Post: #1

GOP suffered a dramatic defeat, and is now at the point when it would either change or extincts completely. Considering that this happened despite, let's say, not a very impressive leadership by Obama, the extinction is a real possibility for them unless they kick out the idiots. But then who'd vote for them?

A retarded "tea party" seem to be the thing in the past, and I'd speculate nobody would even remember them in ten years.

Vast majority of ballot measures are voted in a quite impressive way. Marijuana and same sex marriages legalized, lame attempts to prevent AHA defeated.

It is a very important social development in terms of those things being legalized by the majority of the voters. The DOMA defeat and the reversal of same sex marriage bans in state constitutions is much closer now. Same for marijuana legalization, and rewriting of the Control Substances Act at least.

There's still some dark zone - Alabama, Arkansas and Montana, of course, were an exception. But it would be quite a stretch to call their population smart. Basically they're being forcefully dragged into the reality of the 21st century, kicking and screaming, while they dream about waking up in 1950. But they are not important anyway.

Looks like a lot of people finally woke up and don't buy Fox News shit anymore. Therefore there's still hope.

Post: #2

What exactly are you hoping for? If it's national bankruptcy and financial collapse under a priviledged ruling class of elitists who are more than ready, willing, and able to dictate every aspect of your life down to the calories you consume then that is one fucked up hope but you're welcome to it. I know that's not what you want but it seems that is where we are headed.

I hope I'm wrong, but this is my fear, being told what to do and how to live my life.

Post: #3

(11-07-2012 04:48 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  There's still some dark zone - Alabama, Arkansas and Montana, of course, were an exception. But it would be quite a stretch to call their population smart. Basically they're being forcefully dragged into the reality of the 21st century, kicking and screaming, while they dream about waking up in 1950. But they are not important anyway.

Looks like a lot of people finally woke up and don't buy Fox News shit anymore. Therefore there's still hope.

also backwaters like the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Utah and Idaho, all states where Willard Romney got at least 60% of the vote

Post: #4

Wait, what?

Post: #5

Chris Christie 2016!

Post: #6

(11-07-2012 04:48 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  GOP suffered a dramatic defeat, and is now at the point when it would either change or extincts completely. Considering that this happened despite, let's say, not a very impressive leadership by Obama, the extinction is a real possibility for them unless they kick out the idiots. But then who'd vote for them?

A retarded "tea party" seem to be the thing in the past, and I'd speculate nobody would even remember them in ten years.

Vast majority of ballot measures are voted in a quite impressive way. Marijuana and same sex marriages legalized, lame attempts to prevent AHA defeated.

It is a very important social development in terms of those things being legalized by the majority of the voters. The DOMA defeat and the reversal of same sex marriage bans in state constitutions is much closer now. Same for marijuana legalization, and rewriting of the Control Substances Act at least.

There's still some dark zone - Alabama, Arkansas and Montana, of course, were an exception. But it would be quite a stretch to call their population smart. Basically they're being forcefully dragged into the reality of the 21st century, kicking and screaming, while they dream about waking up in 1950. But they are not important anyway.

Looks like a lot of people finally woke up and don't buy Fox News shit anymore. Therefore there's still hope.

No, you are absolutely dead wrong.

Hope is slipping away.

This nation is headed down the road to fiscal catastrophe. Believe me, it's scary...and hope won't do a damn thing to stop it.

Now math may be hard for you, but I will keep it simple.

Medicare alone has a $37 TRILLION unfunded liability. I know left wingers like you have a hard time with financial concepts, but an unfunded liability is effectively a promise that can't be kept.

Got that?

Now we're almost to the scary part. The annual Gross Domestic product of the United States is about $15 trillion. Ok, I know, I know, it's another tough financial concept for you, but c'mon, you have at least SOME brain cells, right?

So, now divide $15 into $37. Can you do that? I'll wait a moment while you go sharpen the pencil you just dropped.

Figure it out yet? OK, 2.5 is close enough.

Now we're at the really really REALLY scary part. Sitting up? Paying attention? I know you really really want to spend your time dissing Fox News and all, but this is really really important.

Medicare's unfunded liability is 2.5 time our annual GDP. So that mean...

TO ADEQUATELY FUND MEDICARE WE HAVE TO DEVOTE 2.5 YEARS!! worth of ECONOMIC ACTIVITY to pay for it!

