$31 Trillion Debt Ceiling

#26
#26
Vol8188 said:
I’m sure my view was influenced somewhere, but too far back to recall on that front. But my entire claim basically relies on two things: the fears of those writing the constitution that a standing army would be used by a tyrant to gain power and then the single line stating that any funding should be limited to 2 years (which can obviously just be extended, but I believe extension was only supposed to be as needed)
Click to expand...
The single line outlining the funding is interesting.

The fears of the framers you are gathering from Madison's record of the constitutional convention?
 
#27
#27
McDad said:
The single line outlining the funding is interesting.

The fears of the framers you are gathering from Madison's record of the constitutional convention?
Click to expand...

The honest answer to that is that I don’t recall. Perhaps something I read in a history book or heard. But my understanding has always been that, that line existed due to fears of generals using the army to seize power
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#28
#28
Vol8188 said:
The honest answer to that is that I don’t recall. Perhaps something I read in a history book or heard. But my understanding has always been that, that line existed due to fears of generals using the army to seize power
Click to expand...

I seem to remember that the idea of a standing Army was opposed by the anti-federalists and even the Federalist Madison. There was compromise (2 year funding limit) and thus we have a full time Army.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and Vol8188
#31
#31
Majors said:
I'm 45 years old and my entire life the battle cry by politicians is "we can't leave this to our kids and grandkids."
Click to expand...

And yet THEY ( = both parties and most of the politicians in those parties) do absolutely nothing about it. And they always have a "legitimate" reason to raise the ceiling when their guy is in office.
 
#33
#33
McDad said:
There a 21 people in America who want that to happen. 5 post in this forum.

For everyone else, this would be a coup-inducing event.
Click to expand...

Free ammunition!
 
#37
#37
If you like your IRA, you can keep your IRA. If you like your 401K, you can keep your 401K. Okay, maybe not yet, but as we push this debt envelope further and further, you can bet everything will be on the table sooner or later if we don't cut spending massively, reduce the debt and pass a balanced budget amendment. They can and will rob you. The debt ceiling can only be raised for so long. Guess we're going to find out exactly how long as there is no will to change course.

Treasury Taps Retirement Funds to Avoid Breaching US Debt Limit
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst, AM64 and allvol123
#39
#39
McDad said:
If dollars were seconds, 31 trillion equates to 983,010 years.
If dollars were inches, 31 trillion equates to 489,267,677 miles ( a one way trip to Jupiter).

Every man, woman, and child in America owes about 94,000 each in American debt.
My household family owes a cumulative total of 376k.

America's debt in 2000 was 5.7 Trillion. Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden have all added 25 Trillion in 22 years.

Enjoy the future crash. And remember, the party you love (both R and D) are accountable for this. Well done, everybody.
Click to expand...

There is a lot of griping but the overwhelming majority of people on this board, statistically speaking anyway, voted for Trump or Biden in the last election. It’s the definition of insanity.

Everyone wants to blame the other guy instead of looking in the mirror.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#41
#41
Vol8188 said:
Are you asking how I arrived at the idea that a standing army is a violation of the constitution?
Click to expand...

A country without a standing military is nothing at all because it has no means to protect itself. To see no need for self protection is folly.

Additionally Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution says "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States". That basically says there would be a standing military of the United States, and the state militias (National Guard) today when called to supplement would fall under the President as CIC.
 
#44
#44
AM64 said:
A country without a standing military is nothing at all because it has no means to protect itself. To see no need for self protection is folly.

Additionally Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution says "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States". That basically says there would be a standing military of the United States, and the state militias (National Guard) today when called to supplement would fall under the President as CIC.
Click to expand...
A standing military is far different than what we have right now. When I think of "standing", I don't think of kinetic or interventionist.
 
#45
#45
Rasputin_Vol said:
A standing military is far different than what we have right now. When I think of "standing", I don't think of kinetic or interventionist.
Click to expand...

Interventionist? You’re splitting hairs. It’s not a simple thing to do to defend freedom. Sometimes the fight isn’t going to be within our borders. That’s actually the desired scenario.

Using the military for illegal purposes is what would be wrong. It’s often going to be debatable what that means. Protecting our freedom can include safeguarding our assets and “interests” no matter where they are located in the world and beyond. It becomes a gray area - especially in matters of Big Oil interests. When we are dependent on foreign sources of energy, it isn’t that difficult to draw connections to places like the Middle East. When our southern border isn’t being respected, then it’s easy to argue for deploying defense resources into Latin America. When we are dependent on Far East manufacturing then having a presence in the western Pacific and Indian oceans isn’t unreasonable. When NK is threatening lobbing missiles our way or the state of Iran encourages a “Death to America” stance then we are justified being over there. Any nut with access to nukes is fair game.

It’s not about simply exposing the $1,000 hammers and toilet seats in a not so frequent fraudulent contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and InVOLuntary
#46
#46
McDad said:
If dollars were seconds, 31 trillion equates to 983,010 years.
If dollars were inches, 31 trillion equates to 489,267,677 miles ( a one way trip to Jupiter).

