can harm things Id have to look more into that.

 

[Misfit28]

There is property and sales tax to cover that...private companies can build infrastruction and charge a toll just like they did for the NYC Subway system for example.

Community college???? lol why should people pay something they may not use? Forget it.

I would abolish the majority of government agencies to a core minimum, get rid of the CIA, FBI, DoE, Homeland Unsecurity, etc......

Military will cost a fraction of the 600 billion I would end the overseas empire and all the wars and failed interventionist policies once and for all.

There are alot of idea's and am a fan of the School of Austrian economics as you already know which would be a place to study to see how this can all work.

In regards to surgeons, thats what you buy insurance for in case something bad happens. Costs are high party due to government interference, intervention, immoral income taxes and fees, etc.....malpractice of course which I mentioned before.

Gotta go to bed sorry if this post is short just got home from a trip but remember, I did said no income tax, not no tax at all.

I still have to look into Austrian Economics.

 

[ax1]

I still have to look into Austrian Economics.

Just keep in mind I'm not claiming it's perfect lol

I look for the system that both can prosper for most and respect human freedoms.

 

[Jiigzz]

There is property and sales tax to cover that...private companies can build infrastruction and charge a toll just like they did for the NYC Subway system for example.

Community college???? lol why should people pay something they may not use? Forget it.

I would abolish the majority of government agencies to a core minimum, get rid of the CIA, FBI, DoE, Homeland Unsecurity, etc......

Military will cost a fraction of the 600 billion I would end the overseas empire and all the wars and failed interventionist policies once and for all.

There are alot of idea's and am a fan of the School of Austrian economics CJNator as you already know which would be a place to study to see how this can all work.

In regards to surgeons, thats what you buy insurance for in case something bad happens. Costs are high parlty due to government interference, intervention, immoral income taxes and fees, etc.....malpractice of course which I mentioned before.

Gotta go to bed sorry if this post is short just got home from a trip but remember, I did said no income tax, not no tax at all.

I getcha now. Interesting concept for sure.

 

[youngandfree]

Who are contracted by whom?

Our power, gas company, internet, public transportation-city buses, are all private companies in my city. The water service is a Water Authority that provides municipal water to the city and surrounding counties, but is payed by the residents directly on a monthly bill. It's not payed for or provided with tax money.

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

 

[youngandfree]

Invalid Link Removed

Heard this author on the radio this morning. The Fed needs to be abolished.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernanke_doctrine

The quantitative easing plans were made long before they implemented them.

 

[Ari Gold]

Invalid Link Removed

Heard this author on the radio this morning. The Fed needs to be abolished.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernanke_doctrine

The quantitative easing plans were made long before they implemented them.

Never heard of that author, but I'm confused what you mean by the Bernanke doctrine. The premise of a government having a means of controlling both inflation and deflation is not anything terribly alarming.

 

[Misfit28]

Meanwhile, Trump says he thought the job would be easier LOL:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Misfit28]

Our power, gas company, internet, public transportation-city buses, are all private companies in my city. The water service is a Water Authority that provides municipal water to the city and surrounding counties, but is payed by the residents directly on a monthly bill. It's not payed for or provided with tax money.

So there is no subsidization whatsoever? Then why is your state in a deficit?

 

[Misfit28]

Invalid Link Removed

Heard this author on the radio this morning. The Fed needs to be abolished.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernanke_doctrine

The quantitative easing plans were made long before they implemented them.

Good luck with that. Trump is in bed with the big banks too.

 

[ax1]

Invalid Link Removed

Heard this author on the radio this morning. The Fed needs to be abolished.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernanke_doctrine

The quantitative easing plans were made long before they implemented them.

Thats Ron Paul's life work right there, the private Federal Reserve is criminal. You know how they came to power with the coup in 1913?

Did you know after years of fighting to audit the Fed finally in 2011 they did a partial audit and it revealed 16 trillion dollars in secret bailouts including overseas institutions and we will never know who they gave our money too because we (including our own government) are not allowed (even with the audit) to know?

Quantitive easy is such as scam, its a tax on the American people without calling it a tax devaluing our entire life savings and Obama says he did a nice job printing money out of thin air and handing it over to corrupt institutions....let me stop there before I get banned, lol

 

[ax1]

Good luck with that. Trump is in bed with the big banks too.

I dont believe Dump will support the audit the Fed bill, if he doesnt even want to audit the private un-Federal reserve you know who's side he is on.

 

[youngandfree]

Never heard of that author, but I'm confused what you mean by the Bernanke doctrine. The premise of a government having a means of controlling both inflation and deflation is not anything terribly alarming.