That would mean that nobody gets food, gasoline, heat, water, iPhones, new computers, or the shit cleaned up (the real shit, not the metaphoric Fox News shit that you seem to have a fetish for) for 2.5 fucking years!!

Are we clear now? And, oh, this is just ONE Fiscal catastrophe we are facing. There are others. Huge debt already on the books and growing at more than $1 trillion a year. Social Security. The Federal Reserve flooding the economy with dollars that are inevitably going to lose their purchase power.

Oh, and that taxing the rich stuff? You know eliminating the "Bush tax cuts" that Dems are so orgasmic about? You know how much that raises over 10 years? $900 billion. $90 billion a year. When we have a deficit annually over $1 trillion!!! (Ooops sorry, you were supposed to do that division, but I have to move a lot faster that you, alas).

Now, I know you are looking at that rock again, and thinking, "Gee, all this math, can I go back under my rock now?"

OK, you can go now. It's the best place for you, because, you know, math is hard. Especially for Democrats.

Post: #7

(11-08-2012 12:02 AM)tenderman100 Wrote:  OK, you can go now. It's the best place for you, because, you know, math is hard. Especially for Democrats.

Tenderman, Old Nemesis is an extremely intelligent and successful individual who has also displayed remarkable tenacity in pursuing long-term goals in his life. I won't go into details because of privacy, but your patronizing post mostly reflects on you, showing you (a) don't know him, and (b) are willing to insult people inaccurately whom you don't know.

People have been foretelling doom and gloom since well before the Europeans thought the "end" was going to be the year 1000.

The thing about doom and gloomers is, they can always say "it's coming, it's coming unless you <do some stuff they want>"

Well, exactly what would you do?

The hard part is :

1) What would you do--with numbers and specifics and dates, differently. Cut all Social Security retirement so old people starve again like in the 1920's? Cut the military budget in half?

Now, me, I'd add a wealth tax for all assets over let's say 50 million. 10% per yearon assets over 50 million. You may not like it, but it's an objective suggestion. I'm sure you're' that rich and would have a conniption. Those poor centi-millionaires.(end sarcasm)

I find arguing over exactly where the money we have goes leads to a more reality based argument , avoiding resorting to abstractions like "liberal" and "conservative" which don't map to measurable objective reality.
If a suggestion is concrete, you can debate it, even try out a pilot program and see if it works.

I don't know the solution to gubmint waste, but I do think patronizing insults to someone who who is known to be smart--maybe smarter than you--reflect mainly on the insulter.

Post: #8

Californians raised taxes to help prevent school cuts. Ever since USA elected bush for a second time, I decided the nation as a whole were hopelessly stupid.

W was a guy you maybe-- buy a car from in a small town, not a guy to run a major power. It didn't seem "conservative" to borrow 4 trillion from China to invade Iraq. Maybe we were borrowing money from them to build up power where we think they're going to commandeer oil later?

One thing I noticed when I traveled through Red states is they are not the angry, gun-nut apologists for the rich that Limbaugh etc are. The people in Red areas of the West were actually extraodinarily helpful and polite.

I realized they are not the militant oligarchy fascists who run the Republican party, the people are naive and trusting, and tragically believe the rich are their friends, and not rapacious nihilists.

I also think it was important to waste Bin Laden. W is happy on his ranch trying to form complete sentences, and Bin Laden is at the bottom of the sea.

It helps to demonstrate whose side is better to be on. Smart teenagers in Pakistan, when some buffoon tries to explain holy jihad, are going to more tend to think "I'd rather go to medical school in the USA and troll Roosh's forum than die with you morons."


The bogey-man tactics just aren't working, as Hispanic and Asian voter percentages increase. I think asians went 70% for Obama.

I think the tide has tuned back and trickle-down is dead in the public's eye. 30 years of it hasn't worked.
Apologists for the ruling class of wealthies have a hard time ahead.

Post: #9

lol. You said "Obama is at the bottom of the sea." I think you meant Osama?

Post: #10

Oh, and if anyone wants to debate intelligence Dems vs Reps, , make sure you factor in the Blue States give the Red states about 60 Billion a year in tax subsidies via Federal Income tax.

