You're being civil, so I'm definitely willing to think about what you say. I'd agree that repairing transit vehicles and public school teachers are services. I don't see how those would fall under social welfare programs, though. I might have used the wrong term. School funds fall under state/local funding and I'm not sure what you did with transit vehicles. These are what are commonly recognized as social welfare programs (first Google result) https://singlemotherguide.com/federal-welfare-programs/
Isn't that their money?
Isn't that their money?
And they paid taxes on the money as they were making it helping pay for those roads. Did you educate yourself on what impeachment was yet?Hard to say. How did they get all that money, government resources and assistance? I guess they built all the roads that they drive their trucks on, provided the cushy trade deals to sell their goods overseas, used their own money to "loan themselves" to start their businesses, etc.
No, they did not build that on their own. No one ever has. stop being daft.
It is still their money.Inheritance is free money for rich people. What they did was put up with the old bastard until he died. They call it work.
One wonders how many people actually paid 90% in taxes.When most of that infrastructure was build, the marginal tax rate was incredibly high on the very rich. If we want to Make America Great Again (TM) that's what we need to bring back. Of course you'd shit yourself at the very idea...
One wonders how many people actually paid 90% in taxes.
That's the amount listed in the budget. Everything not listed, or listed as something else that goes to maintaining/delivering weapons is about a Trillion, more or less.
If we can compromise at .75 Trillion/year, do the math on the past 63 years (since '64), and then compare it with the amount spent to help your neighbors creating a first world western civilization.
When you ask how money sent to Raytheon and Boeing isn't put back into the economy, it's because many people who benefit from those payments are able to stash that money into bank accounts. Whereas, giving someone who needs helping buying food tomorrow means the money goes right back into the economy, directly, rather than being used to provide Wall St. criminals an opportunity to collect Fees, Commissions and Bonuses while inflating financial bubbles.
Funny thing about that, Congress at this very moment is talking about repealing the inheritance tax which would result in $53 billion gift to a single family.. the Waltons and more than a trillion dollars for the families of a few hundred of America's wealthy. Money that will not get fed back into the economy and instead will be funneled to politicians by those families. Ironically the Waltons made their fortune by exporting American jobs overseas. They spent a lifetime harming America, crippling the middle class and now they want to change the law so that they continue using that money to prevert our political system for decades to come. And you are worried about helping the dirt poor? If you were a student of history you would know that turning your back on the poor is one of the fastest routes to violent revolution.
I find it somewhat repugnant to be bitching about billions to the most needy while contemplating TRILLIONS to the 0.001%ers.
Interesting that you'd link a source that contradicts your numbers in an obfuscational post. Your link says $637B in 2015. It was about the same in 2014.
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/blog/2014/11/11/how-much-do-we-spend-our-nations-veterans/
It doesn't include spending on veterans- there would be a lot fewer with problems if we didn't keep sending them out to get shot up & fucked up.
That's $791B or so each year. I'm confident that there are other bits of spending on behalf of the military tucked away here & there.
But never mind. Let's puff that up, Cut taxes for the financial elite & fuck them poors.
Cuz Freedumb! Cuz MAGA!
It is still their money.
I can't argue about off the books spending, but I also think it happens and it's wrong. Part of what allows things like that is an overly large and needlessly complex federal government. We agree that we spend too much on defense, but we don't agree on the social spending.
I don't think the majority of the money from bloated military contracts goes into bank accounts. Don't have any evidence to support it, but I would guess most of it goes into facilities, production, salary, materials, etc. That would be recycled into the economy. I'm not defending government spending (I think it's too much on everything), but I don't see a huge difference between that and what you proposed with social programs. I don't think the CEO of Boeing will take his millions from a military contract and put it in a bank account. I think he'll invest it in the stock market and give capital to other business to expand. Yes, he/she might put some in an offshore account, but he still was taxed on the bonus as income.
The thing about inheritance taxes is that they are just jealousy taxes. That money that people are leaving to their heirs has already been taxed. Why should it get taxed a second time for being inherited and then a third time when the kids spend it? That's just excessive. I wish my parents would leave me billions, but that is not the government's money. The government doesn't HAVE money; it just takes ours and spends it (poorly in many cases). I know, I know, conservative talking points, but it's true.
As for the jealousy, that is something that everyone has to work out on their own. I do think that we need to get businesses out of the federal government, but the only reason businesses try to influence the federal government is because it (gov) has so much power to influence our lives. Why would corporations spend money lobbying a weak government? They wouldn't.
Wasn't trying to obfuscate. I used the most recent passed numbers (2016) which says: "For FY 2017, President Obama proposed the base budget of $523.9 billion, which includes an increase of $2.2 billion over the FY 2016 enacted budget of $521.7 billion." Also, with that $637B in 2015 it states :"spending for 2014-15 is estimated", so that might explain why 2014-2015 are inflated compared to 2016-2017. Yeah, it' a wiki, so not the best source, but don't be so quick to decry deception.
That's interesting about veterans benefits; I didn't know that. As above, I agree that we need to eliminate spending tucked away here and there and that we are spending too much on our military, too.
And they paid taxes on the money as they were making it helping pay for those roads. Did you educate yourself on what impeachment was yet?
Why is it pretty much anyone with anything to do with guns or hunting in their username always turns out to be a selfish borderline-sociopath with the governmental and financial understanding of, say, the average sea slug? And the morals too.
Correct, the people receiving an inheritance didn't earn it (most of it, anyway), but there is a key difference. I can choose to specifically give my money to my children, charities, strangers, or whomever I want when I die. I can choose to give it to the poor when I die, and a lot of super wealthy people do choose to do that. But, welfare is the government, in essence, taking money by force and giving it to people that they choose. The difference is choice. You're not against choice, are you?Inheritance is free wealth. Inheritors no more earned it than poor people earn food stamps. Conservatives embrace welfare for the children of the rich & reject it for the children of the poor.
lol, you think they paid taxes? where, in the Cayman Islands?
You idiot.
Correct, the people receiving an inheritance didn't earn it (most of it, anyway), but there is a key difference. I can choose to specifically give my money to my children, charities, strangers, or whomever I want when I die. I can choose to give it to the poor when I die, and a lot of super wealthy people do choose to do that. But, welfare is the government, in essence, taking money by force and giving it to people that they choose. The difference is choice. You're not against choice, are you?
What is your problem?lol, you think they paid taxes? where, in the Cayman Islands?
You idiot.
And I will put this here to rub it in:I will put this here to rub it in - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-16/the-u-s-is-where-the-rich-are-the-richest
LOL @ all the foaming at the mouth....."them rich must pay more..much more...aggggrrrrrr.... whhhhhaaaaaaaaaaa"
So let's see those protesting give up their wealth.
Put your money where your P&N mouth is.
And I will put this here to rub it in:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...n-dream/ar-BBCKMQq?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
Despite all the rage in P&N against the 1 percent, or .01 percent (yeah, let's limit the parameters), that isn't the entire story. It's easy to get up in arms against those who ain't you, which is really what most of this crap is about...until they become you. And I would bet a large portion of those in here protesting against the .01% or even the 1% are members of the 20%. You're just as guilty. So let's see those protesting give up their wealth.
Put your money where your P&N mouth is.
And your wishes would be enforced by the govt by whatever means necessary. Beyond that, the rights of the public are superior to the rights of the individual, particularly concerning wealth-
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/w...s-paine-and-ben-franklin-you-didnt-build-that