Government controlling inflation is one thing. The Federal Reserve isn't part of the government. They basically have no overseers in the government. That's why Ron and Rand Paul have been begging to pass a law requiring the federal reserve to be audited.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[youngandfree]

So there is no subsidization whatsoever? Then why is your state in a deficit?

Not in my hometown. I pay money to Roanoke Gas, American Electric Power, Cox Communications. Our public buses are run by the city, not the state.

Why is there a deficit, not sure. Probably the governor spending too much extra money trying to get felons the right to vote before the election, and having to spend money in court because of it.

 

[ax1]

Never heard of that author, but I'm confused what you mean by the Bernanke doctrine. The premise of a government having a means of controlling both inflation and deflation is not anything terribly alarming.

Its an un-auditable private bank, they took power in 1913 when everybody was on vacation and only a few showed up to pass and hand them power.

Nobody knows what they are doing and we are not allowed to know, not even our government.

Central banking was one of the big things our funding fathers warned about.

 

[ax1]

Never heard of that author, but I'm confused what you mean by the Bernanke doctrine. The premise of a government having a means of controlling both inflation and deflation is not anything terribly alarming.

Its an un-auditable private bank, they took power in 1913 when everybody was on vacation and only a few showed up to pass and hand them power.

Nobody knows what they are doing and we are not allowed to know, not even our government.

Central banking was one of the big things our funding fathers warned about.

 

[ax1]

Invalid Link Removed

Written by Invalid Link Removed
Sunday November 27, 2016


Invalid Link Removed

Former Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher recently gave a speech identifying the Federal Reserve’s easy money/low interest rate policies as a source of the public anger that propelled Donald Trump into the White House. Mr. Fisher is certainly correct that the Fed’s policies have “skewered” the middle class. However, the problem is not specific Fed policies, but the very system of fiat currency managed by a secretive central bank.

Federal Reserve-generated increases in money supply cause economic inequality. This is because, when the Fed acts to increase the money supply, well-to-do investors and other crony capitalists are the first recipients of the new money. These economic elites enjoy an increase in purchasing power before the Fed’s inflationary policies lead to mass price increases. This gives them a boost in their standard of living.

By the time the increased money supply trickles down to middle- and working-class Americans, the economy is already beset by inflation. So most average Americans see their standard of living decline as a result of Fed-engendered money supply increases.

Some Fed defenders claim that inflation doesn’t negatively affect anyone’s standard of living because price increases are matched by wage increases. This claim ignores the fact that the effects of the Fed’s actions depend on how individuals react to the Fed’s actions.

Historically, an increase in money supply does not just cause a general rise in prices. It also causes money to flow into specific sectors, creating a bubble that provides investors and workers in those areas a (temporary) increase in their incomes. Meanwhile, workers and investors in sectors not affected by the Fed-generated boom will still see a decline in their purchasing power and thus their standard of living.

Adoption of a “rules-based” monetary policy will not eliminate the problem of Fed-created bubbles, booms, and busts, since Congress cannot set a rule dictating how individuals react to Fed policies. The only way to eliminate the boom-and-bust cycle is to remove the Fed’s power to increase the money supply and manipulate interest rates.

Because the Fed’s actions distort the view of economic conditions among investors, businesses, and workers, the booms created by the Fed are unsustainable. Eventually reality sets in, the bubble bursts, and the economy falls into recession.

When the crash occurs the best thing for Congress and the Fed to do is allow the recession to run its course. Recessions are the economy’s way of cleaning out the Fed-created distortions. Of course, Congress and the Fed refuse to do that. Instead, they begin the whole business cycle over again with another round of money creation, increased stimulus spending, and corporate bailouts.

Some progressive economists acknowledge how the Fed causes economic inequality and harms average Americans. These progressives support perpetual low interest rates and money creation. These so-called working class champions ignore how the very act of money creation causes economic inequality. Longer periods of easy money also mean longer, and more painful, recessions.

President-elect Donald Trump has acknowledged that, while his business benefits from lower interest rates, the Fed’s policies hurt most Americans. During the campaign, Mr. Trump also promised to make audit the fed part of his first 100 days agenda. Unfortunately, since the election, President-elect Trump has not made any statements regarding monetary policy or the audit the fed legislation. Those of us who understand that changing monetary policy is the key to making America great again must redouble our efforts to convince Congress and the new president to audit, then end, the Federal Reserve.

Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Misfit28]

Not in my hometown. I pay money to Roanoke Gas, American Electric Power, Cox Communications. Our public buses are run by the city, not the state.

