The War in Iraq Costs. See the cost of war counter for your community

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

You really should not speak if you do not know what you are talking about.

From the Social Security Administration:

In 2006, the combined cost of the Social Security and Medicare programs represented roughly 7.3 percent of GDP. Social Security outgo amounted to 4.2 percent of GDP in 2006 and is projected to increase to 6.3 percent of GDP in 2081. Medicare's cost was smaller in 2006-3.1 percent of GDP- but is projected to surpass the cost of Social Security in 2028, growing to 11.3 percent of GDP in 2081 when it will be 80 percent larger than Social Security's cost. In 2081, the combined cost of the programs will represent 17.6 percent of GDP. As a point of comparison, in 2006 all Federal receipts amounted to 18.5 percent of GDP.

Source

Actually, you should not put stuff there that absolutely makes no sense from relative point of view:
In the last 5 years we WASTED all the money for the wars while did not increase spendings for basics like education, healthcare and SS.
Healthcare is the worst dump in the world (worse than 3rd world countries), Education is a joke, we all know there will be no SS in 20 years but we're FORCED to contribute to it...

[Negotiator]

Whether or not some congressman gets an earmark inserted into a bill to help his district fund such things does not shift responsibility

You know, they would, but we are kind of running low on funds at the moment. I wonder why... Shifting responsibility my ass, i pay five times as much in taxes to the fed than i pay to my grossly overtaxed state. I would much rather some of that money had gone to subsidize expansion of highways around the tristate so I don't have to spend two hours commuting every day, than to get rid of an obscure Darth Vader in the taint of Middle East. This is from my personal, financially sound perspective, because I don't think my idealism regarding right and wrong would even register.

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Negotiator

You know, they would, but we are kind of running low on funds at the moment. I wonder why... Shifting responsibility my ass, i pay five times as much in taxes to the fed than i pay to my grossly overtaxed state. I would much rather some of that money had gone to subsidize expansion of highways around the tristate so I don't have to spend two hours commuting every day, than to get rid of an obscure Darth Vader in the taint of Middle East. This is from my personal, financially sound perspective, because I don't think my idealism regarding right and wrong would even register.

I will not argue that we are under taxed at the federal level but to claim we are, "running low on funds at the moment" is quite simply a bizarre and ignorant statement. The feds are going to spend approx. $3 Trillion this year!

Why do you feel anyone outside the tristate should have to subsidize making your commute easier? What type of sense of entitlement do you have that makes you think someone in Montana who chose to live there because there were no traffic problems should fork over his hard earned dollars to make the choice you made less painful for you?

If you want your roads expanded, talk to your state legislature.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

I will not argue that we are under taxed at the federal level but to claim we are, "running low on funds at the moment" is quite simply a bizarre and ignorant statement. The feds are going to spend approx. $3 Trillion this year!

Why do you feel anyone outside the tristate should have to subsidize making your commute easier? What type of sense of entitlement do you have that makes you think someone in Montana who chose to live there because there were no traffic problems should fork over his hard earned dollars to make the choice you made less painful for you?

If you want your roads expanded, talk to your state legislature.

What about me...there is no state tax in my state...
I want state roads expanded...

[Negotiator]

Why do you feel anyone outside the tristate should have to subsidize making your commute easier? What type of sense of entitlement do you have that makes you think someone in Montana who chose to live there because there were no traffic problems should fork over his hard earned dollars to make the choice you made less painful for you?

If you want your roads expanded, talk to your state legislature.

Last time i checked heavy traffic is usually a consequence of high population... Higher population means more taxed income, including fed. Do you understand the relationship now?

And I'm not opposed to improving all roads, in fact, I would like to have the government pay for all interstate highways - instead of rebuilding infrastructure that we "shock and awe"-ed to the dark ages...

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Negotiator

Last time i checked heavy traffic is usually a consequence of high population... Higher population means more taxed income, including fed. Do you understand the relationship now?

And I'm not opposed to improving all roads, in fact, I would like to have the government pay for all interstate highways - instead of rebuilding infrastructure that we "shock and awe"-ed to the dark ages...

You just don't like a federal system where responsibilities are divided among the different levels of government. If the feds should pay for your roads, should they also pay for your police? Firemen? Teachers?

Unfortunately for you, that is not the system we have.

[dr335is]

Originally Posted by ganeil

You just don't like a federal system where responsibilities are divided among the different levels of government. If the feds should pay for your roads, should they also pay for your police? Firemen? Teachers?

Unfortunately for you, that is not the system we have.

So, instead of improving the System with $12B wasted per month, we continue throwing the money and you (like other 28% of Americans) still support it...

[Negotiator]

You just don't like a federal system where responsibilities are divided among the different levels of government. If the feds should pay for your roads, should they also pay for your police? Firemen? Teachers?

Responsbilities and fiscal policy are two different things. You're arguing that what I think should be, isn't, and I agree. That's why I'm upset in the first place...

[ganeil]

Originally Posted by Negotiator

Responsbilities and fiscal policy are two different things. You're arguing that what I think should be, isn't, and I agree. That's why I'm upset in the first place...

What are you saying? Local governments should have the responsibility for things like roads, police, schools but the money should come from Washington?

Where then is the accountability?

[Negotiator]

At the voting booth.

[ganeil]

Local officials get to spend money they do not have to raise? There are no trade offs between what I want and what I can afford? Entire police car fleet made up of M5's because the fed's will ante up, no questions asked?

How would they ever lose an election?

[UncleWede]

Projection to 2081??? I was pretty sure that Armegeddon would have occurred by then, we'd have no cash systems, and only 1 centralized military.