$20,000,000,000,000.00 Decit...What is Hillary's Plan to REDUCE it?

[Spare_change]

She has no plan and neither does Trump

Wrong as always!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/u...l-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html?_r=0

Oh, so you mean stiff people for the money they're owed like he's been doing for the past 30 years?

No you claimed that Trump had NO plan, I showed he did using the far left NYT..

That doesn't do a whole lot of good when they'll continue spending money we don't have

We don't have the money because American workers continue to get fucked.

That makes zero sense ....

There is a finite amount of money in our economy. It doesn't matter how you split it - it still will only buy so many loaves of bread.

 

[regent]

Yes.
Many of them became BIG in the US and then left.
If they can do that, we can get back at them.
I don't give a damn if we need to threaten Congress to craft Legislation.

This method of economic warfare increases prices for consumers and independent manufacturing. Tariffs cost jobs because they disrespect the integrity of the free market.

Ever consider that socialism does not work?

I would guess that most industrial nations have a mixture of capitalism and socialism as does the United States. We probably also have a pinch of fascism and maybe even a trace of communism in our economy. Remember conservatives claimed Social Security was communistic and would lead to the downfall of the United States.

 

[Spare_change]

Hillary's plan has been scored by Independent think tanks, and over 10 years, will add $200 billion to the national debt. Trump's plan over 10 years will add $10 Trillion MORE to the National debt, making it $30 Trillion....

If you take the National Debt seriously, then you would HAVE to support Hillary and Hillary's plan, over the Donald's plan which ADDS nearly $10 Trillion more to the National Debt than her plan.

yes. Is there now some notion that Donald will reduce the debt with tariffs?

No...tariffs will reduce the sales of companies that have left the US.
The companies come back or someone else will fill the void.

Nearly all of our RTW and accessory merchandise is made overseas, and some things exclusively, and tariffs are added to these imports, the only people paying for the tariffs are the customers themselves.....and....

And if there is no USA ability to manufacture these products for less than the tariff plus shipping and cost of goods price, there still would be no reason for the importers not raising the price of their products to cover the tariffs, due to having no competition in the USA that would make them be retail price conscious....if customers want or need something, there will be no where to get it for less, so prices will simply go up for all of us, on most of our purchases and the businesses importing won't be hurt a bit....or not enough to make them come home...

When I was buying shoes directly from the manufactures in China, the average woman's cost around $6 a pair, and only half of the price was labor, plus owner's profit and the rest was the cost of materials...

now, on that $6 we had to add freight/shipping and Duties/Tariff costs....We usually placed a shipping container's worth at a time per vendor....and when we estimated what we would label as the "Landed Cost" for the shoes, would be the vendor's price sold to us, plus 10% more for freight/shipping and if the shoe were leather another 17% in tariff duties, and if it were fabric, then 27 1/2% more and if the shoe was mostly polyurethane then the duty was only an additional 6% of costs in tariff duties....so we still landed in the USA, the pair of shoe if leather, for $7.62 including these tariffs and freight costs....if this woman's shoe was bought from a USA vendor at the time, it would have been $15.00 at wholesale.

there was, (when I was Buying for a Brand and for department stores) so so so so so so so so much savings in the cost of the product by purchasing it in a place like China, even with high tariffs on the product, the savings was still greater than having them made here in the USA, thus all the shoe factories making shoes in the USA closed, hundreds and hundreds of them, mostly in the 70's and 80's....I think their might be 5 Brands that still make some of their products in the USA....with maybe 10 small line shoe factories in all of the USA now....

Back then shoes made in the USA were at least $15-$20 more a pair at retail, for the same quality of product....and even lesser quality because all of the factories in china had all upgraded their factories with the help of the USA VENDOR'S ADVICE on how to increase their productivity. This retail saving, mostly went in to your pockets, the consumers....that's the truth, not so much more in to the company's profit margin, but more in profit dollars due to the increased sales from having the shoes at a lower retail price than they would have been if we continued to make shoes in the USA....the better the value, the more pairs we sold.

