|
On May 25 2009 01:12 EvilTeletubby wrote:
sudo.era - I thought it was pretty obvious that "past military" meant money CURRENTLY payed out to people who USED to be in the military; retirement funds/pensions, various benefit programs, etc. You don't need to be acting so pompous when you didn't even understand it yourself in the first place.
Just noticed there was a description right in the goddamn link which you didn't even read that describes exactly what it means:
Past Military,
$484 billion:
• Veterans’ Benefits $94 billion
• Interest on national debt (80%) created by military spending, $390 billion
Anyways, really just came in to say - VIB, stop trolling this thread please. I think it's pretty obvious you have no first-hand knowledge of the subject, all you're trying to do is get some reactions IMO.
Oh, okay. In any case, I don't agree with the size and costliness of our military. I want to emphasize my point about this thread being about experience rather than politics.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 25 2009 00:59 sudo.era wrote:
I noticed it conveniently includes "past military". In the sense of creating a pie chart to represent the current budget, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Stop taking pie charts from retards who don't understand how to make one.
Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The number of veterans granted disability compensation for the last 2 wars (afghanistan and second war in iraq, both currently ongoing), is more than 100,000 to date, suggests that taxpayers have only begun to pay the long-term financial cost of the two conflicts.
About 2.6 million veterans were receiving disability compensation as of 2005. Of the 1.1 million who served in the Middle East during the Persian Gulf war in 1991, 291,740 have been granted disability compensation. An estimate of 400,000 more on the disability pipeline.
It seems to me it is you who should look into how your tax dollars are spent instead of labeling people as "retards who don't understand".
|
Physician, do you work in a VA hospital? I have a friend who is a psych resident at a certain va hospital, and he was telling me about how many young veterans come in trying to get service connected with PTSD. Initially there's nothing really wrong with them, but after living the lifestyle for long enough and taking the meds, they eventually turn into what they're pretending to be.
|
Also, I would like to add that military retirement is awesome. You can earn from 50 to 75% of your average salary during your last three years FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. Considering a military career is usually 20-30 years, that's another 20-50 years of money the federal government owes you.
|
On May 25 2009 01:18 sudo.era wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2009 01:12 EvilTeletubby wrote:
sudo.era - I thought it was pretty obvious that "past military" meant money CURRENTLY payed out to people who USED to be in the military; retirement funds/pensions, various benefit programs, etc. You don't need to be acting so pompous when you didn't even understand it yourself in the first place.
Just noticed there was a description right in the goddamn link which you didn't even read that describes exactly what it means:
Past Military,
$484 billion:
• Veterans’ Benefits $94 billion
• Interest on national debt (80%) created by military spending, $390 billion
Anyways, really just came in to say - VIB, stop trolling this thread please. I think it's pretty obvious you have no first-hand knowledge of the subject, all you're trying to do is get some reactions IMO. Oh, okay. In any case, I don't agree with the size and costliness of our military. I want to emphasize my point about this thread being about experience rather than politics.
Silly argument, we're at war so naturally military spending is going to be high.
|
I don't get why nobody ever raises the otherwise so typical american anti-socialist argument against the military someone who was against the wars could make. It would go something like this (analog to the anti universal healthcare argument):
I should decide what I do with my money and I sure don't want it to be spend it on scholarships and salaries for people who I think are stupid and contribute nothing to society (I never asked you to go to war, in fact I was against it). So why should you get my money only because you voluntarily take a risk on you (and while you are not at war hanging around producing absolutely nothing)?
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 25 2009 01:23 Biochemist wrote:
Physician, do you work in a VA hospital? I have a friend who is a psych resident at a certain va hospital, and he was telling me about how many young veterans come in trying to get service connected with PTSD. Initially there's nothing really wrong with them, but after living the lifestyle for long enough and taking the meds, they eventually turn into what they're pretending to be.
