In the USA for example, 16% of taxes collected were spent on the military. Doesn't this excessive Gubmint spending upset you, cons?

* in the USA in 2014-2015.

Ideally, yes. And I think most conservatives would be all about cutting waste in the military, or wherever you find it. That being said, people on all sides of the political spectrum disagree on levels of involvement we should have in the international stage. Whether it is foreign aid, diplomacy, or military involvement, all take money. I don't think I've really seen a correlation between political ideology and isolationism/activism.

^In response to your first question.

I consider myself a conservative, but I definitely agree military spending should be cut drastically.

Okay, thank you both for that perspective!

I presume they actually support 'the rule of law' so money spent on policing and military is acceptable. Despite the privatisation and profit driven prison system in the IS (and a recent judge being arrested and sentenced for mis-ise of power to profit those same private prisons) I don't believe there are any conservatives calling for the privatisation of Policing or Military (though a lot of molitary contracts do go to private military contractors, what % of the taxation goes to private corporations who make weapons?)

@_jamiet99uk
Quite clearly the political "left" does not have a monopoly on inconsistency and the ability to hold contradictory and nonsensical beliefs / policies

The reason the military doesn't get cut in the USA is because the military elite and their contractors are arguably the single most influential interest group on the planet.

Something confuses me....many liberals are big on taking money from workers -- let's call them tax pauyers -- and giving it to people that do absolutely nothing for a living, and think this is a good thing...

....and yet when you take money from people, and give it to people that are willing to lay down their life in defense of the country -- which is a *primary* purpose of government -- which provides jobs to people that otherwise might not have jobs, and is therefore better than welfare -- Libtards get their panties in a bunch?

Further...but most military expenditures comes with the economic boon of providing civilian jobs as well, as defense requires toys...thus creating more jobs and really really cool technology that spins off into society?

So how, exactly, do Libtards that love welfare not utterly ADORE military spending?

@ Krellin: Something confuses me...

You said:

"Something confuses me....many liberals are big on taking money from workers -- let's call them tax pauyers -- and giving it to people that do absolutely nothing for a living, and think this is a good thing..."

Do you think that the majority of tax income gets spent on welfare?

In the UK, which you probably think is some kind of communist horrorshow, less than a quarter of public spending goes on welfare, and even most of that is spent on old-age pensions for elderly people.

Do you describe the elderly as "people that do absolutely nothing for a living" ?

Also

"lay down their life in defense of the country"

Vast amounts of public money has been spent by the US and UK governments, during my lifetime, killing people who were no threat to me, in countries where we had no right whatsoever to be killing people. And so it continues.

I'm sorry if I don't adore that.

@Jamie:

"Do you think that the majority of tax income gets spent on welfare?"

Depends on how you define welfare.

I have no thoughts that the UK is some communist horrorshow, Jamie. Dont' be dramatic. You think that I want to eat babies, I'm sure, and make all Muslims cut nipple holes in the burkhas. I wish for neither.

The ELDERLY are a special subsection of society, who have generally participated in a "social contract" in which they paid good money over the years into the government system with the promise of assisted living in the future. That has nothing to do with welfare.


Funny thing has happened over the year re: welfare. At various points in time, at least in the US, there has been more and less leniency in regards to who is allowed to collect. The strange (not really..) and very telling fact is that when welfare payments become more restrictive, people who are out of work (GASP!!) tend to find work when pressed to care for themselves.

This is usually preceded by Libtard whining and screaming about how people will strave to death in the streets, etc blah blah...and then they are terribly silent once their doom and gloom doesn't happen....

...and yet, having fewer people sucking on their teet, they often fight to get back the more lenient policies because...well...you know...elections, buying votes from the government slave class and all that...

Jamie -- I'm rather disgusted by the 20 years of war we have been though, especially since Obama the Corrupter willfully ignored the advice of his predecessor and all common sense and gave back the gains in Iraq -- the events in Iraq, and the rise of ISIS, where *specifically* predicted by Bush....

...There could be much more peace in the world, and more safety.

But, all in all, I wish we would conduct more "war" via carpet bombing, and line the borders of the US with US troops, and tell the rest of you motherfuckers to defend your fucking selves and fuck this whole NATO bullshit.


.....

NATO....seems to me the head of France has DECLARED THERE IS A WAR against France - saying the recent ISIS-inspired attacks were an ACT OF WAR....therefore, per NATO, ***ALL*** the NATO nations SHOULD be formulating the war plan to avenge our dear NATO ally, etc blah blah.....

NATO is a fucking farce. Hate to tell you, but Trump was right - NATO needs to be flushed down the shitter because it's broken.


Yes. HELL YES.....less war would be glorious. and when we DO feel the neeed to go to war, we should beat the living hell our of our enemies and leave their lands a crumpled smoking waste so they know not to fuck with us anymore, instead of the pussy hals-ass bullshit we do now.

Ok, Krelly, thanks for those responses. A couple more thoughts :

1. I agree with you on the subject of NATO. Nato is a mess and it causes more problems than it's continued existence solves. I would abolish it. Woo, look at that, Krellin and I are in agreement.

2. If you take away pensions and other support for elderly people (most of whom have, as you say, paid into the tax system during their lives) then last year, welfare accounted for only 10% of UK government spending. That being the case, would you agree that the main function of taxation (at least in the UK) is NOT the propping up of the lazy and feckless?

