Tax "Supercommittee" fallout

[sandman]

Forgive me if this is a retread; I am not feeling strong enough to search the boards to check.

Remember back when the Reps & the Dems got together and agreed to a "supercommittee" to fix the budget? It was to be made up of representatives from both parties and if they failed to reach an agreement, massive cuts in both military and social spending were set to automatically kick in. It made sense: both sides had something to lose that they really, really didn't want to lose. There was incredible incentive to work together on both sides.

Of course, within a few weeks, the "supercommittee" broke up, and the politicians (well, let's be honest, the Republicans specifically) involved petulantly declared that it was impossible to work with the other side and no agreement or compromise was possible as long as the other side (in this case, that means the Democrats) was unwilling to give up everything they deemed important and simply comply with the demands of their opposites.

So the committee failed, and the aforementioned massive cuts in military and social spending were primed to go into effect. Soon.

But wait! The Republicans, led by Ohio disgrace John Boehner, have declared that that mustn't be allowed to happen. Ah, they say, we had our fingers crossed! The Republicans have decreed that to allow the cuts in military spending they agreed to when they agreed to the "supercommittee", would be the worst thing that could ever happen. To hear them talk, it seems like these cuts, that they agreed to, would result in the destruction of America, the instant Islamification of the Western Hemisphere, dogs and cats living together, etc., etc.

"No, no," they say. "We can't have cuts in the military budget, despite the fact we agreed to this eventuality and knew it would happen when we refused to work with the Democrats in the "supercommittee." In fact, we need to increase military spending!"

And how to pay for this sudden reversal of promised action? Why, with additional massive cuts in social spending. So it turns out that in Republican World, the penalty for failing to arrive at a compromise in the "supercommittee" (a failure entirely the fault of the Republican party. it should be noted) is DOUBLE massive cuts in social spending and an INCREASE in military spending.

Seriously. I am now of the opinion that our country would be far, far better off without the Republican party entirely. Even the goddamn communists would be better.

[starseeker]

Doesn't America already spent something like 4 times as much on its military as a % of budget compared to the next country on the list?

[Yaezakura]

Doesn't America already spent something like 4 times as much on its military as a % of budget compared to the next country on the list?

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the USA accounts for roughly 50% of the entire world's combined military budget. For comparison, it only accounts for about 5% of the total world population.

[kefkaownsall]

Doesn't America already spent something like 4 times as much on its military as a % of budget compared to the next country on the list?

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the USA accounts for roughly 50% of the entire world's combined military budget. For comparison, it only accounts for about 5% of the total world population.

to be fair that does allow europe to spend less.  still a few billion in cutbacks would be nice

[nickiknack]

Well don't you know that spending $$ on the military is way more important than spending $$ on a bunch of bottom feeders.../republican fucktard

[kefkaownsall]

Well don't you know that spending $$ on the military is way more important than spending $$ on a bunch of bottom feeders.../republican fucktard

Well dont you know we need to protect the job creators except the defense industry creates the least jobs per dollar

[sandman]

It seems that Ayn Rand has finally become the true patron saint of the Republican Party. They value military spending because the military is the one thing that the wealthy can not provide for themselves. Health care, housing, food, clothing, shelter, transportation, security, all of these things can be had in the USA provided you have the cash, but the military still requires the kind of expenses and liberties only a government can handle.

[Sixth Monarchist]

to be fair that does allow europe to spend less.

This is the argument that's very often rolled out for these kinds of debates, especially from Republicans scrabbling around for a Greater Good to bolt the military-industrial complex to, but it generally ignores the possibility that it's America these days that's causing most of the trouble in the first place by hoarding trillions of dollars in weaponry and feeling the constant need to use it.

[kefkaownsall]

to be fair that does allow europe to spend less.

This is the argument that's very often rolled out for these kinds of debates, especially from Republicans scrabbling around for a Greater Good to bolt the military-industrial complex to, but it generally ignores the possibility that it's America these days that's causing most of the trouble in the first place by hoarding trillions of dollars in weaponry and feeling the constant need to use it.

touche

[ironbite]

On another message board where we had this exact same topic, someone suggested that the Dems need to change out their guns that accept ammo in clips instead of six shooters.  Ladies and gents, the Dems need to break out the Howitzers instead.  Seriously this type of batshit nuttery needs to be exploited.  It's high time the high road was abandoned and the Democrats get down and dirty.

Ironbite-or we as a nation will cease to exist.

[Vypernight]

I'm guessing this is why I and half the people I work with haven't received our refunds yet.

[Her3tiK]

Show of hands by anyone who's surprised by this.

Anybody?

[sandman]

Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes.

[Old Viking]

The Republican position is quite simply grotesque.

[m52nickerson]

Part of the problem is the Democrats very often allow them to get away with holding such positions.  On this on the Dems need to absolutely refuse to change the triggered cuts to military spending unless the GOP comes back to the table and a true compromise is reached.  Since the GOP is the one with their backs against the wall they should have to give more.