I, for one, look forward to a new USSR. It'll give us an enemy again and drive sy stories and the military R&D complex which is good for business. It'll also lead to a Republican in the Oval Office as we all k ow the conservatives are more hard line when it comes to securing our nation's defense.

I hope all of that shit right there was a joke, draug.

Honestly id prefer the ussr/USA bipolar system to the chaos Putin is creating

Well, the latter part was, but not the first part. I actually do think one big bad in a new USSR would be better to deal with than the posturing and slow grabs we have now by Putin's bullshit. But I wouldn't want to see another cold war. Just one nation with a politxally opposing view to deal with in the UN.

Draugs' first post was 100% spot on. :)

Two ways government can spend money:
1. Social welfare programs
2. Purchase weapons.

1. One is a bloated buerocracy which hands money over to people who will do little to stimulate the economy, and will make lots of Walmart purchases (thus aiding foreign corporations)
2. Weapons manufacturers include high tech / high paying jobs, many of which are US based for security purposes.

Support your local US jobs! Buy More American Weapons TODAY!

You want a big Russia *now*? You don't want to start three more irrelevant, stupid Middle East wars first?!

Actually a strong Russia is good for the globe - balances out a China / US showdown.

This just In: White House shakes fist at Putin. Says, "Drat!"

http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-warns-russia-overt-covert-action-ukraine-165511327.html

I'd rather have a showdown with Red China, personally. I predicted that the next Cold War would be with Red China. Putin is less dangerous than communism.

GF - errr....I'd rather not have a showdown with either...uhhh....yeah.

but I'm all for a good reason to throw Democrats out and build up the military, for economic reasons as well as defensive reasons.

A war with India would good for trade and very reassuring to the family and friends of the fallen to know that their sacrifice might have helped keep an American factory open.

who said anything about war?

Pretty sure I just did...

defense spending is suboptimal
can we please not have to increase it

Defense spending > welfare spending and such. My preference is to reduce overall spending period. Since the government is hell bent on spending, I'd rather a direct transfer to industry -> create jobs/increase tax revenue -> lower unemployment
then
transfer to unemployed -> maintain unemployment -> increase debt.

welfare spending sustains human life which can be productive
defense spending only exists to destroy

I don't want either but welfare spending > defense spending and it's really not even a question to me

The uses for the tech that comes out of defense R&D far exceed the destructive aspects of it's use.

"welfare spending sustains human life "

So does a GETTING A FUCKING JOB

.

@Draugnar -- that's not what you're talking about, though, and don't even argue that it is because it's plain disingenuous to assert otherwise. Defense spending to fight Russia in a second Cold War isn't all or even mostly going to R&D, it's going to bullets, guns and salaries for new soldiers, which serves no purpose but to destroy

@krellin -- I agree (and again would prefer not adding more spending to defense OR welfare) but that's not the choice you presented earlier; if I have to pick between welfare spending (which all goes toward sustaining human life, for all its other flaws) or defense spending (which in this context will unequivocally go overwhelmingly toward destroying human life), I'm picking welfare spending and not batting an eye

"which all goes toward sustaining human life" Oh, I utterly reject this statement. The welfare system is a *poorly* run charity at best, and all evidence points to the welfare state doing *nothing* but creating a generational welfare class (let's rephrase that - Democrat Slave voting Block) which has created:
1. The Great American Ghetto, which has created,
2. The Rise of the Single Mother Black Family (because Dad isn't needed...the State takes care of the bills), which has created
3. Concentrated Crime areas, which has...

I could go on, but there is no point. The Welfare State has caused more harm to the Black family, and America in general, than anything else in the last 80 years.

The qualifier "for all its other flaws" isn't there for nothing! I definitely agree that the standard of living it sustains is minimal, and I'm not praising welfare spending as something to be maintained and expanded; but I do see it as better than defense spending. Hence given the choice (and I don't want to have to make the choice, but since we're here) between expanding welfare spending and expanding defense spending, I'd choose the former.

@krellin: Actually, go on. You might start making sense at some point.

Your reasoning seems a little... Lacking? I mean, nothing? No opportunities to anyone? Are you really going to defend that?

And The Rise of the Single Mother Black Family has created concentrated crime areas?

And what's so bad about the crime being concentrated? Just avoid the bad places, and send a lot of cops there.

And you end with a rough overstatement, I'm sure you can figure that one out...

