Slashdot Mirror
Machine Gun Fire From Military Helicopters Flying Over Downtown Miami
Okian Warrior writes with word that, as of Monday evening, multiple police agencies and the military were "conducting training exercises over Miami and elsewhere in the county. The exercise includes military helicopters firing machine-gun blanks while flying over highways and buildings. This YouTube video shows helicopters strafing highways with blank rounds near the Adrian Arts center. There are reports of similar actions in Houston From the Houston article: 'if you see the helicopters or hear gunfire, it's only a drill.'" Note: this time, it's not in The Onion.
Trying to provoke the gun nuts into attacking?
The greatest right given is the right to be wrong...
there's a second amendment.
Don't worry, we're the government, we're here to help.
Private Joker: How can you shoot women or children?
Door Gunner: Easy! Ya just don't lead 'em so much!
Who the hell thought this was a good idea?
Right, lets waste money prepping for Red Dawn. The US has not been at risk of invasion for two centuries.
Okay, so you have helicopters buzzing around and strafing highways with blanks in Die Hard-esque fashion, in highly populated areas.
Oh, yeah. Nothing could possibly go wrong there, right?
I hope that its really a secret operation against Muzzy terrorists in Miami
if you watch the video, RTFA, the trailblazers were in town. the cops were just shooting their fans
This is exactly what I was thinking. Just what is it they're training for?
Somebody's obviously fucked up. You don't advertise that your training for a coup d'état
This reminds me of the 2004 incident where the bullets were live.
somehow the pilot was miles off course when he started shooting...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/05/nyregion/05strafe.html
The Air National Guard warplane, flying a night training mission out of Andrews Air Force Base near Washington, fired a burst of 27 rounds from its 20-millimeter cannon shortly before 10:15 p.m. as it streaked over Little Egg Harbor Township, 20 miles north of Atlantic City, New Jersey military officials said last night
I donno if that really works. In addition to Miami and Houston, there's also machine gun fire in Detroit and Baltimore today, although thats BAU people still duck anyway.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Generally the "don't spend my money"ers are actually "don't spend my money except on things that cause violent death"ers.
They're all for a huge bloated military.
That being said. W.T.F. I have to agree with the GP... What the hell kind of reason do they have firing, even blanks in public areas like this. If it wasn't very well marked all over the place "military training exercise", I sure as hell hope someone gets fired/jailed for this idiocy.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
What happens when training exercise goes bad, cover up!
Who controls those choppers? It's Obama going to war, conservatives are purely defensive. Incidents like this are "sending a message", we WILL fire on you.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
While I'm sure they have their good reasons for this exercise, I don't think this is the sort of military behavior a "free" society should ever have to experience. Why can't they do it in simulation or in the middle of the desert? Why like this now? I can only imagine being in traffic when this happens...
It IS, in fact, possible to wage an effective and persistent guerrilla war against the U.S. Armed Forces. You have multiple theaters of operations as clear evidence.
"Now, I doubt any of you would prefer a rolled up newspaper as a weapon against a dictator or a criminal intruder."
Just like similar drills conducted over Manhattan after 9/11.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
I really hope there is a bag to catch all that brass falling from the machine guns.
sudo make me a sandwich
This is exactly what I was thinking. Just what is it they're training for?
Iran most likely. I recently finished "A year amongst the Persians" by edward granville brown (a (free) librivox recording) and if I were trying to pick a piece of american geography like Iran they could do worse than Houston. The miami connection is probably more to do with size/road architecture than climate. Although Miami is a 3rd world city, at least in parts, which might help with training.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
It's Hotline Miami, right? Right guys?
Good way to get shot at.
Our military has enormous lands throughout the U.S. including large areas of forest and desert and even uninhabited towns and cities built specifically for training exercises. The government was building lots of little makeshift towns just to blow them up with nuclear weapons during the cold war. You can find lots of videos of the government testing bombs in massive stretches of the desert. I've taken weapons training on SWAT courses that are like little ghost towns where the instructors have makeshift bridged built all over the course where they can walk above you and take notes on where you messed up something.
