U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:07 AM
 
20,274 posts, read 18,883,560 times
Reputation: 2827

Advertisements

Military spending is certainly way too high in the United States. However, it should be noted that military spending as a percentage of GDP was even higher, sometimes much higher, for most of the Cold War era.

So, too-high military spending is a legitimate problem, but it is NOT an excuse for failing to devote adequate resources to things like public education, infrastructure, and so on.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:18 AM
gg gg started this thread
 
Location: Pittsburgh
11,661 posts, read 8,002,295 times
Reputation: 4234
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTH View Post
Military spending is certainly way too high in the United States. However, it should be noted that military spending as a percentage of GDP was even higher, sometimes much higher, for most of the Cold War era.
How the heck do you know? You don't. Only the Pentagon really knows what we spend, because the government doesn't report it to us. They pull numbers out of the air.

You sure find ways of defending big government in everything. It truly is shocking. There are so many wholes in your propaganda, it is shocking. You do know our government throws numbers on paper like a $100 coke can, or picks numbers out of the air for all military expenses? You have read about all that haven't you? Some feel our budget is over 1.2 Trillion a year. Who knows what it really is?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:20 AM
 
37 posts, read 29,968 times
Reputation: 30
Guys...aren't you kinda on the same side for once?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:25 AM
 
20,274 posts, read 18,883,560 times
Reputation: 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanpreppie05 View Post
Guys...aren't you kinda on the same side for once?
Kinda, because we both believe military spending is too high.

However, I further believe that means we should be spending less on the military. h_curtis further believes that means we should be spending less on public education and infrastructure. So that is where we part company.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 09:29 AM
gg gg started this thread
 
Location: Pittsburgh
11,661 posts, read 8,002,295 times
Reputation: 4234
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanpreppie05 View Post
Guys...aren't you kinda on the same side for once?
He is still somehow trying to justify and say, oh but the military budget isn't as great of a percentage as the GOP. Brian doesn't know that at all. He is just throwing out more propaganda. He doesn't know the military budget. No one does. It is all smoke and mirrors. We live in a Military Industrial Complex and we all know it. It has a profound effect on schools and really EVERYTHING to better our country. The trickle down doesn't happen. It is all spent to protect our fears. The fear exists in a huge way due to 9/11. It was a turning point and people are okay with a blank check to the military. How is it relevant? No money left for anything else on the federal level, so they don't give any money to the state and no money to anyone to fund the machine. It has an effect on us all, but we don't see it. People don't connect the dots.

Sorry if this is to political for this forum, but it effects our schools, roads and infrastructure. It is never going to get better unless people figure this stuff out.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Shadyside, Pittsburgh
690 posts, read 446,237 times
Reputation: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by h_curtis View Post
He is still somehow trying to justify and say, oh but the military budget isn't as great of a percentage as the GOP. Brian doesn't know that at all. He is just throwing out more propaganda. He doesn't know the military budget. No one does. It is all smoke and mirrors. We live in a Military Industrial Complex and we all know it. It has a profound effect on schools and really EVERYTHING to better our country. The trickle down doesn't happen. It is all spent to protect our fears. The fear exists in a huge way due to 9/11. It was a turning point and people are okay with a blank check to the military. How is it relevant? No money left for anything else on the federal level, so they don't give any money to the state and no money to anyone to fund the machine. It has an effect on us all, but we don't see it. People don't connect the dots.

Sorry if this is to political for this forum, but it effects our schools, roads and infrastructure. It is never going to get better unless people figure this stuff out.
I have a hard time that anyone doesn't believe this. Even if you think that all military spending is disclosed, it's still what, 25% or more of the federal budget? We all know that's a huge number and that it takes away from other things.

What relevance does this have on the relative performance of one school district to another, where there is essentially a level playing field of trickle-down funding?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 10:43 AM
 
20,274 posts, read 18,883,560 times
Reputation: 2827
I don't want to get dragged into another silly argument, but there is really no reason to believe there is more hidden military spending now than there was during the Cold War.

Again, my point in noting that military spending was higher as a percentage of GDP for most of the Cold War era is not to defend the current level of military spending. It is to remove current military spending as an excuse for not investing enough resources in education and infrastructure.

In fact, recall that by the end of the Clinton Administration, military spending was in fact cut significantly as a percentage of GDP from Cold War levels. Of course most of those cuts were undone eventually by the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, but even before then, that "peace dividend" wasn't used to greatly increase our investments in education and infrastructure, and instead most of it went to the Bush tax cuts.

Of course I understand why h_curtis wants to use military spending as an excuse for underfunding education and infrastructure, and ignore the fact we have been favoring tax cuts over those categories of spending: about 98% of what he posts is one argument or another for why he personally should be paying lower taxes at the expense of things like education and infrastructure. But for those of us who actually care about education and infrastructure, we should not accept as an excuse from the likes of h_curtis that our too-high military spending means we must have too-low education and infrastructure spending.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 10:54 AM
 
666 posts, read 1,307,935 times
Reputation: 355
Well, I just popped into this thread to see what the pages of discussion were about, and I see h_curtis and BrianTH are debating again. Just wanted to mention that someone taught me long ago that any argument is weakened when emotion is involved. Just from glancing at these two stated positions with no knowledge to support either, I'm inclined to throw out the one stating propaganda this, conspiracy that, everyone needs to wake up, etc. etc. etc. Just my two cents on how I personally perceive arguments here. Facts are interesting, and debatable. Conspiracy theories and emotional rants are overdone, and are the main reason many of your posts garner so much negative attention.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 12:38 PM
 
6,005 posts, read 1,999,179 times
Reputation: 2746
From the Wall Street Journal. Notice how you covert old scores to new ones. I guess it's an accident that all new scores are artificially high.

Quote:
JUNE 3, 2009
Updating old SAT Scores
Sue Schellenbarger


Q:We enjoyed your column on retaking the SAT after 41 years. Like you, I took the SAT in the 1960s. How can I adjust my scores from that era to make them comparable to today's scores?
S.F. A: To update scores on any SAT tests taken before April 1995, add about 70 to 80 points to your old verbal score, up to a maximum of 800, the College Board says. My 1967 verbal score was 740, so it became 800 after adjustment. Updates to math scores vary based on the original score. If you scored between 200 and 500 originally, add 30 points. If you scored above 500, add 20 points. If you scored above 550, add 10 points. If you topped 600 in math on the old SAT, keep your original score, rounded to the nearest 10-point interval. For example, my 1967 math score was 636, so the College Board recommended I round it to 640. Scores today are reported only in 10-point intervals....
more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124397818883378713.html
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2012, 03:50 PM
 
6,005 posts, read 1,999,179 times
Reputation: 2746
Crickets from the peanut gallery.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top