I have had the fortune (and misfortune, it is a double sided coin) to work for the VA for a couple of years. I did my part and the security clearance looks good on my CV but I won't be doing that again. It sad to hear some of the comments by the war mongering crowd in this forum. If they heard the real stories Vets have to share and how against war in general they are and how the cringe at torture advocates the war-mongering-torture-loving brats in this forum would be put to shame.
Regarding PTSD, people are people, there are course some that exaggerate their symptoms (but have PTSD) and there are some that outright fake it but in general the VA weeds many of them out. Even when there are no health issues extended tours destroys many families, who pays for that? Which is why those faking PTSD don't feel any guilty about it.
War, post war costs and military budgets are expensive but in the US it is 70 times more expensive than anywhere else and ultimately US tax payers pay for it - and as of late it is whether we like it or not, we have no real choice on the matter.
|
On May 25 2009 01:31 Xenixx wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2009 01:18 sudo.era wrote:On May 25 2009 01:12 EvilTeletubby wrote:
sudo.era - I thought it was pretty obvious that "past military" meant money CURRENTLY payed out to people who USED to be in the military; retirement funds/pensions, various benefit programs, etc. You don't need to be acting so pompous when you didn't even understand it yourself in the first place.
Just noticed there was a description right in the goddamn link which you didn't even read that describes exactly what it means:
Past Military,
$484 billion:
• Veterans’ Benefits $94 billion
• Interest on national debt (80%) created by military spending, $390 billion
Anyways, really just came in to say - VIB, stop trolling this thread please. I think it's pretty obvious you have no first-hand knowledge of the subject, all you're trying to do is get some reactions IMO. Oh, okay. In any case, I don't agree with the size and costliness of our military. I want to emphasize my point about this thread being about experience rather than politics. Silly argument, we're at war so naturally military spending is going to be high.
Silly argument, being at war is obviously part of what the argument is against. Don't go to war, try to keep the military defensive yadya
|
On May 25 2009 01:31 Xenixx wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2009 01:18 sudo.era wrote:On May 25 2009 01:12 EvilTeletubby wrote:
sudo.era - I thought it was pretty obvious that "past military" meant money CURRENTLY payed out to people who USED to be in the military; retirement funds/pensions, various benefit programs, etc. You don't need to be acting so pompous when you didn't even understand it yourself in the first place.
Just noticed there was a description right in the goddamn link which you didn't even read that describes exactly what it means:
Past Military,
$484 billion:
• Veterans’ Benefits $94 billion
• Interest on national debt (80%) created by military spending, $390 billion
Anyways, really just came in to say - VIB, stop trolling this thread please. I think it's pretty obvious you have no first-hand knowledge of the subject, all you're trying to do is get some reactions IMO. Oh, okay. In any case, I don't agree with the size and costliness of our military. I want to emphasize my point about this thread being about experience rather than politics. Silly argument, we're at war so naturally military spending is going to be high.
Because we have to be at war and all.....
|
I thought he was arguing the graph was constructed poorly and military spending isn't that high on his graph from wikipedia.
|
is awesome32278 Posts
On May 25 2009 01:18 Physician wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2009 00:59 sudo.era wrote:
I noticed it conveniently includes "past military". In the sense of creating a pie chart to represent the current budget, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Stop taking pie charts from retards who don't understand how to make one. Nearly one in five soldiers leaving the military after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been at least partly disabled as a result of service, according to documents of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The number of veterans granted disability compensation, more than 100,000 to date, suggests that taxpayers have only begun to pay the long-term financial cost of the two conflicts. About 2.6 million veterans were receiving disability compensation as of 2005. Of the 1.1 million who served in the Middle East during the Persian Gulf war in 1991, 291,740 have been granted disability compensation. An estimate of 400,000 more on the disability pipeline. It seems to me it is you who should look into how your tax dollars are spent instead of labeling people as "retards who don't understand".