I've been out of the Industry and work force for a bit now, but this is how it was when I was working and the whole shoe industry is this way.... yes, factories were overseas, but lots of people running retail divisions, and lots of accountants and comptrollers to handle the Letter credits required to purchase overseas, and lots of people buying different leathers and lots of people buying whole sale and their assistants,and long shore man, AND Distribution Center workers, and a whole shebang of infrastructure workers all still worked here in the USA...

plus lot's and lots and lots and lots of money has been spent on these shipping ports to automate them bringing more productivity and ease of loading and unloading and getting the goods to trains or truckers as fast as possible...

this is much more complicated than meets the eye...it truly is....

To further your story ....

A few years ago, I was asked by a friend to help him restructure his company. The company used steel and created extruded products for sale. We were able to keep our costs under control - despite the increasing labor costs - because we used steel shipped from Japan, which was about 13% less - after shipping - than US steel..

The Obama administration was pressured to support the US steel industry, and they did, by increasing the tariff on Japanese steel by 21%, thus driving our costs up. We couldn't use US steel and be cost competitive, so we had to look elsewhere.

We found the answer - the only way for us to remain competitive was to move the manufacturing process overseas. In short, we moved 1200 jobs to Brazil. It was the only way to stay in business. We now sell our product for about 4% less than our US-based competitors. (Actually, we sell it for about 2% less - and pocket the extra 2% as profit.

BTW - the bottom line? We are making about 11% more profit than our US-based effort. That makes our stockholders - and your grandma - very happy.

 

[Spare_change]

I stand corrected.
It's been a LOOOOOOOOOONG day.
Now please explain how Hillary's plan will reduce or eliminate it.

No one is claiming she can eliminate it. She can reduce it by cutting defense spending and closing corporate tax loopholes.

The Corporations will leave and our military will become the Keystone Cops.
I want something that will work.

Corporations are leaving either way. You've noticed that right? They get tax cuts for sending jobs overseas. You can blame republicans for that. Also, you clearly have no idea how bloated our defense budget actually is.

Corporate taxes in the United States at a rate higher than other countries overseas, is the reason why businesses leave. Unfortunately liberals don't understand the global market and think only in terms of raising more taxes. Yet not one of them would even tell you how democrats can encourage business to come and build HERE in order to create more job opportunities.

At one time, Corporations were paying around 60% of ALL Federal income taxes collected....now, mainly due to tax cuts given to them via lower marginal rates and via all of the tax code deductions and credits added to ease their tax burdens, they contribute less than 10% of our federal income tax revenues....

this lowering of taxes on them, did NOT stop them from leaving....

It's the labor cost saving alone, that has made most all of them choose to go overseas to manufacture their products....

on a large corporation, you could reduce their taxes to zero, and it still would not give them the savings they are getting on Labor in a place like China or Taiwan or Korea, or viet Nam or all of the Indonesian countries... I don't think it is income taxes and there is no evidence it is income taxes, that has made them move....it simply is the cost of Labor being so much cheaper....the only thing Americans can still beat them on is productivity, we get paid more, but we can make more per hour than them....HOWEVER, the factory workers in china work 12 to 15 hours a day, so they still end up making more for less money vs the 8 hour day in the USA.

Categorically false ...

 

[Vandalshandle]

The deficit isn't 20 trillion. The debt is.

Facts. Doy!

I stand corrected.
It's been a LOOOOOOOOOONG day.
Now please explain how Hillary's plan will reduce or eliminate it.

No one is claiming she can eliminate it. She can reduce it by cutting defense spending and closing corporate tax loopholes.

Funny stuff ....

The DoD budget can't be cut any longer without further impacting the security of the nation. In fact, it needs to be increased.

Closing corporate tax loopholes? Seriously? You're talking about $180 billion annually - Corporate Tax Breaks Cost U.S. Government $180 Billion Per Year: GAO Report | Huffington Post

That isn't enough to buy toilet paper for the government. The national debt increases about $3 billion per day ---- that means, we can stop the bleeding for TWO WHOLE MONTHS! Then, we go right back to losing $3 billion a day.

You cannot - can NOT - decrease the debt by increasing the income. We passed that point about 6 years ago. Now, there is only ONE way to reduce the debt - decrease spending below income - use the extra money to pay against the debt.