So the Red States are the welfare queens. You could argue they're dumber, because they make less income, or take the rather more cynical view that they're smarter, because they weasel money out of the more economically successful Blue States.

http://www.panderingpoliticians.com/2012...bsidy.html

Hey, I don't mind living in a Blue state and paying taxes for the Red State subsidy. I also agree on affirmative actions, but it should be for those poorer in assets rather than race based.

You have to help those less fortunate to have an advanced society, where people aren't so stupid they're wearing suicide vests.

Post: #11

This is what economic collapse looks like:

http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa...-2013.html

Post: #12

(11-08-2012 01:03 AM)Samseau Wrote:  This is what economic collapse looks like:

http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa...-2013.html

Great exposition-- sure looks scary to me as well.

And your suggestion, with numbers and dates-- to fix it?

Gold standard tomorrow morning?

I'm not trying to minimize inflationary danger or whatever, but what's the point of bringing it all up if you have no suggestion whatsoever of specifically what should be done?

Stop QE totally, tomorrow? Seriously, I don't know, it' s not a rhetorical question except to the degree I'd like to see what people think--specifically-- besides "the sky is falling"

I can barely find a parking spot here in the malls in California, so the economic collapse hasn't happened here. I know Detroit looks a lot different.

Post: #13

(11-08-2012 12:55 AM)Tbone Wrote:  lol. You said "Obama is at the bottom of the sea." I think you meant Osama?

Fixed it, thanks for noting the error.

Post: #14

There are plenty of stupid folks who vote both ways. The real brains vote conservative, simply because they know the liberal narrative is a lie, a siren song, a false promise that appeals to the weakest in people.

I didn't like Tenderman's post. But the debt will crush America. There is no doubt. We're wasting time and money on placating minorities and activists, believing Obama's false promises government will fix all these problems it in fact created, while the Chinese are buying up commodities with our worthless dollars from corrupt African states that are too dumb to realize that money isn't worth the paper it's printed on. This is not doom and gloom, these are facts.

Post: #15

(11-08-2012 12:02 AM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 04:48 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  GOP suffered a dramatic defeat, and is now at the point when it would either change or extincts completely. Considering that this happened despite, let's say, not a very impressive leadership by Obama, the extinction is a real possibility for them unless they kick out the idiots. But then who'd vote for them?

A retarded "tea party" seem to be the thing in the past, and I'd speculate nobody would even remember them in ten years.

Vast majority of ballot measures are voted in a quite impressive way. Marijuana and same sex marriages legalized, lame attempts to prevent AHA defeated.

It is a very important social development in terms of those things being legalized by the majority of the voters. The DOMA defeat and the reversal of same sex marriage bans in state constitutions is much closer now. Same for marijuana legalization, and rewriting of the Control Substances Act at least.

There's still some dark zone - Alabama, Arkansas and Montana, of course, were an exception. But it would be quite a stretch to call their population smart. Basically they're being forcefully dragged into the reality of the 21st century, kicking and screaming, while they dream about waking up in 1950. But they are not important anyway.

Looks like a lot of people finally woke up and don't buy Fox News shit anymore. Therefore there's still hope.

No, you are absolutely dead wrong.

Hope is slipping away.

This nation is headed down the road to fiscal catastrophe. Believe me, it's scary...and hope won't do a damn thing to stop it.

Now math may be hard for you, but I will keep it simple.

Medicare alone has a $37 TRILLION unfunded liability. I know left wingers like you have a hard time with financial concepts, but an unfunded liability is effectively a promise that can't be kept.

Got that?

Now we're almost to the scary part. The annual Gross Domestic product of the United States is about $15 trillion. Ok, I know, I know, it's another tough financial concept for you, but c'mon, you have at least SOME brain cells, right?

So, now divide $15 into $37. Can you do that? I'll wait a moment while you go sharpen the pencil you just dropped.

Figure it out yet? OK, 2.5 is close enough.

Now we're at the really really REALLY scary part. Sitting up? Paying attention? I know you really really want to spend your time dissing Fox News and all, but this is really really important.

Medicare's unfunded liability is 2.5 time our annual GDP. So that mean...

TO ADEQUATELY FUND MEDICARE WE HAVE TO DEVOTE 2.5 YEARS!! worth of ECONOMIC ACTIVITY to pay for it!

That would mean that nobody gets food, gasoline, heat, water, iPhones, new computers, or the shit cleaned up (the real shit, not the metaphoric Fox News shit that you seem to have a fetish for) for 2.5 fucking years!!

