--- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcg...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings no_reply@ > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] , "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] , off_world_beings <no_reply@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > , "shempmcgurk" > > <shempmcgurk@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > , TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also in their favor is that Euro-nations have not spent > > > > > > > > the decades since World War II spending literally *half* > > > > > > > > of their Gross National Product on "defense," which is > > > > > > > > a euphemism for both "Better ways to kill people," and > > > > > > > > "Subsidies for Defense Industries." America has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before you open your big, fat mouth about things you know > > nothing > > > > > > about, why don't you actually do some research? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Show me one year since WWII when half of the GDP was spent on > > > > > > "defense". > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have to agree with Turq on this. If you take Social Security > > out > > > > of > > > > > > the equation, then almost every year more than half was spent on > > > > > > military. Social Security trust fund was inserted into the > > equation > > > > by > > > > > > the Republicans in the 1960's to try to hide their exorbitant > > > > defense > > > > > > spending. It has no business being in there because it is a > > trust > > > > find > > > > > > and not the Government's to use, spend, or touch. > > > > > > > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You guys are mixing up "GDP" with "Federal Budget". > > > > > > > > > > They are NOT the same thing. The entire federal budget even at the > > > > exhorbitant $3.8 trillion is but 27% of the 14.3 trillion GDP in > > 2008 > > > > for the United States. See: > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal > > > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal> ) > > > > > > > > > > And, yes, I may agree with you vis a vis the Social Security > > spending > > > > inclusion. Both Social Security and Medicare are essentially > > insurance > > > > programs. Their contributions and benefits are taken and meted out > > > > completely differently than all other spending and taxing by the > > federal > > > > government and, as such, should be segregated from the budget. > > > > > > > > > > But defense is NOT about half of the budget even when SS and > > Medicare > > > > are taken out. See the following and do the math:>> > > > > > > > > Looks like you need some math lessons. If you take out Social > > Security > > > > and medicare are taken out, Defense is more than half of what is > > left. > > > > > > > > Offorld > > > > > > > > > Oh, really? > > > > > > Here are the figures I linked to: > > > > > > For 2008 (and, by the way, it's worse for 2009 -- which is what we > > were originally talking about -- because the budget for 2009 is $3.8 > > trillion): > > > > > > Total budget: $2.9 trillion > > > > > > Social Security: $608 billion > > > Medicare: $386 billion > > > Total SS and Medicare: $994 billion > > > > > > $2,900 billion > > > - 994 billion > > > > > > = $1,906 billion > > > > > > Defense spending: $481 billion > > > > > > Now, pray tell Off_World, how is $481 billion anywhere near half of > > $1.9 trillion????>> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], off_world_beings no_reply@ > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] , "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] , off_world_beings <no_reply@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > , "shempmcgurk" > > <shempmcgurk@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > > > > <mailto:[email protected] > , TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also in their favor is that Euro-nations have not spent > > > > > > > > the decades since World War II spending literally *half* > > > > > > > > of their Gross National Product on "defense," which is > > > > > > > > a euphemism for both "Better ways to kill people," and > > > > > > > > "Subsidies for Defense Industries." America has. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before you open your big, fat mouth about things you know > > nothing > > > > > > about, why don't you actually do some research? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Show me one year since WWII when half of the GDP was spent on > > > > > > "defense". > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have to agree with Turq on this. If you take Social Security > > out > > > > of > > > > > > the equation, then almost every year more than half was spent on > > > > > > military. Social Security trust fund was inserted into the > > equation > > > > by > > > > > > the Republicans in the 1960's to try to hide their exorbitant > > > > defense > > > > > > spending. It has no business being in there because it is a > > trust > > > > find > > > > > > and not the Government's to use, spend, or touch. > > > > > > > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You guys are mixing up "GDP" with "Federal Budget". > > > > > > > > > > They are NOT the same thing. The entire federal budget even at the > > > > exhorbitant $3.8 trillion is but 27% of the 14.3 