The 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama

colourful language might lead to a ban

Originally posted by GCG
colourful language might lead to a ban

*The place to debate topics with your fellow posters.

Hahahaa. I say that, WD must have been having some inferioty issues that day and needed something to boost himself with, the tool. I wouldn't take it personal, kids, you know.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm sorry, here, let me clear it up for you:

But [you] still [spend] [the] most [as a function of GDP] of the [all] first world countries.

You cheeky German b@st@rd. 😐

Just say, "my bad, I left out one or two key words." Don't act like it's my fault.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, I guess that's still hard for you to comprehend, let me try again.

"Even though there are countries in the world, which do spend more on their military when you factor in the relating Gross Domestic Products, the United States of America still spend by far the most on their health care out of all first world nations, even if you factor in the higher Gross Domestic Product the United States of America have."

Welcome.

I didn't see data on a relative(international) expenditure on health care as a function of GDP.

I did, however, say that the U.S. spends less money on military, as a function of GDP, though.

I'm not sure what you were getting at, there, still. You've mixed things ups with military and health care.

Here's some data that is a bit more relevant than you word mess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

The U.S. is almost at the bottom of the list. 😐

I know they are not the same measurement, but wouldn't the difference between the 50% number posted earlier and 21% relative to GDP indicate corruption or unfairness? I beginning to see that an "across the board" tax plan is much more fair. I know money is made by the U.S. government or other types of monies are made that count towards GDP but don't towards tax numbers, but how much of it makes up that huge 30% gap?

Originally posted by Robtard
Hahahaa. I say that, WD must have been having some inferioty issues that day and needed something to boost himself with, the tool. I wouldn't take it personal, kids, you know.

WTF? lol

Are you TRYING to get banned?

Originally posted by Robtard
Democrats do tend to cut back some on the military, one of the reasons the Repubs/Cons scream that they want nothing but to bring America to her knees (some blame 9/11 due to Clinton's cuts). But that "cut back" really isn't a considerable percentage. So it stands to reason that Obama will cut back ie "change", but we'll have to see to what level it's done.

fair enough, and other than his Pakistan/Afghanistan rhetoric, Obama doesn't seem too much like a war monger (Biden and all of Obama's military advisers [who come from well within the system] I reserve judgment on) so potentially he could really change the way money is spent.

I'm normally really cynical, so I'm pessimistic about how big any cuts might be.

Originally posted by Robtard
We could have better health care, better schools, better roads etc. Unfortunately, that isn't going to happen, there's more money to be made in weapons by the powers that be.

Indeed...

Well, hey, look at the bright side. America is winning in Iraq, apparently.

Originally posted by dadudemon
You cheeky German b@st@rd. 😐

Just say, "my bad, I left out one or two key words." Don't act like it's my fault.

I didn't see data on a relative(international) expenditure on health care as a function of GDP.

I did, however, say that the U.S. spends less money on military, as a function of GDP, though.

I'm not sure what you were getting at, there, still. You've mixed things ups with military and health care.

Here's some data that is a bit more relevant than you word mess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

The U.S. is almost at the bottom of the list. 😐

I know they are not the same measurement, but wouldn't the difference between the 50% number posted earlier and 21% relative to GDP indicate corruption or unfairness? I beginning to see that an "across the board" tax plan is much more fair. I know money is made by the U.S. government or other types of monies are made that count towards GDP but don't towards tax numbers, but how much of it makes up that huge 30% gap?

WTF? lol

Are you TRYING to get banned?

I don't think what you posted relates to the military spending though (and your link is bad).

And yeah, I mixed things up, it was just supposed to say military spending.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The U.S. is almost at the bottom of the list. 😐

So clearly having a defense budget that accounts for 45% of total global spending on defense is necessary.

I think something like military spending does not scale very well by GDP measure. Given that the American economy is by orders of magnitude larger than most other economies on the planet, 20+ % is astounding.

list of 39 nations... not really exhaustive...

Originally posted by inimalist
So, clearly, having a defense budget that accounts for 45% of total global spending is necessary.

What one has to wonder is why such a budget is necessary? It's necessary because our global policies incite riot and anger. Canada is a first world nation that doesn't have a global policy that incites riot and suicide bombings. See, a country can afford universal healthcare if they aren't bankrupting themselves with their defense and offense spending. Canada is still in the top 10 of defense spenders and has a first class healhcare system.

Ha, one of those "why did we make them hate us" lib'rals, I knew it. The truth is, "they hate us for our freedom", don't cha know.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, sure, my bad, I left out a few keywords.

I was being a jerk for teh lulz.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think what you posted relates to the military spending though (and your link is bad).

It does, sort of. Where does the military budget come from? 😐
(and don't pull that cheeky 'From China." answer....because the my smilie would be ------> 🙁

Originally posted by Bardock42
And yeah, I mixed things up, it was just supposed to say military spending.