It ain't rocket science -but you sure need to stop listening to those people who benefit from the deficit. Their empires are built on that debt.

We spend more on defense than all of our allies COMBINED. We have pointless bases in Europe. We build a ridiculous amount of tanks for no reason. It's all about dick size to republicans. That's the point of it.

Lol are you so dense to not consider 180 billion per year a lot of money? That adds up you know that right? Obviously when it comes to keeping the debt from getting bigger, we must close those loopholes.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by the stupidity of opening your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.

Name one pointless base in Europe - just one.

How many tanks do we have in service - how many are replaced annually?

$Sadly, $180 billion is a pissant amount when you're talking about the debt Obama created. Explain to me how breaking even for 60 days is going to pay off the debt. Simple - it isn't. It merely means the debt explodes 1/6 slower than it is now. In fact, the current deficit is about $500 billion. That means you would have to have 5 more "loophole closings" simply to break even.

Bullshit like "closing corporate tax loopholes" is nothing more than a placebo fed to you by political parties that depends on an ever increasing government expenditure to buy its votes.

Cut spending --- it's the only answer. Anything else is pablum fed to you to keep you distracted from reality.

People in government are no different than anybody else - they want to succeed, they want to get a pay raise, they want to get promoted. Since they have no profit by which to measure their performance, they can only 'excel' - stand out when compared to their peers - is by expanding their area of responsibility, making the programs bigger, and creating a larger budget. Nobody gets promoted for eliminating their job. As long as the money spigot is open, government will keep growing.

Cut spending - it's the only answer.

Well, for a start, there are 38 US Army bases in Germany. Now, that is Army only, and does not include Air Force. That seems somewhat bloated to me. The Nazis surrendered. It was in all the papers.

List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Spare_change]

$20,000,000,000,000.00 Decit...What is Hillary's Plan to REDUCE it?

She has no plan and neither does Trump

Actually, Trump has been pretty explicit about his plan ... Clinton, not so much.

Look it up.

 

[Spare_change]

Hillary's plan has been scored by Independent think tanks, and over 10 years, will add $200 billion to the national debt. Trump's plan over 10 years will add $10 Trillion MORE to the National debt, making it $30 Trillion....

If you take the National Debt seriously, then you would HAVE to support Hillary and Hillary's plan, over the Donald's plan which ADDS nearly $10 Trillion more to the National Debt than her plan.

Have you ever considered that Trump's plan expresses an extreme view so that it leaves a massive amount of room for negotiation?

For example when you go to buy a car the Car Dealership has a ridiculous price on the windshield. They know that nobody will pay that much for the car. It's just a tool to start the conversation. Then you come back with a ridiculous counter offer that you know they won't accept. Eventually the two of you work out a deal that is good for both of you but also bad for both of you. They didn't sell the $12,000 car to you for $18,000 but you didn't get the $12,000 car for $7,000 either. Trump's plan are deliberately unrealistic. He is leaving room to make a deal.

Last night the Republican candidate wore a blue tie which is a Democratic color. The Democratic candidate wore a red dress which is a Republican color. Both of them are ready to wheel and deal. Trump doesn't really want to implement tariffs. He has already started the negotiation. Even if he does implement tariffs they will be short lived. The offending nation would comply with our demands within a short period of time. Trump talks in extremes because that gets people's attention. That is deliberate. He does that on purpose.

“Trump’s plans are deliberately unrealistic….”

Sums it up perfectly.

Not all people have the art of negotiation. That's why Trump will lose. They think Trump is delusional because he speaks in extremes. He is deliberately setting the bar unrealistically high so that he can reach the highest point on the realistic side of things. Let's say it is realistic to achieve 8. If you start the bar at 12 then you might just end up with 8. If you start the bar at 8 then you might end up with 6. You just lost 2 by being realistic in your discussion. Don't be a loser. Be a winner.

I first voted in 1952....voted for Eisenhower. I can't believe the Republican party has ended up with a rich, spoiled ass hole running on their ticket.

As opposed to the rich, lying, dishonest asshole running on the Democratic ticket?

 

[Spare_change]

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

We have $19.5 trillion in debt
$123.6 trillion in national assets

Yeah and Republican tax cuts for the rich have caused the whole damn thing:

..............................................Total U S Debt................................................