Are we clear now? And, oh, this is just ONE Fiscal catastrophe we are facing. There are others. Huge debt already on the books and growing at more than $1 trillion a year. Social Security. The Federal Reserve flooding the economy with dollars that are inevitably going to lose their purchase power.

Oh, and that taxing the rich stuff? You know eliminating the "Bush tax cuts" that Dems are so orgasmic about? You know how much that raises over 10 years? $900 billion. $90 billion a year. When we have a deficit annually over $1 trillion!!! (Ooops sorry, you were supposed to do that division, but I have to move a lot faster that you, alas).

Now, I know you are looking at that rock again, and thinking, "Gee, all this math, can I go back under my rock now?"

OK, you can go now. It's the best place for you, because, you know, math is hard. Especially for Democrats.

Tenderman, I guess you are finished "taking stock" ... No more being pensive and melancholy for you.

What happened?

Post: #16

(11-08-2012 01:38 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  There are plenty of stupid folks who vote both ways. The real brains vote conservative, simply because they know the liberal narrative is a lie, a siren song, a false promise that appeals to the weakest in people.

Poetically put. But again I question the value of these vague labels which don't map to a physical reality.

I think you'll find a "conservative" congressman suddenly becomes a tax-and-spend liberal when it's time to shut down a defense plant in his district. The same with a democrat who's going to lose school funding for sucky school that should get closed.

What do you want to do about the numbers? Whose ox gets gored?

All this abstract stuff just keeps us from debating the real issue : Where do we put our money. ?

My belief: There's a reason the real issue ( money) never gets debated. It's because of where most of it goes to ( Connected defense companies)

Post: #17

60bn is nothing compared to the size of those economies. The blue states, CA, IL, NY are bankrupt. They have also all been under one-party democractic rule for years.

Post: #18

(11-08-2012 01:32 AM)deepcov3r Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 01:03 AM)Samseau Wrote:  This is what economic collapse looks like:

http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa...-2013.html

Great exposition-- sure looks scary to me as well.

And your suggestion, with numbers and dates-- to fix it?

Gold standard tomorrow morning?

I'm not trying to minimize inflationary danger or whatever, but what's the point of bringing it all up if you have no suggestion whatsoever of specifically what should be done?

Stop QE totally, tomorrow? Seriously, I don't know, it' s not a rhetorical question except to the degree I'd like to see what people think--specifically-- besides "the sky is falling"

I can barely find a parking spot here in the malls in California, so the economic collapse hasn't happened here. I know Detroit looks a lot different.

The only way to stop the USA from dying is by reducing government spending.

That's never going to happen, so we'll have hyperinflation.

Post: #19

(11-08-2012 12:02 AM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 04:48 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  GOP suffered a dramatic defeat, and is now at the point when it would either change or extincts completely. Considering that this happened despite, let's say, not a very impressive leadership by Obama, the extinction is a real possibility for them unless they kick out the idiots. But then who'd vote for them?

A retarded "tea party" seem to be the thing in the past, and I'd speculate nobody would even remember them in ten years.

Vast majority of ballot measures are voted in a quite impressive way. Marijuana and same sex marriages legalized, lame attempts to prevent AHA defeated.

It is a very important social development in terms of those things being legalized by the majority of the voters. The DOMA defeat and the reversal of same sex marriage bans in state constitutions is much closer now. Same for marijuana legalization, and rewriting of the Control Substances Act at least.

There's still some dark zone - Alabama, Arkansas and Montana, of course, were an exception. But it would be quite a stretch to call their population smart. Basically they're being forcefully dragged into the reality of the 21st century, kicking and screaming, while they dream about waking up in 1950. But they are not important anyway.

Looks like a lot of people finally woke up and don't buy Fox News shit anymore. Therefore there's still hope.

No, you are absolutely dead wrong.

Hope is slipping away.

This nation is headed down the road to fiscal catastrophe. Believe me, it's scary...and hope won't do a damn thing to stop it.

Now math may be hard for you, but I will keep it simple.

Medicare alone has a $37 TRILLION unfunded liability. I know left wingers like you have a hard time with financial concepts, but an unfunded liability is effectively a promise that can't be kept.

Got that?

