More Than Half The Budget....

MellowFarmer

MellowFarmer

Well-Known Member
I am seeing your "what is spent on defense is spent on the nation" and raising with "how come so called world welfare cannot be labeled defense spending?"

If it is all For the Nation then it is all included in the value or price or budget?
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I will have to default to general principles and polish a platitude: "one can never eliminate the poor".

Frankly, I'd like to see some of the gross inequalities in this nation attacked before we seriously assail world poverty. The poor in other countries are quite as human and deserving as we are, but our poor are our immediate problem. i find it instructive that no society since records began to be kept 4500 years ago has figured out how to get rid of the basics, like hunger and homelessness.
So until someone suggests a way to me that does not involve ideas proven to be broken (Marxism leaps to mind, as does the Libertarian concept), I'll despair of our being able to generate social equality by brute force. cn
 
MellowFarmer

MellowFarmer

Well-Known Member
:eyesmoke: but I am serious stop looking at me like that! Damn I wish I could find this short cartoon clip about why we all can't get along... sorta in RIP too... Rodney King
 
MellowFarmer

MellowFarmer

Well-Known Member
I spulged at the co op last night on some very white Berry White

bongsmilie

where was I? yes, people in Fear the Eyes of Fear... watch Bill
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Please do not divert my question. I am not interested in arguing the morality of defense spending. I am interested in why defense spending is not counted as going toward the welfare of the nation. That is the point about which i am asking, and would like a direct answer. Imo, there is bad logic in that initial presumption. cn
Click to expand...
Yes we do need defense spending, but at times we have been VERY VERY wasteful when it comes to this. Have you ever seen some of the cost contractors charge the DOD for simple items. MIND-BLOWING. Let me also ask you a question. Do you apply the Iraq war as defense spending well accounted for ???
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I will have to default to general principles and polish a platitude: "one can never eliminate the poor".

Frankly, I'd like to see some of the gross inequalities in this nation attacked before we seriously assail world poverty. The poor in other countries are quite as human and deserving as we are, but our poor are our immediate problem. i find it instructive that no society since records began to be kept 4500 years ago has figured out how to get rid of the basics, like hunger and homelessness.
So until someone suggests a way to me that does not involve ideas proven to be broken (Marxism leaps to mind, as does the Libertarian concept), I'll despair of our being able to generate social equality by brute force. cn
Click to expand...
Constant progress is the highest aspiration imo. On a personal level, on an evolutionary level and on a social level. Currently, I would compare our civilization's growth upon the earth with that of mold on an orange. Perfection seems unachievable to me.
 
MellowFarmer

MellowFarmer

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Yes we do need defense spending, but at times we have been VERY VERY wastful when it comes to this. Have you ever seen some of the cost contractors charge the DOD for simple items. MIND-BLOWING. Let me also ask you a question. Do you apply the Iraq war as defense spending well accounted for ???
Click to expand...
One word: Haliburtan One documentary if that doesn't help: Iraq for Sale
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
londonfog said:
Yes we do need defense spending, but at times we have been VERY VERY wastful when it comes to this. Have you ever seen some of the cost contractors charge the DOD for simple items. MIND-BLOWING. Let me also ask you a question. Do you apply the Iraq war as defense spending well accounted for ???
Click to expand...
A good point but again I see you springboarding off my agenda to pursue yours. I'm not asking "do we need defense spending?"
I am not asking "is it efficient; is it just?"
I AM asking "by what accounting method is it not counted as going toward the national welfare?"

The questions being asked and argued on this thread are many; I would like to focus on this one, discharge it, and then move on. cn

(But to answer your final question: I approved of the 1990-91 Gulf war. I disapproved of its Iraq and Afghanistan follow-ons. The first was a true international effort with set objectives. The remainder were/are unilateral thrashing. No clear mission. A horrific waste of warriors on accursed occupation duty. My opinion.)
 
MellowFarmer

MellowFarmer

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
A good point but again I see you springboarding off my agenda to pursue yours. I'm not asking "do we need defense spending?"
I am not asking "is it efficient; is it just?"
I AM asking "by what accounting method is it not counted as going toward the national welfare?"

The questions being asked and argued on this thread are many; I would like to focus on this one, discharge it, and then move on. cn

(But to answer your final question: I approved of the 1990-91 Gulf war. I disapproved of its Iraq and Afghanistan follow-ons. The first was a true international effort with set objectives. The remainder were/are unilateral thrashing. No clear mission. A horrific waste of warriors on accursed occupation duty. My opinion.)
Click to expand...
First, I am so confused on how my Defense Spending Approach doesn't incorporate all spending towards defense and second I am getting a head ache remembring hashing out how why Iraq One was Bad and how we set up Saddam another one of many Dictators that we put on our Payroll then Fuck over, not that he was a Good Guy none of them are. I need a nap.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
A good point but again I see you springboarding off my agenda to pursue yours. I'm not asking "do we need defense spending?"
I am not asking "is it efficient; is it just?"
I AM asking "by what accounting method is it not counted as going toward the national welfare?"

The questions being asked and argued on this thread are many; I would like to focus on this one, discharge it, and then move on. cn

(But to answer your final question: I approved of the 1990-91 Gulf war. I disapproved of its Iraq and Afghanistan follow-ons. The first was a true international effort with set objectives. The remainder were/are unilateral thrashing. No clear mission. A horrific waste of warriors on accursed occupation duty. My opinion.)
Click to expand...
I think we are on the same note just different chords .... Could you simplify your question or I will have to buy a vowel. I'm really not understanding it. Are you asking is our National Defese part of our general welfare and is it a price tag on that. Really not understanding.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
londonfog said:
I think we are on the same note just different chords .... Could you simplify your question or I will have to buy a vowel. I'm really not understanding it. Are you asking is our National Defense part of our general welfare and is it a price tag on that. Really not understanding.
Click to expand...
I'm addressing the quote in the OP.
"If half the budget is military spending, then less than half of it goes towards whatever it's defending" is the premise.

To me, that implies that military spending is not counted as "toward whatever it's defending", which would be the nation and its citizens. To me, that seems like fractured logic, which I classify as in the same moral corner as a (more outright) lie. It strikes me as obvious that defense spending is spent in support of the nation and its citizens.

That has been my focus all along: not whether the statement is good or bad or moral or whatnot ... it seems internally inconsistent to me. I posit that until that inconsistency is fixed, there really is nothing to discuss. Closer to the point: I cannot recommend holding a sociopolitical opinion based on fractured logic. Our responsibility as engaged adults is ... other. cn
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I'm addressing the quote in the OP.
"If half the budget is military spending, then less than half of it goes towards whatever it's defending" is the premise.

To me, that implies that military spending is not counted as "toward whatever it's defending", which would be the nation and its citizens. To me, that seems like fractured logic, which I classify as in the same moral corner as a (more outright) lie. It strikes me as obvious that defense spending is spent in support of the nation and its citizens.

That has been my focus all along: not whether the statement is good or bad or moral or whatnot ... it seems internally inconsistent to me. I posit that until that inconsistency is fixed, there really is nothing to discuss. Closer to the point: I cannot recommend holding a sociopolitical opinion based on fractured logic. Our responsibility as engaged adults is ... other. cn
Click to expand...
ok......grabbing bonk and leaving room ................fuck forgot lighter:fire:.....now really leaving.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top