Every man, woman, and child in America owes about 94,000 each in American debt.
My household family owes a cumulative total of 376k.

America's debt in 2000 was 5.7 Trillion. Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden have all added 25 Trillion in 22 years.

Enjoy the future crash. And remember, the party you love (both R and D) are accountable for this. Well done, everybody.
Click to expand...
I'm cool with a one way trip to Jupiter. I'll take debt and we'll be cool.
 
#47
#47
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Interventionist? You’re splitting hairs. It’s not a simple thing to do to defend freedom. Sometimes the fight isn’t going to be within our borders. That’s actually the desired scenario.
Click to expand...
What hair splitting? I'm being perfectly clear. You can't name a single military action since the Civil War that was existential to America or that jeopardized our freedoms.

Thunder Good-Oil said:
Using the military for illegal purposes is what would be wrong. It’s often going to be debatable what that means.
Click to expand...
What purpose do we have being in NE Syria right now?

Thunder Good-Oil said:
Protecting our freedom can include safeguarding our assets and “interests” no matter where they are located in the world and beyond.
Click to expand...
WTF? For you to even say beyond this world shows you are an extreme interventionist.

Thunder Good-Oil said:
It becomes a gray area - especially in matters of Big Oil interests. When we are dependent on foreign sources of energy, it isn’t that difficult to draw connections to places like the Middle East.
Click to expand...
We are only forced to be heavily dependent on foreign sources due to poor political measures here at home. If you want to stage troops anywhere to get oil production up, mobilize troops to DC...

Thunder Good-Oil said:
When our southern border isn’t being respected, then it’s easy to argue for deploying defense resources into Latin America.
Click to expand...
How about just putting the troops in the DAMN BORDER???

Thunder Good-Oil said:
When we are dependent on Far East manufacturing then having a presence in the western Pacific and Indian oceans isn’t unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Again, genius... poor domestic policy. We used to have all of those industries here in America and had a self-sufficient economy. Mobilize troops to DC, not Asia.

Thunder Good-Oil said:
When NK is threatening lobbing missiles our way or the state of Iran encourages a “Death to America” stance then we are justified being over there. Any nut with access to nukes is fair game.
Click to expand...
What has Iran or North Korea ever done to us in history that wasn't the result of a provocation by the US?

Thunder Good-Oil said:
It’s not about simply exposing the $1,000 hammers and toilet seats in a not so frequent fraudulent contract.
Click to expand...
As we are seeing in this Ukraine conflict, it should be abundantly clear that our bloated MIC and defense spending is going towards low volume, highly priced weapons systems that have marginal effectiveness and are not able to be reproduced very quickly or easily due to long supply chains and not enough manufacturing capacity.

Your entire post here is a dumpster fire of neo-conservative talking points. The gold and intellectual efforts we have used in building our military would have been far better used after WWII going towards maintaining our economic base in the energy and industrial sectors instead of the MIC. Most of these foreign escapades that you showed your support for above could have easily been rectified had we not had pizz poor (corrupt) leadership in this country. Facebook and Netflix isn't a real economy. Windmills and solar panels isn't a real energy policy. Manufacturing, mining, agriculture and energy should have been the foundation of our economy and diplomacy, mutually beneficial trade and learning to play well with others should have been our foreign policy.
 
#49
#49
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Interventionist? You’re splitting hairs. It’s not a simple thing to do to defend freedom. Sometimes the fight isn’t going to be within our borders. That’s actually the desired scenario.

Using the military for illegal purposes is what would be wrong. It’s often going to be debatable what that means. Protecting our freedom can include safeguarding our assets and “interests” no matter where they are located in the world and beyond. It becomes a gray area - especially in matters of Big Oil interests. When we are dependent on foreign sources of energy, it isn’t that difficult to draw connections to places like the Middle East. When our southern border isn’t being respected, then it’s easy to argue for deploying defense resources into Latin America. When we are dependent on Far East manufacturing then having a presence in the western Pacific and Indian oceans isn’t unreasonable. When NK is threatening lobbing missiles our way or the state of Iran encourages a “Death to America” stance then we are justified being over there. Any nut with access to nukes is fair game.

It’s not about simply exposing the $1,000 hammers and toilet seats in a not so frequent fraudulent contract.
Click to expand...

People like to forget facts. With technology today our two oceans as buffers mean far less than they did a century ago. Go back somewhat farther than that and a Covid outbreak in China would have meant nothing to us. Now we start sneezing when somebody in a used to be remote part of the globe catches a cold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thunder Good-Oil
#50
#50
AM64 said:
People like to forget facts. With technology today our two oceans as buffers mean far less than they did a century ago. Go back somewhat farther than that and a Covid outbreak in China would have meant nothing to us. Now we start sneezing when somebody in a used to be remote part of the globe catches a cold.
Click to expand...
If you keep good relations with the people that have nukes and instead chose to engage in trade/commerce with them without the woke/Karen judgmental nonsense, you might be surprised at how much more peaceful this world would be for us.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top