<world is ending soon>

Again, as I said, it depends on who you define welfare. I'm being an asshole conservative and defining it very broadly.

eliminate payola to the able-bodies lazy fucks - leave in place "safety nets" for the truly indigent, mentally ill, disabled, etc....but hell, even someone with a disability can work and experience self-worth (I have a niece in just such a situation...she works, but receives support....and the addition of a job to her life *vastly* increased her self-worth, attitude, and therefore overall performance as a human in a society. Yes, anecdotal, but...there it is...)

But I also consider a government system that sends ALL money for the operations of the "civilization" through the central government, only to apportion and redistribute those funds BACK to the localities to essentially be "welfare" for the government worker, who does NOTHIGN to add value to Civilization, and only skims off the wealth whilst they decide which peasant should receive which shekels.

In the US, The Feds have a department of Edumacation....but I assure you, local officials are MORE than capable of collecting local taxes to run the local schools. And NO...federal governemtn does NOTHING to assure equal access to education, equal levels of education, etc....look at our schools. They suck ASS where there is the most government involvement....(ie. welfare cities...blah blah blah).

Neither do I need the government to collect taxes from me in order to give money BACK to my state in order for the state to fix local roads.

etc etc etc.

government welfare to government workers, who otherwise ad no value to society.

Yes, eliminate CORPORATE welfare as well. If your business sucks ass and can't survive...FUCK IT. You should fail. Yes, that applies to "the arts" as well. Artists that are DESIRED by people have no problem getting funding. If your art if a cross in a jar of piss....FUCK OFF.

So yes...I am taking extremem liberties with my definition of th ewelfare state....but Gofernemt paychecks to the local local school district (and UNIONS...) is BULLSHITE...

The US military should stay in the US and take care of our own (border) security before we go spreading American ideology to other parts of the world.

Republicans support military spending for weapons, but most current Republicans haven't served in the military and don't support spending on soldiers and veterans. During Bush II's Iraq War, the spending for the war was removed from the budget as a separate expense to make the yearly deficit seem smaller.

So Republicans are completely consistent on cutting spending for people.

@ leon: I don't agree with you on some things, but I agree with you there.

The US and UK should just intervene a hell of a lot less. Iraq was better off under Saddam, Syria was.better off under Assad. Hard to swallow for some people, but I'm my opinion clearly true.

Jamie....you mean you agree with KRELLIN. Again. That the US and UK need to guard their fucking borders and let everyone else deal with their own shit.

THEN the US can SELL many more weapons to all the worhtless allies who have up until now depended on US blood to man the weapons that protect them.

Ahhhhhh....image it.....glorious isn't, to think of a world in which more and more and more US manufactured weapons are spread around the world, and US arms dealers become even richer than they are now!!!

Mwaaaaa ha haa haaaa.

US Unemployment goes down, global arms sales go up, less US blood is spilt...and surely there will be MORE violence in the world as a result of the massive increae in global arms and....

....I'm damned near ready to....uh...er...."explode" with the excitement of it all!!!!!

And while were at it....MORE PERSONAL ARMS for ALL individuals in all countries. ALL citizens of the globe should be armed....because FUCK COPS.

I can guard the border of my own damned domicile, thank you very much.

Come try to steal from me....I dares ya....

@Krellin: "In the US, The Feds have a department of Edumacation....but I assure you, local officials are MORE than capable of collecting local taxes to run the local schools."

Again, I agree with you. As a local government employee I may have some bias, but I think many things would benefit from less centralism, in the UK too.

"Yes, eliminate CORPORATE welfare as well. If your business sucks ass and can't survive...FUCK IT. You should fail. "

For at least the third time in one thread, I agree with Krellin. <world is indeed about to end>.

I'm not the greatest advocate of capitalism. I believe it's flawed, and for me it's certainly not the best system we could have. However, it is the system we have got. Our goverments proclaim their support for free trade, and the power of the market to efficiently distribute resources. This being the case, it is hypocritical of them to intervene to save private firms that would otherwise go out of business due to effects of the market. This leads to what some economists have called "privatised gains, socialised losses".

For example, if they believed in the free market, then in 2008-09 the US Government should have allowed Chrysler and General Motors to collapse. Instead it intervened to save them.

What would you do
If you were asked to give up your dreams for freedom?
What would you do
If asked to make the ultimate sacrifice?
Would you think about all them people
Who gave up everything they had?
Would you think about all them War Vets
And would you start to feel bad?
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty in' fee.
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
What would you do
If someone told you to fight for freedom
Would you answer the call
Or run away like a little pussy
'Cause the only reason that you're here
Is 'cause folks died for you in the past
So maybe now it's your turn
To die kicking some ass
Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
Now there's a hefty in' fee
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?
You don't throw in your buck 'o five. Who will?
Oooh buck 'o five
Freedom costs a buck 'o five

Iraq wasn't a threat to our freedom. Neither was Libya. There isn't a country in this world that can pose a threat to us, and we have more military spending than the next seven nations combined. I think it's justified to cut our defense spending significantly without risking our freedom.

I actually just gave leon a +1 for making a good statement...

what is happening here?

"There isn't a country in this world that can pose a threat to us"

Well that's just not true.

Name one, Cyrus.

China has been buying up equipment and expanding it's control with a new naval base in Africa. It's not ready to move up to our level, but they can take their time while we get worn down on peace keeping missions.