Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7016|132 and Bush

https://i43.tinypic.com/s30k1g.jpg
Obama Hosts Dinner Honoring John McCain

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?d … 0003022493
The Obama administration has given the Pentagon a $527 billion limit, excluding war costs, for its fiscal 2010 defense budget, an Office of Management and Budget official said Monday.

    If enacted, that would be an 8 percent increase from the $487.7 billion allocated for fiscal 2009 (PL 110-329), and it would match what the Bush administration estimated last year for the Pentagon in fiscal 2010. But it sets up a potential conflict between the new administration and the Defense Department’s entrenched bureaucracy, which has remained largely intact through the presidential transition.

    Some Pentagon officials and congressional conservatives are already trying to portray the OMB number as a cut by comparing it to a $584 billion draft fiscal 2010 budget request compiled last fall by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    The $527 billion figure is “what the Bush people thought was the right number last February and that’s the number we’re going with,” said the OMB official, who declined to be identified. “The Joint Chiefs did that to lay down a marker for the incoming administration that was unrealistic. It’s more of a wish list than anything else.”
Keeping line with what I've been saying. This man is going to piss off more Dems than Reps. An 8% increase seems like a reasonable amount, and if we clean up the pork and defense contracting it would be even better.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina
He's going to piss off a lot of fiscal conservatives too...  what the fuck....
S.Lythberg
Mastermind
+429|6862|Chicago, IL

Turquoise wrote:

He's going to piss off a lot of fiscal conservatives too...  what the fuck....
do whats best, not what the sheeple want
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6953|Long Island, New York
Is he still planning on decreasing the funding for the F-22 and F-35?
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

S.Lythberg wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

He's going to piss off a lot of fiscal conservatives too...  what the fuck....
do whats best, not what the sheeple want
Pretty much...  apparently, our debt is going to be limitless before the year's end...

Last edited by Turquoise (2009-02-02 17:48:21)

blademaster
I'm moving to Brazil
+2,075|7061

Poseidon wrote:

Is he still planning on decreasing the funding for the F-22 and F-35?
hmm is he gonna pull the troops out to fix our economy
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,991|7048|949

I'd support an 8% decrease.

We are in an economic crisis - let's increase spending

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2009-02-02 17:50:08)

AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6568|what

blademaster wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Is he still planning on decreasing the funding for the F-22 and F-35?
hmm is he gonna pull the troops out to fix our economy
If by out you mean from Iraq than certainly.

I don't know how to break the news to you about Afghanistan though.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
S.Lythberg
Mastermind
+429|6862|Chicago, IL

Turquoise wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

He's going to piss off a lot of fiscal conservatives too...  what the fuck....
do whats best, not what the sheeple want
Pretty much...  apparently, our debt is going to be limitless before the year's end...
pass the buck, isn't that what the 60's children are all about?

They're gonna hand my generation a broken economy, a broken society, and a broken planet

thanks a lot
VspyVspy
Sniper
+183|7088|A sunburnt country
The increase in spending will help stimulate the economy so should be seen as a good thing.   I'm willing to bet that the majority of the 8% will be spent in the US, creating jobs as well as keeping people employed.  It also ensures that the skilled workforce is maintained within the US and not sold out overseas.

Reducing Defence spending can only hurt the economy further.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|6001

I think he's really trying too hard to get support from the right.
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6953|Long Island, New York

uevjHEYFFQ wrote:

I think he's really trying too hard to get support from the right.
I dunno, inviting them over for the Super Bowl seemed to work pretty well.
Catbox
forgiveness
+505|7132
Everyone is getting a check from Obama... even the military thankfully...
Love is the answer
mtb0minime
minimember
+2,418|7070

Good, more work for my dad
13rin
Member
+977|6895
HAHAHA...  The whole Gitmo/CIA closures were a farce too.  He's using a hawkish stance to usher in a big pork bail out payoff bill...
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6522|eXtreme to the maX
No big deal, its less than Bush wanted to spend, will mostly be spent in the US to prop up defense contractors which should help the bailout.
Ending activity in Iraq will more than pay for the 8%.
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

VspyVspy wrote:

The increase in spending will help stimulate the economy so should be seen as a good thing.   I'm willing to bet that the majority of the 8% will be spent in the US, creating jobs as well as keeping people employed.  It also ensures that the skilled workforce is maintained within the US and not sold out overseas.

Reducing Defence spending can only hurt the economy further.
Nope.  Increasing debt can only hurt the economy.  That's what this will do, unless he plans on raising taxes.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7016|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

VspyVspy wrote:

The increase in spending will help stimulate the economy so should be seen as a good thing.   I'm willing to bet that the majority of the 8% will be spent in the US, creating jobs as well as keeping people employed.  It also ensures that the skilled workforce is maintained within the US and not sold out overseas.

Reducing Defence spending can only hurt the economy further.
Nope.  Increasing debt can only hurt the economy.  That's what this will do, unless he plans on raising taxes.
Ok and taking more money out of the pockets of struggling families wont hurt the economy.. got it.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6522|eXtreme to the maX
In recessions its customary for govts to go into debt.
Ending activity in Iraq will more than compensate for an 8% increase in budget.
Net debt will not be as high as it would otherwise have been.
Fuck Israel
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

VspyVspy wrote:

The increase in spending will help stimulate the economy so should be seen as a good thing.   I'm willing to bet that the majority of the 8% will be spent in the US, creating jobs as well as keeping people employed.  It also ensures that the skilled workforce is maintained within the US and not sold out overseas.

Reducing Defence spending can only hurt the economy further.
Nope.  Increasing debt can only hurt the economy.  That's what this will do, unless he plans on raising taxes.
Ok and taking more money out of the pockets of struggling families wont hurt the economy.. got it.
Exactly...  neither is good.  Cutting spending is.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

In recessions its customary for govts to go into debt.
Ending activity in Iraq will more than compensate for an 8% increase in budget.
Net debt will not be as high as it would otherwise have been.
But we're not ending operations in Iraq either.  It looks like we'll be there until 2011.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7016|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


Nope.  Increasing debt can only hurt the economy.  That's what this will do, unless he plans on raising taxes.
Ok and taking more money out of the pockets of struggling families wont hurt the economy.. got it.
Exactly...  neither is good.  Cutting spending is.
The entire budget for defending our country amounts to less than half of what we have spent in bailouts.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


Ok and taking more money out of the pockets of struggling families wont hurt the economy.. got it.
Exactly...  neither is good.  Cutting spending is.
The entire budget for defending our country amounts to less than half of what we have spent in bailouts.
True, but we should end the bailouts AND cut the military budget.

If we really want smaller government, it's gonna take more than just ending bailouts -- although that is a good first step.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7016|132 and Bush

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Exactly...  neither is good.  Cutting spending is.
The entire budget for defending our country amounts to less than half of what we have spent in bailouts.
True, but we should end the bailouts AND cut the military budget.

If we really want smaller government, it's gonna take more than just ending bailouts -- although that is a good first step.
Reduce the contract cost.. like Obama says he would. Just make sure we get bang for our buck.. pun intended.

If you cut the military you will probably be laying off hundreds of thousands of people.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6821|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:


The entire budget for defending our country amounts to less than half of what we have spent in bailouts.
True, but we should end the bailouts AND cut the military budget.

If we really want smaller government, it's gonna take more than just ending bailouts -- although that is a good first step.
Reduce the contract cost.. like Obama says he would. Just make sure we get bang for our buck.. pun intended.

If you cut the military you will probably be laying off hundreds of thousands of people.
That's the unfortunate side effect of having a military that's too large to begin with.  You create a situation where more people are dependent on government money than should be.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard