Here's a plan to save some fucking money; stop spending HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR ON THE FUCKING MILITARY.

He realized that we are spending more than we will be able to get back. It is better than endless spending without remorse. He is a true leader that looks out for our well-being.

Here's a plan to save some fucking money; stop sending it to worthless Haitian niggers.

>>25000
God, Liberals always seem to amaze me. The Military is the keystone to everything in this country. Without it we would have nothing, no bargaining chips in economics, no power or wealth. The only thing we need to do though is maintain a military. No more international policing efforts in Haiti or Iraq. Also Afghanistan is a totally other issue so don't debate that here.

>>25012
Here is a plan, cry more. Obama is showing the world that he isn't Bush.

I'm not really savvy on politics or economics, so, what would happen if we brought that deficit down to 0?

>>25059

no hes not. fucking scott brown won in mass and now all the democrats are losing there fucking minds and jumping ship. hes pulling a clinton and moving to the center so he can be a 2 term president.

>>25047
You act like we want to completely end military spending. We don't. We just want to cut it in half.

Conservative

Political maneuver to get re-elected and/or to help dems in 2010. We all know he wants to spend as much as he can before China stops lending.

Idiotic.
As long as employment is tanking we ought to spending like a sailor on payday.
Once everything stabilizes, we can worry about the debt.
Yes, there's going to be allot of debt and it's going to suck when we deal with it, but that's because we've had a bunch of children in charge who thought that tax cuts would pay for themselves, economies could grow forever, and markets would regulate themselves. Let's clean up the mess they left in the real economy first, and then, when we have the real bill for it, we can worry about the government books.

>>25081
That is no longer possible. Bill Clinton achieved it by shutting down congress for weeks. That was at the height of an economic boom, during peacetime.

In order for Obama to do that, he would have to end the war. Then close both the House and The Senate (nothing of value would be lost) for a full year. Even doing that, we would still be spending like crazy due to loans needing to be repaid.

One solution is to stop bailing out companies. If a company goes under, the CEO should spend the rest of their life in prison for letting so many families down.

>>25115
He's not moving to the center. He's just trying to look like he's "learned his lesson and changed his priority to the same thing as the voters".

Obama is the same person today that he was last month. He still wants the same things, and thinks the same things needs to be done to improve America. But he knows that his party has to appear to care about jobs and the high debt and overspending. Just like when he was in Florida, he was suddenly concerned with the space program and sending Americans to the Moon and beyond.

how much does the US spend on defense?

>>25142
So you don't even believe that the deficit is the major problem?
This is what the GOP has been shrieking for months now.

SHUT THE FUCK UP

Liberals fail to understand history it seems. During the 19th century, the greatest, most expansive empire in the world was Great Britain. Do you think they were able to control their colonies and overseas provinces by spending money on green energy? Fuck no. They spent it on a massive navy, and that massive navy enabled them to control their empire for over a hundred years.

Unfortunately the world caught up with them and they were unable to afford controlling the many colonies and ended up releasing them as sovereign states. Regardless, the British Empire wouldn't even had existed had the Brits not investing strongly in their navy.

>>24965

>affects about 447 billion of the annual budget
>results in 250 billion in savings over 10 years
>you now realize the savings results in less than half a percentage point of the deficit.

yep Obama's really raining in the spending there isn't he.

>>25143
You fail at economics.

What we should be doing is lowering taxes, both personal (for small businesses and common consumer) and corporate tax rates. That would result in more money staying in the pockets of those entities, and they'd turn around and spend it (businesses would be able to expand, hiring more people).

Government spending doesn't help the economy, it just masks your lessened private sector economic activity.

>>25175
Of course it is a problem.
I just think that he is doing it out of political necessity, not out of a true desire to do the right thing.

>>24965
It's a gimmick. The number of things that aren't exempted from this freeze make up an amusingly small amount of our budget. Our debt is up to like $12 trillion dollars, and the absolute most this "freeze" could save is about $10 billion over 3 years. And that's IF the congresscritters and bureaucracies don't ignore/ask for exception from the freeze. Which they will.

I also think it's hilarious that McCain proposed the idea of a spending freeze during one of the debates and Obama mocked him for trying to use a hatchet where a scalpel was necessary.

This guy is such an amateur.

>>25175
>the GOP
The same party that was in charge when the problems were created. The same party America voted out of power and now avoid due to seeing McCain and Palin as the final choices.

>>25204
Should say $100 billion, not $10 billion. My bad.

>>25182
so....we need more galleons?

>>25132

Im not against cutting military spending, i want to keep research funding up, along with keeping a large and effective force, but I dont think we need a occupation force. But in reality the reason we have so much spent on the military is because we have always been pushed into the role of Protector and Defender of Freedom across the world, its not a republican or Bush thing, it due to the fact we stood up to protect Europe after world war two, and Europe has never taken over for themselves (not to single Europe out, it is actually the entire world short of Russia and China). I would be fine if US Military troops were never deployed for the next 100 years. As long as we maintain a military force that is still just as threatening, and as talented.

>>25143


economic fail

>>25012
Federal aid to other countries in terms of humanitarian missions are usually quite small. The majority of those funds come from private hands, hence why people keep getting bombarded into donating.

On the subject of cutting costs, I'm gonna say that we may not need eleven Carrier Groups.
Just throwin' that out there. A Navy capable of fighting the remainder of the planet might just be a bit much.

>>25174

Federal Spending Diagram

This is the exact things I need for my thesis. Keep it going :)

Moderate:

I'm so glad to have a forum for dialogue like this....my view: If we'd have elected Ross Perot in '92 none of this would be necessary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Os94JBRvTw

Last I read, America's military budget (above and below the table) is roughly equivalent to the sum of every other nation on the Earth, combined.
I really don't think we have an enemy(ies) worth that level of financial commitment. Unless there really are Cylons, and it's being kept quiet.

I mean, a few special forces units, and a hundred million dollars in expenses would've probably done it for Osama bin Forgotten.

>>25242
CONTROL THE SEAS, CONTROL THE WORLD

reporting a spending freeze without making cuts on the defense budget is like ordering a large big-mac meal with diet coke.

>>25242
I would cut the army and marines a before the navy or air force. The navy and air force allow us to project power around the world and defend us from foreign invaders (if anyone was that stupid). The army and marines have been used mostly for nation building, which has been expensive in terms of lives and money. If we didn't have those forces sitting around, there would be much more of a hassle to go to war. Think about how much money is spent to keep up the military when it is not in use. I would cut the standing army by 50% and have the remaining be 2/3 reserves.

That is once we leave Afghanistan and Iraq.

>>25169

That wasn't what I was asking. I just want to know what life would be like with no deficit. Would it really make a noticeable difference? Again, I'm not savvy on politics or economics.

Not a military fag here, but if we cut our military spending by a significant amount, get out of the middle east, close down overseas bases, and let the world continue on its own course would the world REALLY just collapse that quickly?

Can't we just keep small, specially trained troops and shit? Will there ever come a time when massive conventional warfare threatens us? Doesn't nuclear weaponry eliminate that?

>>25360
defense contractors wouldnt like that

>>25341

People on 4chan are always so trendy, and yet so philistine. The United Stats actively did that from its formation until World War one, what we found was that it actually cost far more to train and to put in action a large untested body. Than to keep a somewhat large and well trained force in reserve. We always bitch and moan because military cost is preventing us from having every socialistic bullshit, bu by and large part, all military spending is given to domestic companies, and the money eventually returns to the government. But trendy trendsetters in college hate not having socialized (fill in the blank).

>>25415
You aren't supposed to be posting truth and reality on this board! It is a bannable offense!