This is me. This is who I am. This is how I live. This is what I believe.
Some people have short memories. They forget what happened the last time a VitriolBot badgered me for data to support my thesis.

Part one of this post was inspired in part by Brad whining about taxes. It was also inspired by the Point Whores who have been attacking the less fortunate in order to score cheap points on the JoeUser board.

I posited that American taxes are not nearly as low as they should be, partially on account of military spending. Military spending has increased because of Bush foreign policy.

So when I see people whinging about taxes and blaming welfare moms and the mentally ill for their onerous tax rates, I feel their anger is misdirected.

Here is a nice pretty picture supporting my thesis:



Notice how military spending accounts for almost eighty percent of the deficit.

Here are some sample quotes from a well researched and sourced article found here: Link

An August 2003 Congressional Budget Office estimate put the FY2004 deficit at $480 billion. This estimate did not include the recent request for $87 billion to occupy and rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan next year, boosting the projected deficit to $567 billion. ..Nevertheless, the Bush Administration is pushing for another increase in military spending after a 17% rise this year (excluding costs in Iraq and Afghanistan). When these factors are included, next years' budget deficit is likely to exceed $600 billion. It will actually exceed $800 billion if the $200 billion borrowed from the Social Security Trust fund is counted as debt.

This deficit is so reckless that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently scolded the United States for fiscal irresponsibility, criticism normally directed at Third World regimes. Last February, a US Department of Treasury report said that income taxes must be raised 66% to balance the budget, yet no one took notice. Few Americans are concerned because corporate cheerleaders like Larry Kudlow at MSNBC and the young models at Fox News tell them everything is great. Many Americans think budget problems can be solved by just cutting welfare and foreign aid. However, if Congress eliminated all federal welfare programs, the military budget would still have to be cut to balance the budget.

While the rest of government can be trimmed, it is obvious that at least $100 billion must be cut from annual military budgets to help save the nation from hyperinflation or bankruptcy. This is not unreasonable since the annual military budget has grown by over $100 billion the past three years; a figure which does not include war costs in the Middle East. In addition, other federal government spending must be slashed, and Congress should scrutinized the outrageous request for $87 billion for colonial adventures in the Middle East; which is several times the annual GDP of both Iraq and Afghanistan. Another $55 billion will be requested early next year unless a fantasy plan succeeds in collecting that much from foreign contributions for the "war on terror." The entire world is perplexed as to why the US Government has asked them for funds and troops to rebuild Iraq after the USA defied the United Nations and international law to conduct an unprovoked bombing campaign and ground invasion.

(G)overnment spending diverts resources and skilled manpower away from America's economic engine. For example, some 200,000 military reservists have been diverted from productive tax paying employment in the private sector to tax absorbing work in the military.

Those in the rapidly growing government sector may feel immune to a faltering economy, yet they should remember that their pay and retirement benefits depend on a healthy economy to generate taxes. Federal workers and military personnel should be alarmed that 27 cents of each dollar they are paid next year was borrowed. ... What is truly alarming is the speed this deficit has grown, from a surplus when Bush took office to a record deficit three years later.

The only thing keeping the nation afloat is a huge trade deficit which pumps a half trillion in surplus dollars overseas, which is used to buy US treasury bonds. China/Hong Kong have $469 billion in foreign currency reserves (mostly US dollars), and lent the poor USA $41 billion last year through the purchase of US treasury bonds. China spent nearly as much on US treasury bonds as it did on its military last year, and billions of US tax dollars now flow to China as interest payments.

The biggest threat to the national security of the United States is exploding debt which will lead to hyperinflation.

If Americans truly care about US servicemen, they should demand higher taxes or reduced military spending to ensure that GIs receive the retirement benefits they expect. Its well past time for American military leaders to rein in plans for bigger budgets and eliminate some programs. Billions of dollars are wasted each year on future military programs when it is obvious there will never be enough money to produce all that equipment. Is it possible that military leaders in the United States can overcome their inbred service loyalty and do something patriotic? They should tell their President that unless taxes are raised, cutting military spending is advisable until the overall budget situation improves. Since the USA spends seven times more on its military than any other nation, a $100 billion a year cut will still allow the USA to spend five times more than anyone else.





Comments (Page 1)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Jul 04, 2004
Nobody appears willing or able to challenge my assertion. Good.

Come November, please remember that a vote for Bush is a vote for higher spending, higher taxes, bad fiscal policy, and hyperinflation.
on Jul 04, 2004
No, you just forget that most Americans don't pay taxes at all. As you were told, and soon forgot, Brad doesn't whine about how much taxes we pay, but who pays the bulk of them.

People see stuff like this as what it is, propaganda. When it comes from "The Canadian", people care even less. You act like defense spending is just buying bombs, you forget that it also goes to provide pay and benefits to soldiers and veterans, millions of citizens that earned the money through service.

Again, Canada is no Utopia. Surely you can find some Canadian activism to occupy your writing. Your opinion on our nation isn't solicited, your participation in the system is just sideline criticism. Don't you think maybe you can find something that actually pertains to you to write about? Is life so dull?


on Jul 04, 2004


People see stuff like this as what it is, propaganda


Exactly. Logical posts with *accurate* data from this millenium are considered 'propaganda' here at JoeU. Vitriolic posts with data from another decade seems more to your taste.

You act like defense spending is just buying bombs, you forget that it also goes to provide pay and benefits to soldiers and veterans


No it does not. I guess you didn't read the article? Veteren spending is completely separate from these figures. So your statement is untrue.

Again, Canada is no Utopia.


My citizenship is irrelevent to the question at hand. I've told you this more than once.

I think I've given any American reading this a good reason not to vote Bush come November. Or at least look stupid in supporting the pro-tax, pro-spending Bush.