I don't know the details, but I imagine it might be a mess in the USA. Welfare states often do quite well though. Why not make a clean sweep and a sensible system?

I must admit to play a little bit of Devil's Advocate, but that should be irrelevant.

"The uses for the tech that comes out of defense R&D far exceed the destructive aspects of it's use."

Surely that depends on your perspective. If your family have just been blown away by a drone then destruction > benefits of R&D. If, on the other hand you are playing a video game that has a graphics card that is superdoopamanyplusplus instead of the old hat superdoopamanyplus and you don't give a shit about some poor johnny-foreigner being blown away then I agree that benefits of R&D > Distruction caused.

Steephie - what I am taking about is pretty much a universalyl accepted *fact*, even amongst Liberals. but they They fully acknowledge that poverty/the decline of the black family due to poverty/single mothers/etc causing increased criminal activity is all related. But Liberals can’t turn off the spigot because then they lose voters…but what I am taking about is really not even in dispute…except for by the libTARD sheeple like you. (Note, there is a distinction between an honest Liberal and you, the sheeple LibTARD.)

"Defense spending to fight Russia in a second Cold War isn't all or even mostly going to R&D, it's going to bullets, guns and salaries for new soldiers, which serves no purpose but to destroy"

Surely, yes, this is a part of it. But it won't just go towards that. It will go towards new kinds of bullets and guns to kill the Russians with. We haven't introduced a new major combat system since the Cold War. Innovation-wise, our military has been relatively stagnant on the killing end of research. Where have they been really good? Creating new types of cyber-defense and buying up many first-day exploits so criminals can't get their hands on them; creating life changing advances in prosthetic limbs; leading the push into robotics and drone technology that can do jobs more efficiently and effectively than humans ever can; leading research into laser weapons and rail guns that have the capability to spill over into civilian uses much like radar and nuclear energy have.

And then there's the possibility of - what if we create a missile defense system that is capable of shooting down any incoming ICBM? Layer that on top of the Iron Dome tech that we've been helping Israel out with, and there is a comprehensive, multi-layered system to take down any ranged rocket propelled vehicle. This eliminates other nations' second strike capacity, and gives the world a real chance at (US-led) world peace.

Krellin - if a country on say 100 people starts with 1000 groats (or borrows it from a neighbour) and has to decide how to spend it, you are quite right that giving each person 10 groats per year to do nothing is the road to ruin. (10 groats is the bear minimum a person needs to survive.) But giving 100 groats to 10 people to stand guard in case of attack is also ruinious. Even if they give 50% back in taxation, the money will soon run out because defence is non-productive. The society could also collapse if the people you are protecting from death, die of starvation or riot and overthrow the govt.

Govt spending should be spent encouraging business to create jobs whilst assisting those that can't work through no fault of their own. This is the only way to make a country's finances sustainable. Building your muscles while you body decays is not the answer.

Try reading everything I wrote, Eden. I said I *didn't* want another cold war in my second post in the thread. I just want a single nation to deal with that has such key significant differences than a conglomerate with each demanding their own say and negotiation rights.

Cold war leads to things being destroyed? lol sigh.....no....actually, Cold Wars mean two (or three) incredibly powerful nations that recognize that destroying shit is too dangerous. Mutually Assured Destruction was *incredibly* effective at keeping a (relative) global peace for 50 years.

"
Govt spending should be spent encouraging business to create jobs whilst assisting those "

THAT IS NOT THE FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT ****AT ALLLLLLLLL****

And all I ned to do is look at the *fucktard* Liberal gtovernment spending to "create jobs" in the "Green Sector"....millions...billions even...have been spent to produce "green" energy in the US (windmills, lots of NOW SHUTTERED battery factories) that were a waste of money. More to the point, some of that technology - such as the battery technology, was ARTIFICIALLY created as a US industry that couldn't be sustained (because NOBODY wants a piece of shit electric car), and when the companies went belly-up, the CHINESE were more than happy to come in and buy the technology/intellectual property that you US tax dollars were (wasted) to create.

Governments SUCK ASS at creating jobs.

It's hilarious, because moronic Libtards on any given day will shout and scream and tell at the top of their lungs that government is corrupt, that corporate spending is ruling Washington, yadda yadda yadda....and then in the very next breath these illogical Libtards will tell you how great Government is at making wise choices when creating jobs.

You complete and utter lack of intellectual rigor amazes me...I'd be shocked if you don't blow your nose with the same tissue you just used to wipe your ass.