It's one thing to have military planes fly over civilian airspace. You have to test these planes traveling for hundreds of miles so of course they'll eventually have to fly over some commercial airspace. Or to have security training exercises be done and rehearsed at an event before it happens. Like the security teams that are not rehearsing the Super Bowl security at the actual stadium. But low flying helicopters? Shooting blanks at civilians and civilian vehicles? What possible reason could there be for that?
What's next? Armed soldiers patrolling the streets shooting blanks at people on the sidewalk? Why not? It's a perfectly safe exercise that won't cause panic at all.
"Hey it's just a training exercise...now put that cellphone camera down or we'll have to detain you. Now go home and watch American Gladiators and go back to bed".
Imagine the fun it's going to be when armed soldiers start firing blanks and some civilian has no idea what is going on and fires back. Or when people start panicking and cause a riot. I'm all for keeping a well trained military....but using our own people as the targets? What kind of self respecting soldier went on this mission without protesting it?
what is the point of this? Does the guy with the gun not know what will happen when he pulls the trigger, or not know how to aim? I'm sure they have target practice So why do this in public, without notifying everyone ahead of time? To scare some old timers into cardiac arrest? To force some return fire?
This is just so bizarre.
For the folks who have always believed in Trilateral Commission, who had seen UN insignia wearing officers in Oklahoma city bombing scene and among the wreckage inspectors of WTC, who had seen Chinese character instructions at the back of highway signs, the government + UN conspiracy to subdue the local population after disarming them, especially for the people who believed in black helicopters, Christmas came a little late. Enjoy the gifts folks.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Obama is efforting to turn this country into a socialistic country, This is not a flamebait though its likely to be modded as such.
The fact of the matter is there is an energy market emerging for Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) and its infrastructure creation for exporting.
There are issues with licensing granted by the president. He intends to take advantage of this process. Already there are representitives erging Obama to grants licenses. There is only one so far having been granted. However with Obama position and intent to capitalize on it, take undue credit for the economic change this market will cause, he intends to manipulat the situation politically and at the price of converting the country to socialism and like hitler, he will have the support of the majority of the people, known as the sheeple. Look back in history at which president served more than 2 terms and realize he did the same thing, taking advantage of a market, the oil industry. With new technology in horizontal drilling and fracking, a huge amount of natural gas has been found...... and so has a lot of oil. You can see picture from space at night side of some of this gas being burn't off.
This is not flame bait or a troll, but as reall as it gets.
"Iran terrorizes own population with helicopters".
Can't the govt. just buy some Xbox360s and PS3s?
That'll show all those backwoods rebel rednecks and Klansmen in downtown Miami!
Blanks or no, I wouldn't be wild about being pelted with hot brass falling at terminal velocity.
What possible excuse is there for doing this over civilians?
Los Zetas.
Mexico must be nearing all-out collapse.
More and more news sounds like "The Onion."
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Not so much because of the military, but because of the 2nd amendment. There are a ton, like 300 million, firearms in civilian hands in the US. What's more, many of these aren't little .25 purse guns, or break action hunting shotguns, they are weapons with military value. As many people have cried about in the press recently, AR-15 variants are quite popular, but they are hardly the only ones.
Well, that makes for a rather bitch of a civilian resistance to overcome. An external invader is going to be pretty universally loathed, their uniforms make for nice "shoot me" targets and it would be pretty literally a situation of getting shot at from every house, every building.
Is is a pretty impossible occupation scenario, and thus makes any sort of real invasion of the US pretty much a non-starter. I mean you aren't going to get all that many troops to the US alive on account of the massive US military, and its suberb intelligence support, but once you do, there are an awful lot of armed citizens.
Generally the "don't spend my money"ers are actually "don't spend my money except on things that cause violent death"ers.
Generally the people that try to downplay how much money we are spending, by attacking other people, don't actually know the enormity of the spending and thusly don't give a shit that their partisan antics are a dangerous public menace.
Total government spending in the United States has grown to $6.2 trillion (2012), and with ~115 million households thats ~$54000 per household.
The median income for those 115 million households was $53000.
I used the word 'enormity', but really it does not encompass the problem here. The government spends more per household than the median income of households.
While you sit there being a partisan dickhead, the most important problem that we face today goes completely unnoticed by you. If there were an official definition of 'ignorant douche' you would be it.