Figures Easily Verified....Taken From the Bureau of the Debt

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton Raised Taxes On The Rich early 1993)

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42

09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

That's cute --- overwhelm them with figures when you don't know what you're talking about.

Do your math -

Figure out the % increase each year.

Compare that % to the % increase in the GDP that year.

Compare the deficit % increase with the tax income for the next year.

Apologize profusely for unintentionally trying to mislead the public with your ignorance.

 

[Spare_change]

$20,000,000,000,000.00 Decit...What is Hillary's Plan to REDUCE it?

She has no plan and neither does Trump

Raise the minimum wage.

Yes the go to response for far left drones!

It would cause prices to rise!

Do these far left drones never learn?

Then again all the far left companies/politicians could do this and lead the way..

Greed is the reasons price increases. Businesses today are making record profits while employees are getting fucked. Except mine.

You TRULY have no idea what you're talking about, do you?

 

[Spare_change]

I stand corrected.
It's been a LOOOOOOOOOONG day.
Now please explain how Hillary's plan will reduce or eliminate it.

No one is claiming she can eliminate it. She can reduce it by cutting defense spending and closing corporate tax loopholes.

Funny stuff ....

The DoD budget can't be cut any longer without further impacting the security of the nation. In fact, it needs to be increased.

Closing corporate tax loopholes? Seriously? You're talking about $180 billion annually - Corporate Tax Breaks Cost U.S. Government $180 Billion Per Year: GAO Report | Huffington Post

That isn't enough to buy toilet paper for the government. The national debt increases about $3 billion per day ---- that means, we can stop the bleeding for TWO WHOLE MONTHS! Then, we go right back to losing $3 billion a day.

You cannot - can NOT - decrease the debt by increasing the income. We passed that point about 6 years ago. Now, there is only ONE way to reduce the debt - decrease spending below income - use the extra money to pay against the debt.

It ain't rocket science -but you sure need to stop listening to those people who benefit from the deficit. Their empires are built on that debt.

We spend more on defense than all of our allies COMBINED. We have pointless bases in Europe. We build a ridiculous amount of tanks for no reason. It's all about dick size to republicans. That's the point of it.

Lol are you so dense to not consider 180 billion per year a lot of money? That adds up you know that right? Obviously when it comes to keeping the debt from getting bigger, we must close those loopholes.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by the stupidity of opening your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.

Name one pointless base in Europe - just one.

How many tanks do we have in service - how many are replaced annually?

$Sadly, $180 billion is a pissant amount when you're talking about the debt Obama created. Explain to me how breaking even for 60 days is going to pay off the debt. Simple - it isn't. It merely means the debt explodes 1/6 slower than it is now. In fact, the current deficit is about $500 billion. That means you would have to have 5 more "loophole closings" simply to break even.

Bullshit like "closing corporate tax loopholes" is nothing more than a placebo fed to you by political parties that depends on an ever increasing government expenditure to buy its votes.

Cut spending --- it's the only answer. Anything else is pablum fed to you to keep you distracted from reality.

People in government are no different than anybody else - they want to succeed, they want to get a pay raise, they want to get promoted. Since they have no profit by which to measure their performance, they can only 'excel' - stand out when compared to their peers - is by expanding their area of responsibility, making the programs bigger, and creating a larger budget. Nobody gets promoted for eliminating their job. As long as the money spigot is open, government will keep growing.

Cut spending - it's the only answer.

Well, for a start, there are 38 US Army bases in Germany. Now, that is Army only, and does not include Air Force. That seems somewhat bloated to me. The Nazis surrendered. It was in all the papers.

List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LOL --- aren't you 'special'?

Run to Wikipedia, get a list, and slap it out here to supposedly validate a fallacious argument. Don't read it - don't research it - just slap it out there and hope nobody actually looks at it.

Of course, you failed to notice that some of those "bases" were actually family housing areas (when not collocated with mission functions, they are given separate names), others were supply depots (diffusion of supply and support assets makes it more difficult to cripple your active units), most of those are German bases on which we have a military presence, and some were even scheduled for closure. And, I'm pretty damn sure you're not aware that the most likely point of invasion into Europe is thru the Fulda Gap in --- oh yea - Germany.

