925 Billion spent just on interest payments for the wars.

[pknopp]

From your OP. Show us the Dimwingers you call out....


That we’re paying interest on our war spending is a political choice. The bulk of the wars over the last century were funded in large part by tax increases and war bonds, the analysis notes. But as the U.S. entered these wars in the early 2000s, the Bush administration actually cut taxes. That meant funding for the wars had to come from another source, in this case financing.

This approach shields “the public from knowing what the true cost of the war is because they’re not feeling the pinch now,” Peltier said. “That displaces the cost to future taxpayers.”

Mainly Obama here.

 

[bendog]

Mainly Obama here.

what? LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I made no errors.

You claimed wars funded with debt "have been funded not out of pocket"
Sorry. Wrong.
Every single dollar a US citizen uses to buy US Treasury debt came "out of pocket".
Every single tax dollar used to pay for a war came "out of pocket".

 

[Natural Citizen]

They've been funded by people buying Treasury Bills, Treasury Notes and Treasury Bonds.
With money "out of pocket".
Funding them by people buying War Bonds is still using money "out of pocket".

Heh heh. You spun that like a top, huh.

Explain open market operations for us, please. I'm curious whether your explanation woud be as thorough as how it actually works.

And what exactly do you mean by 'money"? I'm of the understanding that 'money', unlike currency (Federal Reserve Notes in this case...which happen to be nothing more than a receipt for a claim check on an IOU bond), has to be a store of value to actually be money.

Thanks!

 

[Nostra]

Mainly Obama here.

He never mentioned him in the OP, just Bush.

 

[bendog]

He never mentioned him in the OP, just Bush.

Could it be W started the wars..... ya think.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Meh....a $1 trillion interest payment made with taxpayer money does not concern those getting money and power out of fleecing the taxpayer.

Can we list the elected officials who are NOT crooks? Is it possible?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Could it be W started the wars..... ya think.

Bush started the wars for the MIC.....Obama gladly continued, escalated, and started new wars.

 

[Nostra]

Could it be W started the wars..... ya think.

You obviously have not followed the conversation.

 

[Darkwind]

No, they do NOT want to pay for "defense". That's why we have spent nearly a trillion in interest alone.

Of course, they do. No nation survives without defense.

 

[bendog]

Bush started the wars for the MIC.....Obama gladly continued, escalated, and started new wars.

Obama ended Iraq and the gop squeeeled like a stuck pig.

 

[bendog]

Of course, they do. No nation survives without defense.

Maybe its the necons, Mitch and Brave Brave Sir Lindsey's OFFENSIVES

 

[Rocko]

You got to love when people virtue signal with the pointless wars meme

 

[kaz]

And we argue we can't afford to address health care. All this war mongering is going to bring the country down.

Why Americans will be paying for the cost of the war in Afghanistan for decades

Interest continues to build 24 hours a day every day of the year. As the article notes we will be years trying to pay this off and that doesn't even address the fact that someone is going to want to ramp up the wars again.


That we’re paying interest on our war spending is a political choice. The bulk of the wars over the last century were funded in large part by tax increases and war bonds, the analysis notes. But as the U.S. entered these wars in the early 2000s, the Bush administration actually cut taxes. That meant funding for the wars had to come from another source, in this case financing.

This approach shields “the public from knowing what the true cost of the war is because they’re not feeling the pinch now,” Peltier said. “That displaces the cost to future taxpayers.”

We are asking the young to give their lives and pay for our foolish choices. History will not treat us well.

There are three areas of government. Fiscal, social and military. Unfortunately, both parties are war parties. The Democrats in particular have an issue not being behind the steering wheel, but a war party they are. We should pull out of the entire middle east and unfetter domestic energy production so we don't need energy from violent extremists

 

[bendog]

You got to love when people virtue signal with the pointless wars meme

neocons, the gift that keeps giving. You'd think they voted for Hillary. LOL

 

[pknopp]

He never mentioned him in the OP, just Bush.

The article is about not paying for the wars. Obama did that as well as Bush and Trump.

 

[kaz]

Maybe its the necons, Mitch and Brave Brave Sir Lindsey's OFFENSIVES

True, but you don't know what a neocon is.

You're right that W is a neocon, but so are Obama and Biden as were Bill and Hillary. Kerry and Gore were neocons.

Trump isn't a neocon. Sure, he spends like one but he wasn't getting us into new conflicts. Somehow this standard of yours hating neocons isn't really a standard, is it? You like all the Dem neocons and hate Trump

 

[bendog]

There are three areas of government. Fiscal, social and military. Unfortunately, both parties are war parties. The Democrats in particular have an issue not being behind the steering wheel, but a war party they are. We should pull out of the entire middle east and unfetter domestic energy production so we don't need energy from violent extremists

Well, Americans tend to be all for war when the trumpets blow, as was seen in Afghan and Iraq, but the will to stay for immearsurable gains is not there.

It takes a pol with strong defense creds to lay out a plan for not getting into dubious wars without end. We don't have one right now.

 

[pknopp]

Of course, they do. No nation survives without defense.

It's our "offense" that is the problem.

 

[kaz]

neocons, the gift that keeps giving. You'd think they voted for Hillary. LOL

Hillary was a neocon, moron