Now we're almost to the scary part. The annual Gross Domestic product of the United States is about $15 trillion. Ok, I know, I know, it's another tough financial concept for you, but c'mon, you have at least SOME brain cells, right?

So, now divide $15 into $37. Can you do that? I'll wait a moment while you go sharpen the pencil you just dropped.

Figure it out yet? OK, 2.5 is close enough.

Now we're at the really really REALLY scary part. Sitting up? Paying attention? I know you really really want to spend your time dissing Fox News and all, but this is really really important.

Medicare's unfunded liability is 2.5 time our annual GDP. So that mean...

TO ADEQUATELY FUND MEDICARE WE HAVE TO DEVOTE 2.5 YEARS!! worth of ECONOMIC ACTIVITY to pay for it!

That would mean that nobody gets food, gasoline, heat, water, iPhones, new computers, or the shit cleaned up (the real shit, not the metaphoric Fox News shit that you seem to have a fetish for) for 2.5 fucking years!!

Are we clear now? And, oh, this is just ONE Fiscal catastrophe we are facing. There are others. Huge debt already on the books and growing at more than $1 trillion a year. Social Security. The Federal Reserve flooding the economy with dollars that are inevitably going to lose their purchase power.

Oh, and that taxing the rich stuff? You know eliminating the "Bush tax cuts" that Dems are so orgasmic about? You know how much that raises over 10 years? $900 billion. $90 billion a year. When we have a deficit annually over $1 trillion!!! (Ooops sorry, you were supposed to do that division, but I have to move a lot faster that you, alas).

Now, I know you are looking at that rock again, and thinking, "Gee, all this math, can I go back under my rock now?"

OK, you can go now. It's the best place for you, because, you know, math is hard. Especially for Democrats.

Thing is, I actually agree with Tenderman on the above. But Republicans offer what? Tax cuts? That's going to shrink the deficit?

Post: #20

(11-08-2012 02:12 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  Thing is, I actually agree with Tenderman on the above. But Republicans offer what? Tax cuts? That's going to shrink the deficit?

The idea is to cut marginal rates and compensate by broadening the tax base.

Broadening the base is the easiest and most efficient way to raise revenue. Cutting marginal rates leads to an immediate revenue loss, called the static effect (income effect), but because you have now changed the trade-off between leisure and labor, there will be a dynamic substitution effect as workers increase their labor/leisure ratio.

At tax rates in the US, this effect will be very strong for marginal tax rates of 35 percent. That's a rather high marginal tax on income, so the dynamic effects will be quite strong. They'll be much less strong at a lower rates.

The Reagan tax reform of 86 is touted as an example. Martin Feldstein showed that a 10% broadening of the tax base matched by a comparative rate reduction would lead to a 4% increase in revenue.
Let's say you take $100 you spend on tax exemptions, credits and loopholes, and spend $100 on a marginal tax-rate cut instead.

It will only cost you $60 to do this, because your tax revenue will increase $40. The reason the revenue increases is due to output growth, as you incentivize productive behaviour.

This was the point of the Romney plan, Simpson-Bowles and latest GOP offer to Obama (from Boehner yesterday).

The President however, wants to raise marginal rates on the highest earners. Which is stupid. The highest earners are not the country's richest people. The richest people in the country get most of their income from investments and savings. They don't even have jobs! The answer to that is to raise taxes on capital dividends and gains. I'm a conservative, and I'm very much in favour of this, as long as the corporate tax rate is halved. The US has the highest corporate tax rates in the world, and reducing these rates would increase FDI in the US and encourage businesses to have their income taxed in the US rather than elsewhere. In economics, always go for the carrot over the stick. I think 15-19% would be a good flat corporate tax rate, because it would put as at the lower end of the OECD.

In addition, there needs to be spending cuts. Like Dave Stockton, we should cut across the board:

Entitlements, defence and discretionary spending, and get rid of half of the federal government employees.

End the QE, starting prepping the country for higher interest rates, so we can get people back into bonds and fixed income and away from equity.

Solve immigration, go for negative low-skill immigration and a slight positive high-skill immigration until unemployment is below 3%. After that, go for low-volume high-skill immigration to keep innovation in the US.

Tax reform as described above.

Pay back all debt to the Social Security Fund, and use those funds for infrastructure investment in the US (toll roads, toll bridges, lease-back public buildings), or send it out to earn returns on the financial markets, or use it to do what the Chinese are doing and buy mines, assets and other stuff in 3rd world countries.