Surely, you can do better than that.

How ya doing on those tank deployment figures?

 

[Vandalshandle]

No one is claiming she can eliminate it. She can reduce it by cutting defense spending and closing corporate tax loopholes.

Funny stuff ....

The DoD budget can't be cut any longer without further impacting the security of the nation. In fact, it needs to be increased.

Closing corporate tax loopholes? Seriously? You're talking about $180 billion annually - Corporate Tax Breaks Cost U.S. Government $180 Billion Per Year: GAO Report | Huffington Post

That isn't enough to buy toilet paper for the government. The national debt increases about $3 billion per day ---- that means, we can stop the bleeding for TWO WHOLE MONTHS! Then, we go right back to losing $3 billion a day.

You cannot - can NOT - decrease the debt by increasing the income. We passed that point about 6 years ago. Now, there is only ONE way to reduce the debt - decrease spending below income - use the extra money to pay against the debt.

It ain't rocket science -but you sure need to stop listening to those people who benefit from the deficit. Their empires are built on that debt.

We spend more on defense than all of our allies COMBINED. We have pointless bases in Europe. We build a ridiculous amount of tanks for no reason. It's all about dick size to republicans. That's the point of it.

Lol are you so dense to not consider 180 billion per year a lot of money? That adds up you know that right? Obviously when it comes to keeping the debt from getting bigger, we must close those loopholes.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by the stupidity of opening your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.

Name one pointless base in Europe - just one.

How many tanks do we have in service - how many are replaced annually?

$Sadly, $180 billion is a pissant amount when you're talking about the debt Obama created. Explain to me how breaking even for 60 days is going to pay off the debt. Simple - it isn't. It merely means the debt explodes 1/6 slower than it is now. In fact, the current deficit is about $500 billion. That means you would have to have 5 more "loophole closings" simply to break even.

Bullshit like "closing corporate tax loopholes" is nothing more than a placebo fed to you by political parties that depends on an ever increasing government expenditure to buy its votes.

Cut spending --- it's the only answer. Anything else is pablum fed to you to keep you distracted from reality.

People in government are no different than anybody else - they want to succeed, they want to get a pay raise, they want to get promoted. Since they have no profit by which to measure their performance, they can only 'excel' - stand out when compared to their peers - is by expanding their area of responsibility, making the programs bigger, and creating a larger budget. Nobody gets promoted for eliminating their job. As long as the money spigot is open, government will keep growing.

Cut spending - it's the only answer.

Well, for a start, there are 38 US Army bases in Germany. Now, that is Army only, and does not include Air Force. That seems somewhat bloated to me. The Nazis surrendered. It was in all the papers.

List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LOL --- aren't you 'special'?

Run to Wikipedia, get a list, and slap it out here to supposedly validate a fallacious argument. Don't read it - don't research it - just slap it out there and hope nobody actually looks at it.

Of course, you failed to notice that some of those "bases" were actually family housing areas (when not collocated with mission functions, they are given separate names), others were supply depots (diffusion of supply and support assets makes it more difficult to cripple your active units), most of those are German bases on which we have a military presence, and some were even scheduled for closure. And, I'm pretty damn sure you're not aware that the most likely point of invasion into Europe is thru the Fulda Gap in --- oh yea - Germany.

Surely, you can do better than that.

How ya doing on those tank deployment figures?

Speaking of "not reading the link", apparently you missed the part at the bottom where they said that the large number of bases were no longer needed because the cold war with Russia was over, and that some where scheduled to be closed (four, to be exact). As for me, I don't see any particular reason why we need any more army bases in Germany today, than we did in 1938, which was "None". As for housing units and supply depots, I suspect that if we had no personnel in Germany, they would not need housing or supplies, either. See how that works?

 

[Spare_change]

Funny stuff ....

The DoD budget can't be cut any longer without further impacting the security of the nation. In fact, it needs to be increased.

