Korean Job Discussion Forums

[mises]

Not to be too picky, but wouldn't it depend on what your tax dollars buy? I don't want to pay for bombs that are dropped on Afghanistan. Am I not patriotic? I also don't want to pay for the rehab of some meth junkie (with a short memory). Am I not patriotic?

Sounds like an argument for submission to power.

[Ya-ta Boy]

[Ya-ta Boy]

Real Clear Politics is running another article disagreeing with Biden. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/but_one_life_to_give_the_irs.html

This one too brings up 'redistribution of wealth', like Pluto did. It seems an evasion of Biden's point.

I guess what's really on my mind is why the Korean reaction in '97 was so very different. They got about $50 billion and AIG alone got $80. Koreans ransacked their attics and turned in all the gold they could find to save the country. They cooperated and in 2 years' time the worst was over.

So far, it seems a large number of Americans are reacting with 'Cut someone else's programs but don't ask me to share the burden'.

Disappointing.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[bacasper]

[bacasper]

Tax resistance is patriotic.

[Nowhere Man]

In this case, you have to factor in national debt as well. Is China spending a kazillion dollars on its military with a national debt of $9+ trillion?

It's actually pretty hard to track down on the net how much their national debt is, but it looks like it's about $60 billion or so.

As for R&D, that accounts for roughly 16% of the military's spending.

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

You're quite right about US troops being more expensive than those of other countries. However, it's never been clear to me how troops in Iraq were struggling for body armor and welding plates onto Hummers while, over here, soldiers are getting their Harleys flown to Korea for "hardship duty".

That also doesn't properly account for defense contractors contributing to campaign funds.

Nor does it account for why the war spending isn't terribly accountable at all.

(No sigline, so here it is)
http://www.truemajorityaction.org/oreos/

The "sitting duck" argument for current defense spending is much akin to the slippery slope arguments made by gun enthusiasts.

[mises]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[Kuros]

I had to go back up and edit my post, because apparently people thought I meant that the Dept. of Education could possibly be thought to be a huge drain on our treasury, when assuredly it is miniscule next to the defense expenditures I know Pluto so fervently supports.

----------------

It seems to me there has been a huge transfer of wealth in the form of borrowing. The Baby Boomers have been borrowing and borrowing on their equity, both publicly and privately, effectively passing the buck on to my generation (I'm under 30). This is the real wealth redistribution.

What's worst is that this is occurring with a generation that has not had enough children to support them. The Baby Boomers are the first American generation to beget fewer than their own number. Taken alone, this is not anything but economically problematic. But aggregated with the effect of excess borrowing BEFORE the demographic meltdown is terrible, terrible national negligence.

The worst part is that it hampers our ability to take care of the baby boomers when they are old. Social Security cannot be dismantled for those already over 50, that would be a catastrophe. But as it is, its being eroded away by fiscal constraints.

It seems like one could label this fiscal lack of restraint many things, but allowing it to happen is anything but patriotic.

[bacasper]

[Nowhere Man]

[RJjr]

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14962

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[quote="Nowhere Man"]

[bacasper]