It doesn't diminish OUR point, though. We spend a BUTT load of money on military. Waaaay too much.

Would you be pissed if we cut our spending down by $100 billion, gave $10 billion to Nasa's budget, $10 billion to our education system, and used the rest o get our spending under control?

I know it's not something you would like, but wouldn't you prefer it over the current situation? I sure would.

Originally posted by inimalist
So clearly having a defense budget that accounts for 45% of total global spending on defense is necessary.

You cheeky Canadian b@st@rd. 😐

Originally posted by inimalist
I think something like military spending does not scale very well by GDP measure. Given that the American economy is by orders of magnitude larger than most other economies on the planet, 20+ % is astounding.

list of 39 nations... not really exhaustive...

I'm not a republican, so I can't and won't justify the abnormally large spending budget. I was just stating the fact that other countries are spending much more of their money for military. My point was to show a weak correlation between that 50% number and the 21% number. I think it shows corruption, to a certain degree. ( which is apples and oranges, by now.)

Where does the government get all of its money? It's not just taxes.

Also, we don't spend very much of our GDP on miltary...........but it equates to a huge load of money.

Damn, I'm so confused by now........

I look at this when I get off work.

Obviously I would think that 100 billion of that spending would be better used in education or scientific research. Yes.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I found lately that anything can lead to a ban with about same percentage of likelihood, so I figure, wtf ever, at least I am not "arguing with xyz"...a bannable offense in the GENERAL FREAKING DISCUSSION FORUM*, nowadays.

*The place to debate topics with your fellow posters.

Exactly a place to have "DISCUSSIONS" not to act like a idiots and start fights with other members which causes to derails threads.

As for me been on topic. Gladly! Since I was been social without attacking anyone. Gee what a concept...

So try to keep it in mind. C-cool? R-right?

that's that...

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Exactly a place to have "DISCUSSIONS" not to act like a idiots and start fights with other members which causes to derails threads.

As for me been on topic. Gladly! Since I was been social without attacking anyone. Gee what a concept...

So try to keep it in mind. C-cool? R-right?

that's that...

Or discuss a topic, lets be honest, you already hinted you planned to ban me at the slightest provocation, childish, but your choice. You didn't even warn either of us, come on, it's obvious to anyone that read the thread, just come out and say it, mate.

Now, excuse me, I have to actually talk to people on topic, something you should try one of these days.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Or discuss a topic, lets be honest, you already hinted you planned to ban me at the slightest provocation, childish, but your choice. You didn't even warn either of us, come on, it's obvious to anyone that read the thread, just come out and say it, mate.

Now, excuse me, I have to actually talk to people on topic, something you should try one of these days.

No, you're not excuse, if you have a bloody damn problem pm Raz. He told you before so take advantage. To warn you or ask you something is just a pointless waste of time and posts. You keep going and going...Lord knows you think you're some kind of James Dean.

If you want more shoot me a pm.

There...now you're exuse.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
No, you're not excuse, if you have a bloody damn problem pm Raz. He told you before so take advantage. To warn you or ask you something is just a pointless waste of time and posts. You keep going and going...Lord knows you think you're some kind of James Dean.

If you want more shoot me a pm.

There...now you're exuse.

I don't have a problem, I don't wish to PM Raz, it leads to nothing, and I would prefer not to be baited anymore, if that is possible.

Also, you mean "excused"...excuse really makes no sense in this context. "exuse" even less.

So, again, why no warning, to either of us? Don't answer it's rhetorical.

Besides, I take it you just admitted that it was personal and you just don't like my style of posting, that's really enough for me. Lets go back to topic.

You got any opinion on Barak Obama or how the military spending should develope or did you just come in here to attack me and make excuses for your uncalled for behaviour?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Obviously I would think that 100 billion of that spending would be better used in education or scientific research. Yes.

I am seriously trying to contact a person I know who works for NASA. He's a PMP for NASA. He may have some information right off the top of his head on why increasing funding with efficient project management would be a major benefit for the US. If he doesn't, he may know someone who does.

Since I feel that any answer I'll give would fail horribly to be adequate because of my obvious bias, I'd prefer it come from someone who knows much more about it give me a good answer.

Off the top of my head, robotics is a major one. More than anything, we need virtual intelligence. If there were robots who were programmed to do our farming and repair themselves, that would certainly be a huuuuuuge step to curing world hunger. Yes, something like that could or may come from NASA. I constantly see job postings for robotics and project managers ALL the time for NASA. I see tons of intelligence programming jobs, too. Just what the hell are they doing? Building HAL?

Not to mention, self contained bio-units that float in space. I am going far out there, but this is stuff talked about and planned on by NASA. You can thank NASA for even having this conversation, if you want to. 😐

I searched at work, but didn't have much time to much of it. I have a shit load of Java homework to do this weekend, so I doubt I'll get to citing some nice hard reasons.