Closing corporate tax loopholes? Seriously? You're talking about $180 billion annually - Corporate Tax Breaks Cost U.S. Government $180 Billion Per Year: GAO Report | Huffington Post

That isn't enough to buy toilet paper for the government. The national debt increases about $3 billion per day ---- that means, we can stop the bleeding for TWO WHOLE MONTHS! Then, we go right back to losing $3 billion a day.

You cannot - can NOT - decrease the debt by increasing the income. We passed that point about 6 years ago. Now, there is only ONE way to reduce the debt - decrease spending below income - use the extra money to pay against the debt.

It ain't rocket science -but you sure need to stop listening to those people who benefit from the deficit. Their empires are built on that debt.

We spend more on defense than all of our allies COMBINED. We have pointless bases in Europe. We build a ridiculous amount of tanks for no reason. It's all about dick size to republicans. That's the point of it.

Lol are you so dense to not consider 180 billion per year a lot of money? That adds up you know that right? Obviously when it comes to keeping the debt from getting bigger, we must close those loopholes.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by the stupidity of opening your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.

Name one pointless base in Europe - just one.

How many tanks do we have in service - how many are replaced annually?

$Sadly, $180 billion is a pissant amount when you're talking about the debt Obama created. Explain to me how breaking even for 60 days is going to pay off the debt. Simple - it isn't. It merely means the debt explodes 1/6 slower than it is now. In fact, the current deficit is about $500 billion. That means you would have to have 5 more "loophole closings" simply to break even.

Bullshit like "closing corporate tax loopholes" is nothing more than a placebo fed to you by political parties that depends on an ever increasing government expenditure to buy its votes.

Cut spending --- it's the only answer. Anything else is pablum fed to you to keep you distracted from reality.

People in government are no different than anybody else - they want to succeed, they want to get a pay raise, they want to get promoted. Since they have no profit by which to measure their performance, they can only 'excel' - stand out when compared to their peers - is by expanding their area of responsibility, making the programs bigger, and creating a larger budget. Nobody gets promoted for eliminating their job. As long as the money spigot is open, government will keep growing.

Cut spending - it's the only answer.

Well, for a start, there are 38 US Army bases in Germany. Now, that is Army only, and does not include Air Force. That seems somewhat bloated to me. The Nazis surrendered. It was in all the papers.

List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LOL --- aren't you 'special'?

Run to Wikipedia, get a list, and slap it out here to supposedly validate a fallacious argument. Don't read it - don't research it - just slap it out there and hope nobody actually looks at it.

Of course, you failed to notice that some of those "bases" were actually family housing areas (when not collocated with mission functions, they are given separate names), others were supply depots (diffusion of supply and support assets makes it more difficult to cripple your active units), most of those are German bases on which we have a military presence, and some were even scheduled for closure. And, I'm pretty damn sure you're not aware that the most likely point of invasion into Europe is thru the Fulda Gap in --- oh yea - Germany.

Surely, you can do better than that.

How ya doing on those tank deployment figures?

Speaking of "not reading the link", apparently you missed the part at the bottom where they said that the large number of bases were no longer needed because the cold war with Russia was over, and that some where scheduled to be closed (four, to be exact). As for me, I don't see any particular reason why we need any more army bases in Germany today, than we did in 1938, which was "None". As for housing units and supply depots, I suspect that if we had no personnel in Germany, they would not need housing or supplies, either. See how that works?

Well, I'm certainly glad you're not responsible for making provisioning and placement decisions for DoD. That kind of ignorance will get people killed.

 

[candycorn]

Hillary's plan has been scored by Independent think tanks, and over 10 years, will add $200 billion to the national debt. Trump's plan over 10 years will add $10 Trillion MORE to the National debt, making it $30 Trillion....

If you take the National Debt seriously, then you would HAVE to support Hillary and Hillary's plan, over the Donald's plan which ADDS nearly $10 Trillion more to the National Debt than her plan.

Have you ever considered that Trump's plan expresses an extreme view so that it leaves a massive amount of room for negotiation?

For example when you go to buy a car the Car Dealership has a ridiculous price on the windshield. They know that nobody will pay that much for the car. It's just a tool to start the conversation. Then you come back with a ridiculous counter offer that you know they won't accept. Eventually the two of you work out a deal that is good for both of you but also bad for both of you. They didn't sell the $12,000 car to you for $18,000 but you didn't get the $12,000 car for $7,000 either. Trump's plan are deliberately unrealistic. He is leaving room to make a deal.