This only includes physical disabilities right?
|
On May 25 2009 00:35 Physician wrote:What has the army done for you? I am not sure, but it is particularly expensive in the US. (federal funds pie chart; 54% of US federal income tax goes to military use) http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
I am sure "warresisters.org" is a great site for objective data about military spending. /end_sarcasm
Here is from Encarta:
and a couple others:
+ Show Spoiler +
The majority of US government spending still goes to "entitlement programs". And thus our society leans more toward one of entitlements, lawsuits, and any other way money can be obtained without earning it.
/end_rant
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 25 2009 07:20 Savio wrote:
I am sure "warresisters.org" is a great site for objective data about military spending. /end_sarcasm
They used http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/index.html to come up with that pie chart.
Savio your posting charts that include trust funds (e.g. social security) and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. I posted a pie chart of were your "income tax" goes. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds, such as social security, that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller. Instead of dismissing something, try paying attention and understand how they came up with that pie chart.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 25 2009 01:50 silynxer wrote:
I don't get why nobody ever raises the otherwise so typical american anti-socialist argument against the military someone who was against the wars could make. It would go something like this (analog to the anti universal healthcare argument):
I should decide what I do with my money and I sure don't want it to be spend it on scholarships and salaries for people who I think are stupid and contribute nothing to society (I never asked you to go to war, in fact I was against it). So why should you get my money only because you voluntarily take a risk on you (and while you are not at war hanging around producing absolutely nothing)?
John Stewart in a way did with Newt Gringrich and left him speechless.
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.watchjonstewart.com/ episode 14
http://www.hulu.com/watch/73822/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-newt-gingrich-part-2
|
The fact that pulling information from one sided site already invalid the argument. Ie. http://www.warresisters.org
Numbers can be played around to show anything. You need more than one source, and an objective one.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 25 2009 10:21 furymonkey wrote:The fact that pulling information from one sided site already invalid the argument. Ie. http://www.warresisters.orgNumbers can be played around to show anything. You need more than one source, and an objective one. - alternatively u can think for yourself and scavenge for the raw data; but by all means don't let me stop you, go find yourself a load-full of "sources" and "objective" sites and "argue" it with the wall all you want..
- try "government" sites, this one is a good one:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/index.html
|
What has the army done for me?
Paid me through a year of college with three more to go, pumped my physical fitness to an all-time high, motivated me to excel and to improve personal discipline, made me around a million friends, through which I met my current girlfriend, free medical care, job security once I graduate, increased my alcohol tolerance, and, most importantly, taught me how to just put up with the bullshit.
It's actually been a great experience so far, or at least since I got used to making my bed at 5:30am everyday :p
|
On May 24 2009 06:22 VIB wrote:
Are some people actually citing the discipline you learn from the army as a positive side? You learn to obey without questioning and that is a good thing?
(cont...)
I'm referring more to personal discipline; in my life at the Royal Military College so far I've had to really pick-up on skills such as time-management, finding time to work in the military activities while still workout out and studying (and drinking  ). Could you learn this outside of the military? Sure, but that's not the topic.
As a military member, you are obligated to obey lawful orders without question. If the Captain tells me to bayonet this 3 year old girl in Afghanistan, I have the full support of the Canadian Forces when I tell him to shove it.
|
No it wasted 2 years of my life. and now its wasting 2 years of duckies life
sure we all learn stuff in army but the things learnt could have been learn so much more efficiently and faster just by doing something productive within that 2 years.
|
Your missing the point, even the most straight up numbers can be twisted around to show anything you want it to, like purposely missing out numbers to exaggerate other numbers.
The source i was refeering to is the analyze of the budget. Try find a similar one to your war-resisters website thats actually objective in this matter, and not a link back to that one! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.warresisters.org/pages/images/pieFY09.gif)
![[image loading]](http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/aencmed/targets/illus/cha/T051695A.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www.nationalpriorities.org/images/stories/chartspage/totalfy04.gif])
![[image loading]](http://www.marketobservation.com/blogs/media/blogs/r/US_Government_Spending_2004.jpg)
