DescentBB

I guess it just goes to show that money can't buy happiness, or world peace for that matter. Some things are priceless for everything else there is the US taxpayer.

Since 2001, Congress has approved $507 billion for Afghanistan, Iraq and other operations deemed part of combating terrorism. Even with the Democrats in control, there is unlikely to be much appetite for cutting the war-related spending requests, Mr. Kosiak said.

\"No one seems to be saying we're going to make deep cuts in war-related expenditures,\" he said. \"I don't see evidence that the Democrats are interested in cutting this.\"

Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/30/washi ... ref=slogin

At that price couldn't you have just bought Iraq and had Afghanistan thrown in as a deal sweetener? I mean that is only about 6 grand each man, woman and child. Give them the cash and let them take a year off to hang out on the beach or something. Things would be a lot quieter.

That 507bn would have fed clothed and provided utilities for, what the entire undeveloped world? And what did humans do with it? A war? Really? ..how..pathetic.

I thought that number was higher, actually. My arse hurts more than 507bn worth.

My greatest political concern at this point is that the Democrats won't have the spine to cut funding for the war.

Kyouryuu wrote:My greatest political concern at this point is that the Democrats won't have the spine to cut funding for the war.

The first concern is always figuring out which contractors will pay your party millions of dollars in campaign donations so you can be sure not to cut the funding that those donors benefit from...

Then you assign your lackeys the task of preparing your double speak explanations to the press when they ask you about it...

Then you figure out how to personally benefit financially from the defense budget...

Then you go on TV and bite your lower lip, tell the people how you feel their pain, and how only by voting for you will the corruption be stopped...

Welcome to a government of the lobbiests, for the lobbiests!

Testiculese wrote:That 507bn would have fed clothed and provided utilities for, what the entire undeveloped world? And what did humans do with it? A war? Really? ..how..pathetic.

Ah yes, Testiculese the politician:
Politician #1: "Ok, Ok, so what should we do with this 500 billion dollars that the taxpayers give us?"
Politician #2: "Hmm... How about we spend it in military, and attack a few Asian countries, mabye keep control of them and prevent them from launching attacks on us? And plus, we'll get cheaper fuel prices as a bonus!"
Mr. Testiculese: "There's no need for this violence! Why should we waste thousands of lives fighting, even if it might keep us in power a little longer? I say we give it to all the poor people in the undeveloped worlds, so that they may too get a chance to be as powerful as our country! And wouldn't it be great to get that warm feeling in your heart from helping others?"

Somewhere in West Australia:
Kid: "Mommy? Did you hear people laughing too?"

TIGERassault wrote:

Testiculese wrote:That 507bn would have fed clothed and provided utilities for, what the entire undeveloped world? And what did humans do with it? A war? Really? ..how..pathetic.

Ah yes, Testiculese the politician:
Politician #1: "Ok, Ok, so what should we do with this 500 billion dollars that the taxpayers give us?"
Politician #2: "Hmm... How about we spend it in military, and attack a few Asian countries, mabye keep control of them and prevent them from launching attacks on us? And plus, we'll get cheaper fuel prices as a bonus!"
Mr. Testiculese: "There's no need for this violence! Why should we waste thousands of lives fighting, even if it might keep us in power a little longer? I say we give it to all the poor people in the undeveloped worlds, so that they may too get a chance to be as powerful as our country! And wouldn't it be great to get that warm feeling in your heart from helping others?"

Somewhere in West Australia:
Kid: "Mommy? Did you hear people laughing too?"

I don't think Testi was advocating giving the money away he was just illustrating the contrast of just how much 'good' could come from such a large budget versus the end result of how it was actually spent...

Thank you, Will. Sometimes I type too subtle, I suppose

Will Robinson wrote:I don't think Testi was advocating giving the money away he was just illustrating the contrast of just how much 'good' could come from such a large budget versus the end result of how it was actually spent...

Yes, it was a bit hard not to notice that! But I just couldn't resist anyway!

Don't forget, that's ON TOP OF the 380 Billion or so, the military spends each year. So, the figure is around 2.8 TRILLION spent in the last 6 years on killing people and destroying countries.

I feel bad for everyone's kids. They're the ones who are getting royally @#$%ed. They've been born into slavery.

Will Robinson wrote:Welcome to a government of the lobbiests, for the lobbiests!

Term limits. Term limits. Term limits.

Nothing will change in Washington unless we can oust the archaic clowns that rule the roost year in and year out.

I want to see the demise of the "career politician." No one should be able to make a living as a Senator. You either move up the chain or you go home. Simple as that.

Term limits would also create a moving target for lobbyists. It doesn't solve the lobbyist problem, but it would probably force them to spend more money due to the revolving door of politicians, rather than paying some geezer his yearly fee to vote their way. Plus, it prevents them from buying political capitol as easily. They could pay someone off, but if that guy will only be there for a fixed number of years, it's not a strong investment in the future.

No matter if it is the NRA or Greenpeace, lobbyists are a rampant infection of our government. Let's call it what it is: bribery.

Kyouryuu wrote:I want to see the demise of the "career politician." No one should be able to make a living as a Senator. You either move up the chain or you go home. Simple as that.

I like this idea. It seems as if many politicians are corrupted over time; if they weren't in office long enough for that to occur, it could make a big difference.

Mobius:

Don't forget, that's ON TOP OF the 380 Billion or so, the military spends each year. So, the figure is around 2.8 TRILLION spent in the last 6 years on killing people and destroying countries.

I don't think so Mobi. The article seems to indicate that this is the total spent on the military by the US since 2001. The figure might not include all that you would consider \"military\" such as the national guard and even the CIA.

Ford Prefect wrote:Mobius:

Don't forget, that's ON TOP OF the 380 Billion or so, the military spends each year. So, the figure is around 2.8 TRILLION spent in the last 6 years on killing people and destroying countries.

I don't think so Mobi. The article seems to indicate that this is the total spent on the military by the US since 2001. The figure might not include all that you would consider "military" such as the national guard and even the CIA.

Not to mention the "Star Wars" thing.
How much is being spent on that nowadays anyway?

Political draft.

... then no one would want to be in office.

catch22 wrote:Political draft.

... then no one would want to be in office.

I love that idea. Imagine you go to the mailbox to get your mail and on the walk back into the house your wife hears you say "Oh ★■◆● me!! I got Congress duty!!"
You would have a bunch of people in their that have a grudge against the system instead of looking to make it a lifetime career! Lets do it!!!

Hmm, I was just about to suggest a Demarchial system like that.