Last night the Republican candidate wore a blue tie which is a Democratic color. The Democratic candidate wore a red dress which is a Republican color. Both of them are ready to wheel and deal. Trump doesn't really want to implement tariffs. He has already started the negotiation. Even if he does implement tariffs they will be short lived. The offending nation would comply with our demands within a short period of time. Trump talks in extremes because that gets people's attention. That is deliberate. He does that on purpose.

“Trump’s plans are deliberately unrealistic….”

Sums it up perfectly.

Not all people have the art of negotiation. That's why Trump will lose. They think Trump is delusional because he speaks in extremes. He is deliberately setting the bar unrealistically high so that he can reach the highest point on the realistic side of things. Let's say it is realistic to achieve 8. If you start the bar at 12 then you might just end up with 8. If you start the bar at 8 then you might end up with 6. You just lost 2 by being realistic in your discussion. Don't be a loser. Be a winner.

Yeah, see in the world of diplomacy, if you say you're going to commit 50,000 troops to peacekeeping operations in Iraq or Afghanistan or wherever...and you show up with 35,000, trying to explain that you were "talking in extremes" isn't going to fly. People will die because of what you said.

 

[Vandalshandle]

We spend more on defense than all of our allies COMBINED. We have pointless bases in Europe. We build a ridiculous amount of tanks for no reason. It's all about dick size to republicans. That's the point of it.

Lol are you so dense to not consider 180 billion per year a lot of money? That adds up you know that right? Obviously when it comes to keeping the debt from getting bigger, we must close those loopholes.

Your ignorance is only exceeded by the stupidity of opening your mouth when you don't know what you're talking about.

Name one pointless base in Europe - just one.

How many tanks do we have in service - how many are replaced annually?

$Sadly, $180 billion is a pissant amount when you're talking about the debt Obama created. Explain to me how breaking even for 60 days is going to pay off the debt. Simple - it isn't. It merely means the debt explodes 1/6 slower than it is now. In fact, the current deficit is about $500 billion. That means you would have to have 5 more "loophole closings" simply to break even.

Bullshit like "closing corporate tax loopholes" is nothing more than a placebo fed to you by political parties that depends on an ever increasing government expenditure to buy its votes.

Cut spending --- it's the only answer. Anything else is pablum fed to you to keep you distracted from reality.

People in government are no different than anybody else - they want to succeed, they want to get a pay raise, they want to get promoted. Since they have no profit by which to measure their performance, they can only 'excel' - stand out when compared to their peers - is by expanding their area of responsibility, making the programs bigger, and creating a larger budget. Nobody gets promoted for eliminating their job. As long as the money spigot is open, government will keep growing.

Cut spending - it's the only answer.

Well, for a start, there are 38 US Army bases in Germany. Now, that is Army only, and does not include Air Force. That seems somewhat bloated to me. The Nazis surrendered. It was in all the papers.

List of United States Army installations in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

LOL --- aren't you 'special'?

Run to Wikipedia, get a list, and slap it out here to supposedly validate a fallacious argument. Don't read it - don't research it - just slap it out there and hope nobody actually looks at it.

Of course, you failed to notice that some of those "bases" were actually family housing areas (when not collocated with mission functions, they are given separate names), others were supply depots (diffusion of supply and support assets makes it more difficult to cripple your active units), most of those are German bases on which we have a military presence, and some were even scheduled for closure. And, I'm pretty damn sure you're not aware that the most likely point of invasion into Europe is thru the Fulda Gap in --- oh yea - Germany.

Surely, you can do better than that.

How ya doing on those tank deployment figures?

Speaking of "not reading the link", apparently you missed the part at the bottom where they said that the large number of bases were no longer needed because the cold war with Russia was over, and that some where scheduled to be closed (four, to be exact). As for me, I don't see any particular reason why we need any more army bases in Germany today, than we did in 1938, which was "None". As for housing units and supply depots, I suspect that if we had no personnel in Germany, they would not need housing or supplies, either. See how that works?