"His name was James Damore."
October 30, 1938. Never forget.
You be shuttin' your fool mouth John Smallberries!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Spent shell casings typically rains down when an aircraft is firing, "blanks" or not. I wouldn't want to be under it without a kevlar.
That was my concern, they'll be dropping piles of casings all over the place.
What is this, the Weekly World News? There are no military helicopters flying over downtown Miami firing machine guns.
This is f**king insane, and EXTREMELY poor judgement on the part of our military leaders. So many things could have gone wrong here, not to mention the fact that they are certainly belittling the peoples trust in their own military. You have to wonder if they are just trying to train for overseas urban warfare, or if they are training to put down a revolt against the citizens of this country. Either way, they could have found a better place to do it than the middle of goddamn downtown Miami. Just plan stupid.
Try "how to shoot down a helicopter". Aim for the pilot or tail. The tail rotor is a weak point, but very necessary for preventing helicopter spin.
To familiarize the civilian population with the conditions of martial law.
Have gnu, will travel.
Apart from the stupidity of using real infrastructure instead of false ones, or at last empty highways, what if one guy mistakenly took real ammo instead of blank ones?
Don't tell me it can't happen, it already has in France.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1030442/Horror-French-military-17-people-seriously-hurt-live-bullets-fired-crowd.html
17 people hurt, and it was with firearms during the day.
Now imagine a Blackhawk at night...
What the hell kind of reason do they have firing, even blanks in public areas like this.
Cuz it looks cool and stuff.
This is something I would expect from X-Files episode.
Wonder who was important and dangerous enough that they brought military to assassinate him in the middle of a city downtown.
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
Seriously? As if the military doesn't already have training facilities for this? We've fought a war in that region. Training was apparently sufficient. Miami was not needed.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Great once we got the locals on our side.
This is Miami and Houston we're talking about, right?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Just imagine what's really happening. This was no doubt a real scene with some ex cop and a military man finding some ridiculous intel about our government doing something bad, and now they're on a Die Hard style mission to bring the evil doers to justice. We're just the normal schmucks in the background being led to believe it's all a training exercise.
I believe in you secret agent man. I believe.
The feminist brigade is called Militia Etheridge.
I'm no military or gun expert but I'm fairly certain that there would be thousands of shell casings falling down from the sky which are high caliber and thus quite heavy. I bet they could easily go through a car window or hurt someone's head. Sounds pretty stupid to me.
We are imprisoning you for your own good. Please remain indoors until you are given clearance otherwise.
Training exercise for Marshal Law, this is.
"They're training." Fema camps are in every state with the barbed wire inwards. Once the president orders that a president can stay in power past two terms. We all know how they treated the wall street protesters as "terrorists". The government is just training for this event.
Around 75 million citizens in the USA own more than a quarter of a billion guns and currently have around 40 billion rounds of ammunition in their possession. Most of the military's fighting men and women will desert and go home, taking as much equipment as they can manage to get their hands on, home to defend their families friends and neighbors. If an out-of-control government tries to sic the military on the citizens, things will end up very badly for the tyrants.
What is the military really preparing for? The resistance to a transition to socialism
First there was a Republic established by the founders, then FDR finalized its transition to a Democracy and Now Obama is efforting to turn this country into Socialism.
What good is history if you want to repeat it?
Clearly some people know what is comming... i.e. http://www.georgia-arms.com/
Need to hear it from the horses mouth? Sign the petition and spread the word of it, like the death star petion.... just to get a response from the Obama Administartion
No where in the Declaration of Independence, The US Constitution or Bill of Rights will you find the word "Democracy." The Founders knew better!
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%." — Thomas Jefferson
"A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way. The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [disregarding accepted rules or conventions] which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty."
— Fisher Ames
"Democracy is the road to socialism."
— Karl Marx (father of communism)
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
— Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Joseph Milligan in 1816, stated: "To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee of everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."
