Join me on Facebook!
Follow me on Twitter!
More 'toons here!
Or subscribe here.
Why is government spending on a worthless military not "economic stimulus," but deficit spending on domestic make-work, like hiring temporary census takers, is?
The one lesson you have to take away from this is every dollar the government spends on something is a dollar taken from somewhere else. Because the dollar the government spend is taken under the threat of force and government market knowledge is limited because it is a monopoly and not subject to market forces, it will not be efficient in how it spends the resources it has taken or borrowed.
In other words, government spending, whether on the military or not, always makes us poorer in the aggregate.
Do I smell Rick "CUTS" Scott on this video?
- - It's easy for folks to say (as Obama did to get elected); things like "we shouldn't have troops in so many places around the globe" and "war is bad & expensive", "torture un-necessary", etc., BUT when your in the "hot seat" as president Obama has found out - you suddenly realize the truths of the matter.
- - After all. . . a so-called anti-war president still has us in at least two wars, our troops are still needed around the world, terrorist are still being tortured (it's just being done in another place).
- - So that either means he lied to get elected, OR these things are really necessary for our safe survival.....
Or he's beholden to an inner circle of military brass, cronies, lobbyists, ideologues and corporate interests that force him to act in a certain way.
If only we were accomplishing something with the money spent. Idiots seem to run the CIA and the so-called intelligence personal. And Osama is really only another Bush. I wonder what would happen if he tried to end some of this stupidity? I really think he has been warned not to rock the boat, or he will go the same way some others have gone that didn't follow the correct reasoning. Like all the little plane crashes of people running for office.
More fearsome than the volume of spending is the fact that so much of it has to be obscured in "black budgets" that aren't even acknowledged as existing. How hard would it really be to mark down "$22 billion for Advanced Aircraft Research" (with no need to specify the details of what aircraft are being researched) instead of just pretending that it's not happening? Just how much does it harm the "security" of America for the public to know this much?
I pay taxes. Who pays for all those military ads I see on TV and hear on the radio? What's the reason for them?
We all pay taxes for the Military to get more soldiers to fight the wars that the George Bush's started.I mean both George Bush's that they both don't pay as much as we do in taxes.
Hurray for US millitary spending!
No global conflicts since 1945!
We share the world in peace or we all incinerate together! What a great idea is MAD!
The two biggest super-powers with deeply co-dependant economies - hopefully that also stays Too Big to Fail.
Take my tax dollars and build a millitary so powerful and deadly that peace is maintained - if only because the alternative is too horrific to consider.
Ok all you pacifists and US haters - let the mud fly! =P
Uh, the Cold War ended nearly 2 decades ago. No one talks about MAD anymore. Not even the Pentagon. We hear about asymmetric warfare now not nuclear arsenals. Get your head out of your... I mean sand.
Excuse me there "Uh", but re-branding MAD as asymmetric warfare is media spin to keep the sound bites fresh and seemingly new. The labels you apply to the policy is trivia to quibble over.
Any country that covertly assists a terrorist group in launching a nuclear attack against us can expect our nuclear retaliation.
Any nation that launches a military nuclear first strike against any other people will be obliterated by everyone who has the means even if they are not directly targeted.
That is good policy. =D
That is the most successful formula for lasting peace between the major powers that has ever existed. It is wisdom made manifest that aggressive wars of conquest are antiquated relics of the past that are now suicidal insanity to attempt.
As for the rest, the tin pot dictators and warlords will soil themselves when we come to town.
Go US military! Never stop setting the bar higher!
It works, as long as something doesn't go wrong. Imagine a world with dozens of nuclear powers (quite possible by 2100). How long do you think before there is an "accident" or "misinterpretation" or just a plain psychotic lunatic in control of a nuclear arsenal. Whoops! Bad strategy after all!
But...when you get some oppressed folks who live in a place where religion becomes the law and the law is the religion, might you just get a few insanely suicidal people (terrorist) that really don't care. Don't forget to add to the equation the folks who have NOTHING to lose.
Especially love those 'black budgets' always given to the CIA and their ilk. No accounting necessary. How cool is that?
Love it when liberals scream and complain that we need the government to take care of us and disarm the public and monopolize the guns for police and the military and then they whine about too much money to the military.
