The thing that makes this terribly counter-intuitive thing happen is basically that the cut of the pie you aren't taking is used to make another pie, which because the economy isn't zero-sum doesn't take long to end up with more revenue in the end because the cuts from the extra pies add up to more than what was in the old cut now left in the first batch.
You are talking about something else. Yes lower ta rates means that the economy will do better. But the economy is not Government revenue, the Government's money that it can choose how to spend. If the government wants more money to buy something then it needs to either make taes higher or cut something else. Obviously going to high will hurt the economy which will have other knock on issues.
> Source: National Priorities Project
> Click link
> Hi we are the NPP. here is our claims. source: ourselves
lol, lmao even. They literally cite themselves.
The citation doesn't even lead to a database of their research... no, it just links to their main website
> Presearch National Priorities Project
> Wiki article
> NPP is a "non partisan" (this means leftist) organization founded specifically to oppose Reagan's small govt policies who severely harmed the economy by reducing federal spending.
> The NPP boasts successfully raising federal spending.
> NPP promotes a "balanced" approach which ensures high federal spending and protecting the federal safety net
lol, lmao even.
Sorry I was just googling for a website with a pie chart. Anyway yes it does look like the NPP is leftist but the Peterson group is not I wikipediad them and they were founded by this Peter guy who worked for Richard Nixon. They are probably not leftist.
I just fucking gave you the numbers. Military is about a tenth of federal spending, if military got the "biggest part" of federal spending they would shut up about funding forever, and federal is not all US government spending. Yes, you do need a big military, surely this whole islamic thing is not an ideology, and China's empire building is totally harmless to you because it's not ideology based, LMAO.
Federal is the only thing that matters. People should only care about Federal and THEIR OWN STATE. It's not my problem what stupid crap California gets up to they are not my government.
Also lol really? Islamists are your big scary threat that's keeping you up at night? It's not the middle ages the Ottoman Empire is dead. Islam won't be able to grow by the sword anymore, there is no Islamic nation or empire that is about to invade America or Europe and force you to convert pay a Dhimmi protection money or die. Islam now only spreads because of birth rate and people converting because they see it as based compared to globohomo and how the Catholics now have gay blessings this is the reason you see those like Tate and other "masculine" influencers will go to it. The only way Islam will overtake us is if we allow immigration or if we keep going woke, and people decide to accept it. But the way western nations have structured their military with liberalism and democracy the Army is useless at stopping this kind of conversion.
As to China's trying to get an empire in the Pacfic? So? Again we spend more than them already even if we cut our funding by half we'd still have twice as much as them.
Please stop simping for isolationists, they would not know good foreign policy if it hit them in the face. Yes, neocons are somewhat retarded about immigration policy, but that does nothing to help the fact that isolationists are retarded about geostrategic stuff.
If they are not leftists, why are they so wrong? I gave you the numbers.
The idea that US defense spending is way too high and should be lowered is a very old and widespread leftist policy proposition.
Who cares if leftists say it? That doesen't mean it's not true. We don't need 800 billion for the army.
You need that or more to keep China in check. No, being butthurt at allies will not keep China in check if you want to ask.
No we don't need that much to keep China and check. Again we have more than 8 times as much as China spends. There are two options
@Zachowon tell me which it is.
Option 1 we don't need to spend that much because the companies are overcharging us and our enemies and allies and other nations with more reasonable spending our getting more bang for their buck and they are actually close to us. In this case we should reduce spending because we are getting ripped off and see about replacing everything about the way our Army does everything so that we can get efficient military procurment.
Option 2 the money we spend is not overcharged and we do really outmass and outtech everyone else. In this case we should cut our spending because we don't need to be able to fight the top 10 military spenders after us at the same time. Especially if half that list are our allies. Again if we want to keep China in check we can reduce spending so we only have twice as much as them, and also rely on our allies to fight also. After all Japan is supposed to be in those top 10.
The only reason we'd need that much money spent on the army is if we were wanting to have an empire.
They are one generation behind at best.
LOL yeah right you saying their "navy" or air force is advanced is eye roll worthy. Come on these arguments are things neo cons switch one second we are the best and have the most advanced tech that no one can catch up to when they say we should confront China and not be afraid of them or cautious. and then when they want something like more funding they say China is right on our heels and will overtake us.
Again, purely theoretical, even some bunch of desert barbarians now have drones and try to blockade one of busiest trade routes on the planet.
Again we don't need $800 billion, if we need that much money to compete with desert barbarians with drones then we are pathetic.