"It is well known that there have always been those amongst us who wish to ENLARGE the powers of the General Government, and experience would seem to indicate that there is a tendency on the part of this Government to overstep the boundaries marked out for it by the Constitution. Its legitimate authority is abundantly sufficient for all the purposes for which it was created, and its powers being expressly enumerated, there can be no justification for claiming anything beyond them. Every attempt to exercise power beyond these limits should be promptly and firmly opposed, for one evil example will lead to other measures still more mischievous; and if the principle of constructive powers or supposed advantages or temporary circumstances (9/11) shall ever be permitted to justify the assumption of a power not given by the Constitution, the General Government will before long absorb all the powers of legislation, and you will have in effect but one consolidated government." — Andrew Jackson
And as a note for Slashdot interest see Levy's definition of Hackers ethic - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_ethic
Did any of the news organizations offering this reactionary reporting actually check with the local authorities to see if the helicopters were being used in for a movie shoot?
They did THIS without warning anyone? Not one word about it? You've got to be kidding me. That's basically impossible. Obviously they were shooting energy burst rounds at an invisible alien ghost and now they're covering it up.
They already have fake training towns built. No need to spend money.
You...they're training for you..
I think what we are seeing now may be something like standard game-theoretical escalation (between 'government' and 'citizenry').
Since the (corruption-driven) economic crisis, an increase in resistance-like protests have put those in power on edge. Perceiving increased resistance from a portion of the population, those in power are purposely scaling up their defenses against potential resistance (increased surveillance and attempts at gun control, bills like HR 347 and executive orders that grant extraordinary powers, usurpation of due process and indefinite detention etc.).
The game-theoretical result of this is that at the grassroots level, a small but steadily increasing proportion of the citizenry starts to (basically rightfully) sense that the government is escalating against the citizenry. This fuels further calls for resistance, calls for revolution from some quarters, the massively increased gun sales and stockpiling we've seen, and so on.
The game-theoretical result of that in turn is a government saying "oh shit, the people look increasingly likely to revolt", and the result of that is this kind of escalation - a raw display of brute power intended to demonstrate that we'd better all keep in line, "or else" - it's a kind of veiled threat, a kind of shock and awe tactic. "Behave citizens, or next time there'll be real bullets".
We're currently on a game-theory escalation path to increasing fascism and oppression and possibly a prolonged low-grade guerilla-style 'civil war' (though it will never be called a civil war, it will be called 'terrorism').
The proper solution is that both people and government need to try work with each other as partners toward a common goal, both 'sides' need to calm down and negotiate with mutual interest in the concerns (and rights) of the 'other side'.
In reality the government is now so corrupt and overtaken by corporatist interests (e.g. banks who are now supposedly too powerful even to prosecute for serious crimes, and a 'fox guarding the henhouse' situation at the treasury and Fed) that it might not be possible for true cooperation.
My other UID is three digits.
Might be part of the cause, military and police acting in conjunction is a no no unless Constitution or Congressional Act authorizes.
The one exception is the U.S. Coast Guard which is the only U.S. military force with legal authority.
Maybe something about pretty much the whole population being war hardened vets for like like last 40 years or so and continually fighting this kind of war.
I'm not sure how determined your average local american is, but I don't think there is really a comparison. That said there are an awful lot of war vets in the US as well. However somehow I doubt most of these would be on a side of revolution, I would suspect unless extremely disenchanted, they would likely be with government forces, further making this sort of action pointless.
"The sound of gunfire, off in the distance, I'm getting use to it now..." -- Talking Heads, Life During Wartime.
---------
http://marketdailynews.com/2013/01/28/u-s-military-miami-police-staged-an-urban-training-exercise-with-diving-blackhawks-machine-gun-fire/
Make no mistake -- this is urban training in putting down armed resistance to some event, such as economic collapse. This is about the military enforcing control should the SHtF -- and we have an Argentinian-style collapse, and normal law and order breaks down. Remember that, as far as the military is concerned, every man, woman and child in the USA is a potential terrorist. And all it takes for it to become an us versus them scenario is any significant disruption to utilities.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
I'm sure it was just chaulked up as an excercise for urban enviroments. However maybe the more nafarious purpose is to desensitize troops from aiming at civilian targets. Thats not a mom with a stroller, that's a potential taliban and a bomb. Shoot Shoot Shoot. Somehow I would not be surprised that this is how tragaties like the wikileaks gunship video get started during training.