You liberals have nothing to blame but yourselves. You wanted socialism and BIG government and now the military industrial complex and the corporations are bigger and more frightning than ever. This is what we get. Hope for your sakes the 2nd american revolution comes soon so we can have a free society again or else its the Gulag.
This is so "out to lunch", I honestly cannot tell if it
is being said tongue in cheek!
Yeah it is a bit ludicrous to blame the bush/reagan military buildups and subsequent budget deficits on liberals.
Just as ridiculous as blaming the republicans for repealing glass/stegal under clinton, passing dadt also under clinton, and for carters lowering taxes on the wealthy.
There are no real liberals in power nor corporate media.
He was talking about the growth of government, the result of decades of socialism and how that growth has enabled the corporations military ETC to gain EVEN more power. The glass segal bill was nothing but an unnecesary burden on markets which contrary to liberal myth DID NOT PREVENT DEPRESIONS AND RECESSIONS.
Wonder what you consider a real liberal?
So Mark.....The square-root of all U.S. Defense spending is....
"None of our God Damn business?!"
Can you possibly damn someone else, if you really have to do it? I am sure that you can find someone else to damn. Or, maybe don't damn at all?
Let's not forget that other departments of government treat decreases in the rate of spending or levels of spending greater that fall short of requested amounts as "cuts" as well-it's not just the military.
Where is the Tea Party crying for cutting the military spending?
(I am still waiting for my question to the Tea Party what programs they want to cut and what to cut additionally to fund the tax cuts they are asking for.)
Present and accounted for. That is the few of us that still take what the founding fathers and others said seriously.
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. the supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.”
“A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen”
“Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.”
Edward Everett Hale
“Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.”
Henry David Thoreau
But what do you liberals care? These people were rich white guys who are obsolete.
Did you find a bunch of ol McCarthy era, John Birch material in your attic or something? Only you know what the founding fathers would think if only they were here to agree with you, I am sure. Watch out...they are sneaking around, sneakin around, coming to take your gun, coming to take your gun. Oh my God, they are coming to take you a way. I am so sick of you righteous jerks. Education, he says...do you not know that the colleges and universities are full of those dirty word liberals that do not believe in a bit of your insane paranoia. This is NOT 1776. See Fiori's leach treatment cartoon!252
It may not be 1776 but the values and ideas of the founders still work today.
Let me correct that for you do you not know that the colleges and universities are full of those dirty word liberals that do not believe in a bit of your insane paranoia. freedom and liberty only communism
Move to Liberal China for Pete sakes
why are you spouting off here? Oh yeah, because you've got so many other topics on your plate right now, you can't be bothered with protesting against your fellow Republicans, right? Thanks for trying, I guess. I'm sure that, once you and your fellow Tpers are done fighting to insert CoLB-requirements in many state legislatures, and make sure that poor women are forced to jump as many hoops as humanly possible before they can get a procedure that is their constitutional right-abortion.
But, right after that, oh, forgot about shutting the gummint down because to hell with jobs.
Jobs? You must be out of your mind if you think government creates jobs! HELL NO! If anything It destroys jobs! And abortion (murdering an unborn human being)isn't even mentioned in the constitution!
MY GOD! WHAT DO LIBERALS SMOKE AT THEIR COFFEESHOPS!?
"Military math" is like "military intelligence." It's an oxymoron.
42% of world military budget
The US military budget is a shocking 42% of the world military total.
(You need to sum the column yourself.)
The 42% portion is less than half. Do you have a source for "If we are to continue spending more than all other militaries of the world combined . . ." ?
Thanks for drawing attention to the crazy spending.
I'm still looking for more sources that break it down into base defense budget vs. wars vs. nuclear vs. shiny new gizmos. Here is a good starting point, the article is a few years old, but, I can assure you the numbers overall have only gotten bigger. (Spending less in Iraq seems to be the only-- surprisingly small-- exception at this point.)
This is also a must-read, or must-continue-reading, as the case may be:
A big issue in these lists and budget comparisons is that there are so many ways to parse the data and determine what is "defense" or "military." Seems to me we should include Homeland Security, nuclear weapons, wars and veterans' benefits in our calculation, which obviously drives us to more spendy territory.
More links to follow, post any good ones you find.
Military Math . . . it's actually much worse than this cartoon depicts. Only barely scratched the surface of the gobs of cash and convoluted budgeting rats' nest.
More information about formatting options