Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Internet Censorship.

Meh. I don't know about fixed.

By GDP we're 23rd in the world in public social spending and 4th in military spending.

What we spend on those two things is proportionate only through American eyes.

I couldn't care less how other countries spend their money or how we spend money relative to them, particularly since many of them don't spend money on their militaries because they know we do and we'll keep them safe.

Over 60% of the budget goes to entitlement spending vs 15% for the military - it's not military spending that's keeping us from fixing bridges.
 
Last edited:
I couldn't care less how other countries spend their money or how we spend money relative to them, particularly since many of them don't spend money on their militaries because they know we do and we'll keep them safe.

Over 60% of the budget goes to entitlement spending vs 15% for the military - it's not military spending that's keeping us from fixing bridges.
And interest is like half the military budget. My fiscal conservative side wants to never elect a republican again until debt gets knocked down a peg.
 
(it's just an instinct about debt; I know economists say it's not a problem as long as our economy is growing at a certain rate)
 
And interest is like half the military budget. My fiscal conservative side wants to never elect a republican again until debt gets knocked down a peg.

so who do you vote for instead? Democrats who will spend even more and make it worse? Doesn't seem like such a great strategy.

Interest is only half the military budget because rates are kept artificially low - and it appears they will be kept there until they no longer can.
 
so who do you vote for instead? Democrats who will spend even more and make it worse? Doesn't seem like such a great strategy.

Not in my lifetime. Deficits go up more when we elect republicans.
 
Last edited:
so who do you vote for instead? Democrats who will spend even more and make it worse? Doesn't seem like such a great strategy.

Interest is only half the military budget because rates are kept artificially low - and it appears they will be kept there until they no longer can.

it's fine to criticise the Democrats for this, just don't pretend to care about budget deficits ever again, unless you can make everyone forget about what happened from 2001 - 2009.

Our grandkids will still be paying the costs of veteran care and disability payments from these wars. Bush never even made an attempt to mitigate the hit to national debt directly: no higher taxes, no war bonds, nothing. All financed right on top of the existing national debt.
 
Not in my lifetime. Deficits go up when we elect republicans.
I think the record generally agrees with you, but it's undermined by the fact that Hillary and Biden (and most of the House Dems Leadership) supported the Iraq War and voted for it.

How many Democrats vote against defense spending? Like a handful... Bernie (not 100% consistently either), Barbara Lee in CA, Ro Khanna, Tulsi Gabbard... those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Barbara Lee was the sole vote in the House AGAINST all the War on Terror Pork Spending that has been shown to be correct. It was like 499-1 or something like that. In a sane country, she would become president based on that alone.
 
I think the record generally agrees with you, but it's undermined by the fact that Hillary and Biden (and most of the House Dems Leadership) supported the Iraq War and voted for it.

How many Democrats vote against defense spending? Like a handful... Bernie (not 100% consistently either), Barbara Lee in CA, Ro Khanna, Tulsi Gabbard... those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Barbara Lee was the sole vote in the House AGAINST all the War on Terror Pork Spending that has been shown to be correct. It was like 499-1 or something like that. In a sane country, she would become president based on that alone.

Instead of going after budget by controlling spending, I wish there was some blanket method for reducing layers of management.
 
Instead of going after budget by controlling spending, I wish there was some blanket method for reducing layers of management.

I have never been on the management level of any government bureaucracy, not even one time.

So I?m doing my part.
 
I have never been on the management level of any government bureaucracy, not even one time.

So I?m doing my part.

It would not surprise me if $1 of new hardware for the government took $3 of design work, $3 of testing, $4 of supplier doing government paperwork, and $4 on the government side creating the requirements and evaluating the paperwork.
 
iu

iu

iu
 

I saw someone post some of these on twitter, but I thought they were caricatures of Seuss' comics, not his actual works.

They seem to be leftist though... (right?) According to Wikipedia, "America First!" has been a slogan of nativist/white supremacy groups throughout American history. I am confused. I can see those might not be appropriate for a children's book, but as editorial cartoons... they land close to the truth.

I don't get the Kangaroo one; communists and facists are on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum... unless he's lumping them all together as extremists or something.
 
the faces of the little boy and the older lady reading "Adolf The Wolf"... that could be a Young Michchamp (circa 1984) innocently asking an older family member a question about race and being shocked by the cheerfully bigoted answer I got in response
 
(it's just an instinct about debt; I know economists say it's not a problem as long as our economy is growing at a certain rate)

some economists - morons like Nobel Prize winners Joe Stiglitz and Paul Krugman. There are plenty of economists who know this is utter nonsense.
 
Back
Top