Post: #21

(11-08-2012 12:02 AM)tenderman100 Wrote:  OK, you can go now. It's the best place for you, because, you know, math is hard. Especially for Democrats.

That was really nice, bro.

Too bad you vented off too early, right when I was prepared to learn how the hell we managed running up such huge national debt when there was surplus after Clinton.

Also I heard there were some pretty wars which cost some money, you're so good with the numbers, could you please enlighten me who was that bad liberal socialist dude who started them? Could you tell me how much they cost so far? I've seen some really scary numbers.

I'm dying to hear from you bro. Just don't bring your guns, your cowboy boots and your pickup truck, they scare me!

Post: #22

(11-08-2012 01:38 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  I didn't like Tenderman's post. But the debt will crush America. There is no doubt. We're wasting time and money on placating minorities and activists, believing Obama's false promises government will fix all these problems it in fact created, while the Chinese are buying up commodities with our worthless dollars from corrupt African states that are too dumb to realize that money isn't worth the paper it's printed on. This is not doom and gloom, these are facts.

You know, your statement would carry much more value if you also mentioned couple of wars we're running and remembered who started them. You know, like giving the credit when it's due. Also an explanation about how we ended up with so much debt between 2001-2009 when a conservative was in power would be helpful too. This would be at least fair.

Post: #23

(11-08-2012 03:56 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  Also I heard there were some pretty wars which cost some money, you're so good with the numbers, could you please enlighten me who was that bad liberal socialist dude who started them? Could you tell me how much they cost so far? I've seen some really scary numbers.

Those numbers aren't even that bad.

1.3 trillions dollars over 10 years for war?

That's probably the cheapest war America has ever fought. Over that same period total output was over 100 trillion dollars. Annual output today is around 16 trillion dollars.

That's not that expensive. We spend more than 1.3 trillion dollars a year on entitlements.

We spend over 300bn dollars a year on interest on the federal debt, which means the interest rate is around 2%. That is insanely cheap. Most US debt is short-term funded, and the Fed buys something like 75% of US Treasury Bonds and T-Bills, which keeps those rates artificially low. If the Fed wasn't pumping the economy with imaginary and make-believe currency, interest rates would be closer to 6% and we'd be paying 900 billion dollars a YEAR on federal interest.

So let's bury this idea Iraq and Afghanistan are the cause of our problems, OK? Mismanaged wars? Yes. Expensive? No.

Eye on the ball, please. It's entitlements, bloated government bureaucracy at several levels of government (in the military as well), debt and immigration that's really crushing us.

Post: #24

(11-08-2012 04:09 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 01:38 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  believing Obama's false promises government will fix all these problems it in fact created

You know, your statement would carry much more value if you also mentioned couple of wars we're running and remembered who started them. You know, like giving the credit when it's due. Also an explanation about how we ended up with so much debt between 2001-2009 when a conservative was in power would be helpful too. This would be at least fair.

As I outlined above, the numbers simply do not support the idea the war's have broken our finances.

What's really expensive are entitlements.

And I absolutely agree Bush created a lot of these problems - that's what I wrote, wasn't it? Obama just made them worse. I believe it's all Bush's fault, really, because he enabled Obama. Obama is just a liberal Prez, you can't blame him for doing what he says he wants to do. You can get mad at Bush for selling out, destroying conservative credibility, retarding financial markets, encouraging more generational thievery, mismanaging our wars, pursuing left-wing progressive agendas when he should've been a responsible conservative.

Post: #25

(11-08-2012 04:14 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  1.3 trillions dollars over 10 years for war?
That's probably the cheapest war America has ever fought. Over that same period total output was over 100 trillion dollars. Annual output today is around 16 trillion dollars.

So then why everyone complaining we're in debt and need cut spending? After all, we can afford spending 100B a year for a war.

Quote:So let's bury this idea Iraq and Afghanistan are the cause of our problems, OK? Mismanaged wars? Yes. Expensive? No.

There are many causes, but if 100B a year is not a waste for you, I definitely wouldn't trust you with any cuts.
And yeah, I'm sure taxing rich is definitely a better solution - although I'm actually one of those who's going to get taxed under Obama's proposal (as a lot of other people here in Silicon Valley). It is Arkansas population who have nothing to worry about.