Why is there a deficit, not sure. Probably the governor spending too much extra money trying to get felons the right to vote before the election, and having to spend money in court because of it.

Interesting that your bus system says this on their homepage in the About section:

"Funding sources include operating and capital grants from federal, state, and local agencies including the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, and the City of Roanoke. Additional sources of funding include fare box revenues, advertising revenues, and the sale of passes."

They may contract the services through private companies, but they seem to derive funding from local, state and federal dollars.

 

[Misfit28]

Our power, gas company, internet, public transportation-city buses, are all private companies in my city. The water service is a Water Authority that provides municipal water to the city and surrounding counties, but is payed by the residents directly on a monthly bill. It's not payed for or provided with tax money.

Your water authority received over $600,000 dollars last year from local government subsidies. That's from their annual report.

 

[youngandfree]

Your water authority received over $600,000 dollars last year from local government subsidies. That's from their annual report.

I said the bus company was owned by the city and the water authority was conglomerate of local city and counties.

 

[Misfit28]

I said the bus company was owned by the city and the water authority was conglomerate of local city and counties.

You also said there was no subsidization, which is obviously not correct.

 

[youngandfree]

You also said there was no subsidization, which is obviously not correct.

For the items I bolded when I quoted his post a couple pages back. I specifically cited 3 utilities, gas, power, and internet that were private. I was mistaken on the bus service and water. Here's your cookie.

 

[Misfit28]

I'm not looking for a cookie, just pointing out how much you said you liked those services.

Do you like them less now that you know that they are subsidized by governmental entities?

 

[Ari Gold]

Invalid Link Removed

 

[youngandfree]

I'm not looking for a cookie, just pointing out how much you said you liked those services.

Do you like them less now that you know that they are subsidized by governmental entities?

It doesn't matter to me. Jiggywithit mentioned that all utilities and services were provided by the government, I was merely pointing out that some arent.

"Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport, emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. "

 

[thebigt]

Not in my hometown. I pay money to Roanoke Gas, American Electric Power, Cox Communications. Our public buses are run by the city, not the state.

Why is there a deficit, not sure. Probably the governor spending too much extra money trying to get felons the right to vote before the election, and having to spend money in court because of it.

duke, vectren, spectrum, and American water....but the kicker is that the city control sewage fees, and everytime they need funding for stupid projects they hike the sewer bill.

they passed a law several years ago that capped property taxes, so if they need money sewer bills go up...the amount of my sewer bill is nearly triple that of my water bill!!!

 

[Jiigzz]

It doesn't matter to me. Jiggywithit mentioned that all utilities and services were provided by the government, I was merely pointing out that some arent.

"Serious question: where will money for government run things come from, if not through tax? Roading, community colleges, parks, infrastructure (includes power cabling, traffic systems etc), public transport, emergency services, utility services (no tax means you will start paying much more for basic things like power, water, internet etc), and so on. "

You misunderstand. A lot of utilities were sold by govt for privatization, but many are still run through govt run spaces - I.e. power lines, or piping.

Watch if everything goes private and the costs skyrocket for basic systems. Also, without military spending or other things like that, invention goes down.

All throughout history the biggest technological breakthroughs have been powered by military spending and the need to stay one above everyone else. AX thinks that cutting military spending would do good, but ti would slam the US economy (a large portion of your manufacturing capabilities and out sourcing is military things) and not just that, hundreds of thousands of jobs rel on military.

Getting rid of it will create a host of issues both for your national security, economic growth and employment. Couple that with reduced tax and less people paying it due to plants being closed down, people being made redundant etc and you have just sunk the HMS USA

In case you're interested, the Internet is a direct result of military spending, as are Unix systems, GPS, satellites, engineering, nuclear power, etc.

Then if you cut spending for education, you now not only have a poor country, but a dumb one as well. The reason education is govt. funded is because education is expensive, so usually only well off families can afford to send their kids their. The idea is to create a system where all people are afforded equal opportunity to engage in higher learning.

 

[ax1]

You misunderstand. A lot of utilities were sold by govt for privatization, but many are still run through govt run spaces - I.e. power lines, or piping.

Watch if everything goes private and the costs skyrocket for basic systems. Also, without military spending or other things like that, invention goes down.

Open up for competition, costs will go down. You should see the war that happened this past 6 months between 4 cell companies here in the USA.

All throughout history the biggest technological breakthroughs have been powered by military spending and the need to stay one above everyone else. AX thinks that cutting military spending would do good, but ti would slam the US economy (a large portion of your manufacturing capabilities and out sourcing is military things) and not just that, hundreds of thousands of jobs rel on military.