trillion GDP in > > 2008 > > > > for the United States. See: > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal > > > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal> ) > > > > > > > > > > And, yes, I may agree with you vis a vis the Social Security > > spending > > > > inclusion. Both Social Security and Medicare are essentially > > insurance > > > > programs. Their contributions and benefits are taken and meted out > > > > completely differently than all other spending and taxing by the > > federal > > > > government and, as such, should be segregated from the budget. > > > > > > > > > > But defense is NOT about half of the budget even when SS and > > Medicare > > > > are taken out. See the following and do the math:>> > > > > > > > > Looks like you need some math lessons. If you take out Social > > Security > > > > and medicare are taken out, Defense is more than half of what is > > left. > > > > > > > > Offorld > > > > > > > > > Oh, really? > > > > > > Here are the figures I linked to: > > > > > > For 2008 (and, by the way, it's worse for 2009 -- which is what we > > were originally talking about -- because the budget for 2009 is $3.8 > > trillion): > > > > > > Total budget: $2.9 trillion > > > > > > Social Security: $608 billion > > > Medicare: $386 billion > > > Total SS and Medicare: $994 billion > > > > > > $2,900 billion > > > - 994 billion > > > > > > = $1,906 billion > > > > > > Defense spending: $481 billion > > > > > > Now, pray tell Off_World, how is $481 billion anywhere near half of > > $1.9 trillion???? > > > > > > When, then, is mathematically challenged?>> > > > > Your math sucks. You are digging yourself into a deep hole here. Defense > > is more than 500 trillion in the chart you linked to, and, right on that > > page, next to the chart, it shows that the Department of Defense, Global > > war on Terror (Bush/Cheney's term) add up to more than half of the > > budget, after you take out SS and Medicare. > > > > Why don't you just admit you were WAY wrong....again. > > > > By the way, that chart DOES NOT EVEN INCLUDE the Iraq and Afghanisthan > > war costs, and those amount to well over a trillion dollars already > > (they are just not paid for yet) > > > > * Discretionary spending: $1.114 trillion (+3.1%) > > * $481.4 billion (+12.1%) - Department of Defense > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense> > > * $145.2 billion (+45.8%) - Global War on Terror > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Terrorism> * $69.3 billion > > (+0.3%) - Department of Health and Human Services > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Hum\ \ > > an_Services> * $56.0 billion (+0.0%) - Department of Education > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Education> > > * $39.4 billion (+18.7%) - Department of Veterans Affairs > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Veterans_Affai\ \ > > rs> * $35.2 billion (+1.4%) - Department of Housing and Urban > > Development > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Housing_and_Ur\ \ > > ban_Development> * $35.0 billion (+22.0%) - Department of State > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_State> and > > Other International Programs * $34.3 billion (+7.2%) - Department of > > Homeland Security > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Secur\ \ > > ity> * $24.3 billion (+6.6%) - Department of Energy > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Energy> * > > $20.2 billion (+4.1%) - Department of Justice > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice> > > * $20.2 billion (+3.1%) - Department of Agriculture > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Agriculture> > > * $17.3 billion (+6.8%) - National Aeronautics and Space Administration > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space_Administrat\ \ > > ion> * $12.1 billion (+13.1%) - Department of Transportation > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Transportation\ \ > > > * $12.1 billion (+6.1%) - Department of the Treasury > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury> > > * $10.6 billion (+2.9%) - Department of the Interior > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_the_Interior> > > * $10.6 billion (-9.4%) - Department of Labor > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Labor> * > > $51.8 billion (+9.7%) - Other On-budget Discretionary Spending * > > $39.0 billion - Other Off-budget Discretionary Spending > > > > > > ""The Iraq War <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War> and the War in > > Afghanistan > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001-present)> are > > not included in the regular budget. Instead they are funded through > > special appropriations.[1]"" > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget%2C_2008#cite_n\ \ > > ote-0 > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget%2C_2008#cite_\ \ > > note-0> > > > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > The ONLY category applicable is "defense". > > See Barry's original post, above. No mention is made of other categories that tangentially have something to do with defense (i.e., people who work in those departments once saw "Saving Private Ryan").>
I see. What you mean to say here is: Shemp admits he was wrong, and that military spending is more than half of the annual US budget when Social Security is taken out. OffWorld