Your opinion on our nation isn't solicited


You guys can't take any criticism. Get thicker skin. It's gonna get a lot hotter between now and November.
on Jul 04, 2004
, no, things aren't gonna "heat up", not because of foreign opinion, anyway. You are one to talk about "vitriol", everything you write about America is snide and condescending, as I would imagine you, yourself are.

You don't even realize that the bulk of people you are talking to never pay taxes here, and those who do will have higher taxes under Kerry...

The fact is your post isn't gonna effect anything. People who would agree with you are already voting against Bush, and anyone voting for Bush would see you for what you are. Canadians would be insulted if we in the US decided we'd effect change in Canada, just as a hobby.

You do what you like, as long as you understand that between your antagonism and your statistical bias you aren't changing any minds. It is your time to waste. Your own politicians are probably damn happy you are so distracted.

You criticize with no tact, no diplomacy, and pretty much act just like what you accuse us of, a know-it-all nosing into other people's business as if you have a mandate from God. Feel free, but you have to see what light others take your "advice" in.

on Jul 04, 2004

Um....I don't see a rebuttal here. Perhaps you are intimidated because the numbers favour my position so solidly?

Read the article, it's a good one. And please, try to take a stab at rebutting my argument. If you're going to post here I'd prefer meaningful posts germane to the discussion at hand, rather than whining about how I'm being mean to you.
on Jul 04, 2004
I've offered rebuttal. The stats are smokescreen, something to divert people from the facts:


  1. America has really low taxes, they aren't "high" by any comparison

  2. Most people pay little or no taxes at all

  3. Taxes under Kerry can only go up. He'll increase spending, as he has promised, he'll revoke past tax cuts, as he has promised, and he'll add new taxes to decrease the deficit you're blathering on about.



So, if you are really worried about our taxes, Kerry is the last man for the job. If you are interested in defeating Bush, the last thing you want to start talking about is high taxes. You need to learn more about the mindset of the American public if you want to impose change from "above".

on Jul 04, 2004
America has really low taxes, they aren't "high" by any comparison


As proven by the post above, American tax rates are a mirage, a smokescreen if you will. They do not reflect actual govenment spending and cannot be realistically sustained. Today's deficit is tomorrow's tax hike. Did you read this part?

'This deficit is so reckless that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently scolded the United States for fiscal irresponsibility, criticism normally directed at Third World regimes. Last February, a US Department of Treasury report said that income taxes must be raised 66% to balance the budget.'

[
Taxes under Kerry can only go up. He'll increase spending, as he has promised, he'll revoke past tax cuts, as he has promised, and he'll add new taxes to decrease the deficit you're blathering on about.


Yes he'll probably increase spending, but not as much as Bush has. He'll have to raise taxes because they are unrealistically low to the point your economy is threatened with hyperinflation. And I don't 'blather', please take that attitude somewhere else.
on Jul 04, 2004
So, you really aren't concerned with our "high taxes", you just use the word as a flashpoint to get people's attention. Then you tell them why their taxes really need to be higher to please you and the IMF. Kerry is *not* gonna decrease spending. He has proposed a lot more spending and refused to commit to barely any cuts. You don't say anything about what Kerry will do, just what needs to be done.

So, if you want to do an honest anti-Bush piece, you have to base it on the comparison with Kerry's proposals. He is the only other alternative, and he doesn't fall into your grand plan either. It's like your bitty old aunt telling you what kind of woman to marry. If she doesn't exist, the advice is pretty useless. Go look at Kerry's proposals, go look at his voting record, go look at who lobbies him and gives to his campaign.

That is why pro-Kerry folks dwell on Bush so much, they have very little to say about their own candidate.
on Jul 04, 2004

Still waiting for a rebuttal.......
on Jul 04, 2004
Go look at Kerry's proposals, go look at his voting record,


That's not very good advice since of he looks at these two things he is just gonna get confused.
on Jul 04, 2004
That's not very good advice since of he looks at these two things he is just gonna get confused.


More personal attacks, completely unhelpful, uncalled for, and irrelevent to the debate.

I'd expect more from a propellorhead. But sometimes I forget not all progammers studied Poli Sci and Economics at university like me, though, so you can be forgiven for being too timid to step into the debate.
on Jul 04, 2004

That graph is highly misleading.

It totally removes Social Security spending, Medicaid spending, Medicare spending, and interest on the debt spending (except for admin costs).  It's propaganda.

on Jul 04, 2004

This is from http://draginol.joeuser.com/articlecomments.asp?s=1&AID=542

source: congressional budget office.

The article I link to (that I wrote awhile back) isn't about bitching about how much taxes Americans pay but the fact that half of Americans effectively pay no taxes but simply receive money from the other half.  That's not a fair system. I think every American should have to contribute *somethign* even if it's just a token amount into the system in exchange for receiving benefits.

on Jul 04, 2004
It totally removes Social Security spending, Medicaid spending, Medicare spending, and interest on the debt spending (except for admin costs). It's propaganda.


Yes Brad, it does remove those items. That's why it says in big letters discretionary spending. So it is not highly misleading, the figures are legit. Saying it's propaganda doesn't make it so. Saying it's highly misleading doesn't make it so.
on Jul 04, 2004

David, it isn't correct about discretionary spending either.  It totally ignores pensions (which it purposely leaves out, why? Because pensions are a big amount).

And medicaid and medicare ARE discreationary spending.

Your graph is pointless because it ignores most of the things governments spend money on.  In terms of "discretionary" spending what else would the government spend its money on? The primary purpose of the federal government is to provide a common defense.

If you want to lower the debt you have to go after things that we spend lots of money on like medicaid, medicare and social security.  My graph tells the whole story. Your graph is just propaganda.

If your premise is why our taxes are high, then you should include teh whole picture.

3 Pages1 2 3