Another topic:

Despite the fact the a Libertarian administration would probably be the best thing for America and probably the rest of the world, it probably won't happen anytime soon. I don't see it happening, at least for a long time.

I bet our founding forefathers would shit their pants if they saw what we've done to their constitution.

Edit-Here's some shit.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1752963.ece

Edit- Also, NASA is an excellent way for the government to poor money into the contractor sector WITHOUT it being about killing people. Tons of civilian contractors get paid millions of dollars to sucessfully run and complete NASA projects, so, yes, it is being done by the private sector on contracts paid out by the government.

I don't think that NASA is the one that should bring robotics though. As far as AI and Robotics go, I am very sure that the market has a need for such things, and therefore the only argument of inimalist that I do think may have validity doesn't apply.

Yes, they could benefit the US, no doubt (actually, for 17 billion a year they better do), my argument is not, and has never been, that government agencies have NO benefits, the argument is that they a) have less and b) shouldn't be forced on the citizens.

As for the libertarian thing, I agree. But, I am not a constitutionalist, I think your constitution is pretty good, it does need improving imo, though. (similar to Ron Paul, who just wants the laws it has to be applied unless changed).

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think that NASA is the one that should bring robotics though. As far as AI and Robotics go, I am very sure that the market has a need for such things, and therefore the only argument of inimalist that I do think may have validity doesn't apply.

Yes, they could benefit the US, no doubt (actually, for 17 billion a year they better do), my argument is not, and has never been, that government agencies have NO benefits, the argument is that they a) have less and b) shouldn't be forced on the citizens.

As for the libertarian thing, I agree. But, I am not a constitutionalist, I think your constitution is pretty good, it does need improving imo, though. (similar to Ron Paul, who just wants the laws it has to be applied unless changed).

I made an edit...two.

On the libertarians.

I believe in limited but strong government. Which means, they are small but can do the work of a much larger government. That is very much possible. No, a person doesn't have to work harder, they have to work smarter. Running projects much more intelligently can cut it's costs significantly. Trust me. 😐

There's no reason we should be developing what we are at the costs we are. We could probably do everything, military-wise, on a budget that is 2/3 of what it is now. I am dead serious. I've seen better improvements on a program with even less of budget reduction after a project management group came through and cleaned house.

I don't agree with all of the basic libertarian ideals, but I do agree with them a WHOLE lot more than I do other political parties. I'm not one for calling yourself a specific party name, I'm more for dipping into any and all good ideas and selecting the best ones. Of course, I'm just rational and logical.....it's hard to find someone who would actually take the time to review all the candidates policies and make the best selection.

I don't think the "awesome" candidate will ever get a chance to win. It would require a lot of contractors to stop delaying on projects, and for the commercial sector's lobbyist pull to be diminished greatly.

Edit- HOLY SHIT! Wrong thread!

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
[b]

Just a bit of a post, before the fact 😉

This will be a thread to discuss the upcoming four years with the president.

Questions to ask?
-Where will we go from here?
-How will the Iraq war end?
-Do you believe this is for the better?
-Will Biden's prediction of a crises in the first 6 months be true? Opinion?
-Your thoughts?

Happy Four Years coming guys, and Merry Christmas... Your big gift? Obama. Your stocking stuffer? Joe Biden.

vincent

[/B]

Originally posted by spidey-dude
everyone is gonna see later on they made a big mistake just like they did with bush

Ron Paul 2012!

As I've said, and even Kid Rock would agree I think, that reverse engineering history is the lazy, convenient way of analysing history and thus making your conspiracy theory plausible. A poor/middle class kid that grew up in Hawaii is so in tune and heavily considered by the global conspiracy that he has their efforts squarly in mind when he turns America into a socialist, fascist, communist, domestic terrorist, black panther nation without undestanding that these ideologies contradict each other? When does the black sedan pull up; when he's 10 and then indoctrinated into this global society of hate and repression of individual freedom? Where are the pictures of his honky mother selling him to the blood-ritual sadists that think stealing Geronimo's skeleton is going to give them some sort of Raiders of the Lost Ark advantage over the less-than-faithful? That's why these ideologies have different names folks! History has judged these ideologies and it has deemed to assign them different names to describe the differences in the ideology. What's most concerting about your position is that there is zero room for argument or logic or reality when it can be so easily assigned to this conspiracy or that one?! Where is that open-minded consideration of the situation that your position demands? Oh yeah, it's part of the singular, "open-minded to fool you" conspiracy that permeates every aspect of our lives. Sadly, I didn't get the memo from my lizard-like overlords. What you want to do is condemn the people who don't agree with you by calling Bush supporters the same mindless idiots that you want to call anyone who voted against him. Since most of the planet didn't vote for either, you want to call everyone an idiot for subscrbing to a different idea than you do. Sometimes a spade is a spade and nothing more.