Of course perhaps I am being paranoid and cynical. It could be these are excercise to train troops to avoid civilains in urban settings. One can hope.
No, an oligarchy...
The emperor has no clothes. But the banking cartel does.
Should we tolerate a government that holds the public in terror by staging military exercises that could be easily mistaken for actual attacks? How is the average person supposed to know they are firing blanks? Obviously, the government does not care, because it is their intent for the subject to be in fear.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
I distinctly remember at least one occasion where troops exercising with blank rounds managed to hit bystanders (Carcassonne, France, June 29th 2008). I'm sure there have been others. Not to mention bystanders with weapons firing back!
Even Jar Jar Binks, the galaxy's clumsiest Gungan, took out about 3 separatist tanks without even trying.
Since I'm level 25 in BF3 I guess that qualifies me as a military expert as well!
Seriously, you mouse commandos need to shut the fuck up...
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..."
We want to be a free country, so we accept the fact that we need a way to defend it from other countries. We will do this by providing a standing army and state regulated militias (National Guard units). We will provide these with the proper weapons to be able to efectively defend this country from other countries.
"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Now, since we already said we are going to have an army and state regulated militias, and we already said we are going to have to ARM these entities, we need a way for the common people to make sure they can defend themselves from the army and militias of the government in case the government decides to become tyrannical. We will do this by stating that the common people have a right to keep privately owned weapons and that the government has NO RIGHT to stop people from having them. The government has NO RIGHT to even make it difficult for people to have them. The govt has NO RIGHT to charge a license fee, nor to perform a background check, nor to keep a database of who has the weapons, nor to limit the number of weapons a person can have, nor to limit the type of weapons a person can have, nor to limit the amount of ammunition a person can have, nor to in any other way INFRINGE on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In the simplest and most concise wording, this right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
I hope this makes it clear enough for everyone.
Bazinga.
Miami was not needed.
Some would argue it still isn't.
I really like this explanation. For all the amazingly stupid bullshit I've been hearing the last month about America having a "gun culture," we are actually far below average in our exposure to this stuff. I'm pretty sure most Americans get a little freaked out whenever they see machine guns outside of movie screens.
There are many possible agendas which would benefit from changing that (let's create the "gun culture" the media keeps telling us we already have), and you have suggested one very plausible one. I can think of some others, too, though yours is better.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
if the US military has this kind of money to be doing scare exercise for little or not value they have way way too much money in their budget. The us military budget needs to be slashed.
If there were an official definition of 'ignorant douche' you would be it.
Problem is there are any number of official dictionaries. In mine, your picture is next to the 'ignorant douche' entry. In yours, my picture is there. And in everyone's copy, their own picture is next to the 'sane patriotic American' entry.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Well, the GP specifically said "Even wargamers know tanks are dead meat in *cities*"
I could see how this would be the case, especially if the military ever came in with a domestic show of force. There are plenty of places tanks aren't going to be able to travel, and plenty of places for them to get stuck. All those tunnels and what-not that often run under streets, bridges, etc, a tank isn't going to travel well over a 15' hole in the ground.
Hopefully we'll never have to find out how tanks fare in a domestic in-city conflict.
Yes but it also serves as a further step of the overmilitarization of all security forces in the homeland.
The fun fact is that, even if you decide to ignore all the atrocities the government is causing in foreign countries (crimes against humanity is not an exxageration, imho) all that violence, control and deprivation ends up being applied internally.
As it happens with the infamous "war on drugs", the same will happen with the elusive "war on terror".
"Science can amuse and fascinate us all, but it is engineering that changes the world. " - Asimov.
I haven't seen any mention of Detroit or Baltimore, or do you just mean gang violence?
Graphics and voice acting still need work.
That's secret bro...
We could tell you, but then we have to label you a terrorist so we can kill you. ;-)
In modern use our mines are deployed to temporarily interdict a particular area in order to promote the objectives of a ground operation. Modern mines -- the ones the US uses - can be deactivated via timer or, I guess by now, an encrypted coded radio burst. Seventy two hours is a long time during a kinetic battle. That is a typical delay.