Getting rid of it will create a host of issues both for your national security, economic growth and employment. Couple that with reduced tax and less people paying it due to plants being closed down, people being made redundant etc and you have just sunk the HMS USA

So just so people can have jobs we should continue the empire, continue all the wars slaughter millions of people?

You know what will crush the economy, a 20 trillion dollar deficit, the Federal Reserve pumping money out of thin air devaluing every-bodies life savings and purchasing power to float the artificial bubble back up and the continuation of a 600 billion dollar a year war machine budget.

But really, you worry to much there is a solution to all these problems, this catastrophic rhetoric comes from the very people that got us into all these problems and trying to put fear in peoples hearts so they can continue to keep the ship afloat.

Talking about national security? Lets keep blowing people up people, surviving family members will thank the US for liberating them.

 

[Jiigzz]

Open up for competition, costs will go down. You should see the war that happened this past 6 months between 4 cell companies here in the USA.



So just so people can have jobs we should continue the empire, continue all the wars slaughter millions of people?

You know what will crush the economy, a 20 trillion dollar deficit, the Federal Reserve pumping money out of thin air devaluing every-bodies life savings and purchasing power to float the artificial bubble back up and the continuation of a 600 billion dollar a year war machine budget.

But really, you worry to much there is a solution to all these problems, this catastrophic rhetoric comes from the very people that got us into all these problems and trying to put fear in peoples hearts so they can continue to keep the ship afloat.

Talking about national security? Lets keep blowing people up people, surviving family members will thank the US for liberating them.

You can spend money on military without needing to actually deploy said military. Your issue is what the military is doing (and I agree, its not good) but it's a good thing you have one.

I do think you I overspend on it. You have a higher combined total than the next top 7 countries. But you are a militaristic nation, and one that saw rapid growth during periods of war so I dont see that changing.

I agree with you that all these wars are tiresome, endless and devastating. But cutting them now would sink the US because it is your backbone. Any change would need to be gradual.

You can have a military without war

 

[thebigt]

You can spend money on military without needing to actually deploy said military. Your issue is what the military is doing (and I agree, its not good) but it's a good thing you have one.

I do think you I overspend on it. You have a higher combined total than the next top 7 countries. But you are a militaristic nation, and one that saw rapid growth during periods of war so I dont see that changing.

I agree with you that all these wars are tiresome, endless and devastating. But cutting them now would sink the US because it is your backbone. Any change would need to be gradual.

You can have a military without war

peace thru strength???

walk softly and carry a big stick???

 

[ax1]

You can spend money on military without needing to actually deploy said military. Your issue is what the military is doing (and I agree, its not good) but it's a good thing you have one.

I do think you I overspend on it. You have a higher combined total than the next top 7 countries. But you are a militaristic nation, and one that saw rapid growth during periods of war so I dont see that changing.

I agree with you that all these wars are tiresome, endless and devastating. But cutting them now would sink the US because it is your backbone. Any change would need to be gradual.

You can have a military without war

Im not interested in desolving our military, dont think that. I want my country to be strong.

The only reason the military's budget is so high is due to the influence of the military industrial complex who is all for wars at any means to keep they income coming. I see it changing if people stop voting for big government Republicrats and Demicans who are mostly all war mongers and lobbied by military contractors for the big budgets.

This country is dead broke, if we dont significantly cut the military which accounts for 54% of our entire budget we wont have an America anymore so it will change when the money isnt there anymore. We cant even take care of our own people.

 

[Jiigzz]

Im not interested in desolving our military, dont think that. I want my country to be strong.

The only reason the military's budget is so high is due to the influence of the military industrial complex who is all for wars at any means to keep they income coming. I see it changing if people stop voting for big government Republicrats and Demicans who are mostly all war mongers and lobbied by military contractors for the big budgets.

This country is dead broke, if we dont significantly cut the military which accounts for 54% of our entire budget we wont have an America anymore so it will change when the money isnt there anymore. We cant even take care of our own people.

Yeah, I agree!

The issue is what the military is doing, not that you have one IMO.

 

[thebigt]

Im not interested in desolving our military, dont think that. I want my country to be strong.

The only reason the military's budget is so high is due to the influence of the military industrial complex who is all for wars at any means to keep they income coming. I see it changing if people stop voting for big government Republicrats and Demicans who are mostly all war mongers and lobbied by military contractors for the big budgets.

This country is dead broke, if we dont significantly cut the military which accounts for 54% of our entire budget we wont have an America anymore so it will change when the money isnt there anymore. We cant even take care of our own people.

Obama was the first president to spend more on welfare than defense...and the gdp is hovering around 2%