BoatBanter.com - the american plutocracy

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - the american plutocracy (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/118734-american-plutocracy.html)

the American plutocracy

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 16:55:52 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 13:14:47 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:48:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

What????? It's about $1M/year/troop. I think you missed something
somewhere...
I am just quoting the number that is floating around CNN and MSNBC
this week.

The $1m a year is DoD overall and includes that soldier painting rocks
white outside an officer's club in Arkansas and a sailor working at
the Base Exchange in Norfolk

It's not $1M per hour. It's $1M per year. Don't know what CNN/MSNBC
said.
If
it's DoD over all, then it's got to be less per soldier.

You are right about the $1m per year. Now you have me curious about
the other number. Dylan Ratigan, Charley Rose and one of the CNN guys
all had the same number and I heard it to be $700k/hr. I will go back
through my DVR and see if I can get a better cite

Maybe it was $700/hour? :)

No it was a huge number because they were talking about it compared to
the cost of education and other things we spend a lot of money on.

Probably in the $5-10k an hour range. Depending how many soldiers we are
counting in Iraq. There is 8760 man hours in a year. Multiply that by the
number of soldiers and divide that in to the $800 billion a year or whatever
we are spending there. 10,000 soldiers is about $9k an hour.

the American plutocracy

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 23:55:58 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:48:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

What????? It's about $1M/year/troop. I think you missed something
somewhere...
I am just quoting the number that is floating around CNN and MSNBC
this week.

The $1m a year is DoD overall and includes that soldier painting rocks
white outside an officer's club in Arkansas and a sailor working at
the Base Exchange in Norfolk

And how much of the DOD budget is pork of non DOD spending? the first
Supplemental spending bill for Iraq was something like 24% pork. I have
said for years to get us out of most of Europe and a lot of other lands.
Japan, until they decided to spend excessively like we are presently
doing,
was doing really well as their total cost for Civil Defense was only about
6% of GDP. That included Fire, Police, National Guard, Coast Guard, etc.
Gave them about 10% extra of GDP for financing companies to take business
away from the US and other lands. Yes we can cut defense spending 25% as
well. But where is the basis for spending on NEA? Or other really
discretionary items like that? Dept. of Education was not even a
department
until about 1974. What is their budget now? How many employees? How
much
did spending go up during the Clinton years? Just like California, they
spent the windfall of the dot.com boom, without saving any of the
windfall.
Plus they committed the spending in to future years. Clinton came closer
to
balancing the budget, only because there was a tremendous surge in Federal
Revenues from all those IPO's. They took about 36.5% of every IPO. 35%
top
tax rate and 1.5% Medicare tax. No upper limits on either. Look at the
vote buying via Medicare and the drug benefits. Totally out of control
spending.

There is an interesting idea floating around the tax reform community.
Maybe the tax payer should get a receipt at the end of the year (just
a web site you can visit, not a piece of paper) that takes your total
tax bill and breaks it down into how much money went to SS, Medicare,
DoD, HHS etc.
It would be a real eye opener for most people. You quickly figure out
that most of the things people bitch about the loudest only cost them
$10 a year or less. The lion's share of your tax money goes to things
people are not willing to cut. Social Security and Medicare.
DoD is really the big slice of the pie that we can cut but it is
skillfully doled out to all 50 states so it is hard to get much
traction in congress for cutting any of it.
DoD is our ongoing stimulus project.

DoD probably is a better stimulus than what the Stimulus package is spending
on. Still we need to cut spending at least 45%. Match expenses to revenues
and pay down some of the massive debt. DeFume likes NEA. Why are we
funding arts when we are borrowing to fund basics? We are cutting aid to
the handicapped, but paying for performance arts, etc. I like the arts, I
do art welding as a hobby, I go to plays, but I can afford to spend for the
tickets and the welding supplies. The government's can not afford the
luxuries these days. Just like a family should, if you can not afford it,
do not buy it.

the American plutocracy

"Califbill" wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 23:55:58 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 10:48:17 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

What????? It's about $1M/year/troop. I think you missed something
somewhere...
I am just quoting the number that is floating around CNN and MSNBC
this week.

The $1m a year is DoD overall and includes that soldier painting rocks
white outside an officer's club in Arkansas and a sailor working at
the Base Exchange in Norfolk

And how much of the DOD budget is pork of non DOD spending? the first
Supplemental spending bill for Iraq was something like 24% pork. I have
said for years to get us out of most of Europe and a lot of other lands.
Japan, until they decided to spend excessively like we are presently
doing,
was doing really well as their total cost for Civil Defense was only
about
6% of GDP. That included Fire, Police, National Guard, Coast Guard, etc.
Gave them about 10% extra of GDP for financing companies to take business
away from the US and other lands. Yes we can cut defense spending 25% as
well. But where is the basis for spending on NEA? Or other really
discretionary items like that? Dept. of Education was not even a
department
until about 1974. What is their budget now? How many employees? How
much
did spending go up during the Clinton years? Just like California, they
spent the windfall of the dot.com boom, without saving any of the
windfall.
Plus they committed the spending in to future years. Clinton came closer
to
balancing the budget, only because there was a tremendous surge in
Federal
Revenues from all those IPO's. They took about 36.5% of every IPO. 35%
top
tax rate and 1.5% Medicare tax. No upper limits on either. Look at the
vote buying via Medicare and the drug benefits. Totally out of control
spending.