Well, I'm certainly glad you're not responsible for making provisioning and placement decisions for DoD. That kind of ignorance will get people killed.

Actually, I get a lot of my inspiration from my cousin, who retired as a full colonel. He has told me for decades that the military structure is such that if there is no war going on, they will do their best to start one. Makes for great promotions, advancement and budgets. Of course, this is no news to me, having seen what the geared up war machine is capable of in the Vietnam era. We reined them in, to a certain extent by taking away the draft. Too bad we have yet to take away their checkbooks.

As for my getting people killed for DoD, I think that you may have me confused with Robert McNamara.

 

[Onyx]

Actually, I get a lot of my inspiration from my cousin, who retired as a full colonel. He has told me for decades that the military structure is such that if there is no war going on, they will do their best to start one. Makes for great promotions, advancement and budgets. Of course, this is no news to me, having seen what the geared up war machine is capable of in the Vietnam era.

There is a symbiotic relationship between the generals, politicians, and defense companies.

Most research and development projects are shells which are designed to fail. Ask yourself why the pentagon is more interested in building sci-fi service rifles, vehicles, and powered combat suits rather than updating the militaries increasingly outdated weapons arsenal.

It does not matter if the people incur the blunt of costs, because everyone in power is making a hefty profit off of the military-industrial complex. It goes even deeper than that too.

Watch the film Pentagon Wars. It is a comedic take on how flawed the US defense hierarchy is.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Actually, I get a lot of my inspiration from my cousin, who retired as a full colonel. He has told me for decades that the military structure is such that if there is no war going on, they will do their best to start one. Makes for great promotions, advancement and budgets. Of course, this is no news to me, having seen what the geared up war machine is capable of in the Vietnam era.

There is a symbiotic relationship between the generals, politicians, and defense companies.

Most research and development projects are shells which are designed to fail. Ask yourself why the pentagon is more interested in building sci-fi service rifles, vehicles, and powered combat suits than updating the militaries increasingly outdated weapons arsenal.

It does not matter if the people incur the blunt of costs, because everyone in power is making a hefty profit off of the military-industrial complex. It goes even deeper than that too.

Watch the film Pentagon Wars. It is a comedic take on how broken the pentagon is.

Yep! Got two brothers whose careers were in the defense industry. They lived quite well designing aircraft and missiles. of course, they retired 10 years ago, and everything they built is now obsolete.

 

[Onyx]

Yep! Got two brothers whose careers were in the defense industry. They lived quite well designing aircraft and missiles. of course, they retired 10 years ago, and everything they built is now obsolete.

You are enlightened on one facet of this terribly corrupt and self serving government.

Consider the fact that all your tax dollars serve in making the ruling class richer and more powerful.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Yep! Got two brothers whose careers were in the defense industry. They lived quite well designing aircraft and missiles. of course, they retired 10 years ago, and everything they built is now obsolete.

You are enlightened on one facet of this terribly corrupt and self serving government.

Consider the fact that all your tax dollars serve in making the ruling class richer and more powerful.

I'm afraid that you will have to start the revolution without me. I have to attend the Boeing stockholders meeting. I used to be a republican, and old habits die hard.

 

[owebo]

Yep! Got two brothers whose careers were in the defense industry. They lived quite well designing aircraft and missiles. of course, they retired 10 years ago, and everything they built is now obsolete.

You are enlightened on one facet of this terribly corrupt and self serving government.

Consider the fact that all your tax dollars serve in making the ruling class richer and more powerful.

I'm afraid that you will have to start the revolution without me. I have to attend the Boeing stockholders meeting. I used to be a republican, and old habits die hard.

Why did you become a fascist?

 

[Vandalshandle]

Yep! Got two brothers whose careers were in the defense industry. They lived quite well designing aircraft and missiles. of course, they retired 10 years ago, and everything they built is now obsolete.

You are enlightened on one facet of this terribly corrupt and self serving government.

Consider the fact that all your tax dollars serve in making the ruling class richer and more powerful.

I'm afraid that you will have to start the revolution without me. I have to attend the Boeing stockholders meeting. I used to be a republican, and old habits die hard.

Why did you become a fascist?

Reagan was very convincing.....