There is an interesting idea floating around the tax reform community.
Maybe the tax payer should get a receipt at the end of the year (just
a web site you can visit, not a piece of paper) that takes your total
tax bill and breaks it down into how much money went to SS, Medicare,
DoD, HHS etc.
It would be a real eye opener for most people. You quickly figure out
that most of the things people bitch about the loudest only cost them
$10 a year or less. The lion's share of your tax money goes to things
people are not willing to cut. Social Security and Medicare.
DoD is really the big slice of the pie that we can cut but it is
skillfully doled out to all 50 states so it is hard to get much
traction in congress for cutting any of it.
DoD is our ongoing stimulus project.

DoD probably is a better stimulus than what the Stimulus package is
spending on. Still we need to cut spending at least 45%. Match expenses
to revenues and pay down some of the massive debt. DeFume likes NEA. Why
are we funding arts when we are borrowing to fund basics? We are cutting
aid to the handicapped, but paying for performance arts, etc. I like the
arts, I do art welding as a hobby, I go to plays, but I can afford to
spend for the tickets and the welding supplies. The government's can not
afford the luxuries these days. Just like a family should, if you can not
afford it, do not buy it.

The DoD spending is good stim, the stim was good stim, the GM bailout was
good stim (their/domestic sales are up, foreign car sales down, even with
incentives), Yes, I like the NEA. No, we can't cut spending 45% in this
economy Mr. Hoover.

the American plutocracy

On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 10:54:45 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

DoD probably is a better stimulus than what the Stimulus package is spending

nope. these studies have been done. DoD is one of the least efficient
ways to stimulate the economy, even less efficient than cutting taxes
for the rich

on. Still we need to cut spending at least 45%. Match expenses to revenues
and pay down some of the massive debt. DeFume likes NEA.

yawn. you're talking hair cuts, not major surgery.

the american plutocracy

On 6-Oct-2010, bpuharic wrote:

americans think, wrongly, that the upper 20% of americans have 60% of
the coutnry's weath. the REAL figure is 85%.

http://www.good.is/post/americans-ar...ign=o utbrain

so what are they going to do?

send to congress the GOP who thinks this 20% should be given a massive
tax cut.

makes sense, huh?

High wage individual will always make high wages. Poor people will always
be poor. What's changing in the US is the movement of middle class to the
category of poor. Production of raw materials through management,
engineering and marketing made a middle class. With the US absorbing excess
production capacity from Korea, Japan and China, the middle class is no
longer needed. Will they become "rich?" No, they slide the other way into
poverty. Of COURSE there's a bigger gap. The high income people could adapt
- people existing on inflated and extorted wages cannot.

You ain't seen NUTHIN yet.

I explained the solution 10,000 times, won't be doing it again. OK, may 100
times.

the american plutocracy

On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 23:17:54 GMT, "Colonel Kurtz"
wrote:

On 6-Oct-2010, bpuharic wrote:

send to congress the GOP who thinks this 20% should be given a massive
tax cut.

makes sense, huh?

High wage individual will always make high wages.

yeah especially if they rig the system to steal everything not nailed
down like your pals on wall street did, while adding nothing to the US
economy

Poor people will always
be poor.

that happens in a dictatorship, doesn't it?

What's changing in the US is the movement of middle class to the
category of poor

and the right wing is acting as midwife during the process

You ain't seen NUTHIN yet.

I explained the solution 10,000 times, won't be doing it again. OK, may 100
times.

your view is to starve the middle class to make sure the rich stay
rich

the solution is obvious. heavy taxes on wall street...massive
unionization of the middle class

but the righ won't permit this

the american plutocracy

"Colonel Kurtz" wrote in message
...

On 6-Oct-2010, bpuharic wrote:

americans think, wrongly, that the upper 20% of americans have 60% of
the coutnry's weath. the REAL figure is 85%.

http://www.good.is/post/americans-ar...ign=o utbrain

so what are they going to do?

send to congress the GOP who thinks this 20% should be given a massive
tax cut.

makes sense, huh?

High wage individual will always make high wages. Poor people will always
be poor. What's changing in the US is the movement of middle class to the
category of poor. Production of raw materials through management,
engineering and marketing made a middle class. With the US absorbing
excess
production capacity from Korea, Japan and China, the middle class is no
longer needed. Will they become "rich?" No, they slide the other way into
poverty. Of COURSE there's a bigger gap. The high income people could
adapt
- people existing on inflated and extorted wages cannot.

You ain't seen NUTHIN yet.

I explained the solution 10,000 times, won't be doing it again. OK, may
100
times.

Thus, you skipped out. Got it.

the American plutocracy