When I was at the big annual weapons show in Singapore many years ago I checked out various makes of mines. You had to ask. It was like porn. The vendors brought the catalogs out from under the counter. Nothing mine-like was on display. The Yugoslavians (Yes, THAT long ago.) made some of the sleaziest permanent types -- WMD in slow motion. These are used to pollute borders and terrorize and coral local populations. Lots of them in Afghanistan. Not ours. Next door in Tajikistan there is a big mine problem left over from their civil war.
As to helicopter gunships spraying mock ordinance over downtown Miami I say, "Tired." Now as to drones spraying mock ordinance over downtown Miami I say, "Wired."
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
...'Escape from New York'. Then 'Escape from LA'. Is Miami next?
Where is Snake Plissken when we need him?
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Note, I found no mention of this on CNN.com. MSNBC.com, Foxnews.com
Looks like a media blackout is being enforced. (Can't imagine our sensationalist media that covers fires, car accidents, and rapes all over the globes in order to have sensationalist headlines would ignore this willingly.)
Any witness to one of these "exercise" should file assult charges against the military. Remember assault is just the "putting in of fear." clearly even simulated gun fire with blanks is fear inducing if you don't know they are blanks, doubly so if fired from a fully automatic weapon mounted on a black chopper.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Official boats: they must be they have flashing lights. No really good clips of any "action" a half dozen blank rounds getting fired and a few choppers flying around, woo hoo. These are blackhawks right? So what is it M-60's or something they have. Now if it was Apaches with their Bushmasters going :)
Four helicopters flew over our rural area yesterday, heading north. Were there any reports of these 'exercises' occurring anywhere else?
Recently I've noticed a marked increase in A-10's practicing strafing runs over Highway's 65 and 54 in mid-Missouri (within range of Whitman AFB).
Awesome as it is to watch the pilots throw these monster machines around like toys, I do find it a bit unnerving when they "strafe" the highway in front of me, and have to wonder just what scenario they're practicing for...
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
First, you're comparing median income, to mean debt. The mean debt per person is 20257.23, while the mean income is 48520.90, So government spending is roughly 40% of our money, not 105% of our money.
We are deficit spending in that we collect 13% taxes from folks like Mitt Romney, leaving a gap of 27% unpaid (my income is below median, so I pay 30% in taxes, leaving 10% unpaid).
But that's more an issue of accountability rather than out of control spending - we can pay 40% taxes to cover our spending, we just choose to borrow from China instead.
Besides which, the deficit spending can be traced to our multiple wars and our nuclear warhead bunkers and our troops idling in Europe and South America (not that they're not working, just, what are we accomplishing with bases in germany and panama, exactly?).
We could easily stay within the 20% collected, if we simply stopped spending half our money creating terrorist, without cutting roads or schools or social security.
Changa hates change.
Wasn't Miami where they had that zombie face-eating attack not too long ago?
I've got it sussed now... John McAfee has slipped into the country!!1! We're all doomed!!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Completely cancel the entire defense department saves $700 billion. You are still borrowing $600 billion. Tax 100% of the income of "the rich" nets another $500 billion.
You're still borrowing $100 billion a year.
Do you mathematically illiterate clods realize you can't get this under control without some cuts in social spending and also increasing taxes on the middle class?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Or use an abandoned city like Detroit
Most, if not all US combat helicopters are named after tribes.
When I hear people say this myself and others have to call you on your Bullshit. You sat by for 8 years of Bush shredding our Constitution, spying on us, waging illegal wars, and massively consolidating power. And with your precious 2nd amendment making sure you had guns "just in case" the government ever went power crazy you did what? Right, nothing. The time to act if you were going to do something because you were afraid of the government has long past. If the government ever does plan on coming for your guns, which btw nobody is proposing, that will be step 100 out of 100 with steps 99 out of 100 haven already taken place. In other words, too little too late, the 2nd amendment won't protect you now.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
State and Fed pens are always located far away from urban centers, placed in the rock-ribbed, salt of the earth, god-fearing bible-thumping heartland where the yokels with absolutely nothing in common with the inmates and don't really even see them as human.
Same thing with the military; just check the rosters to make sure no one in the units are from the targeted area.
Can you cite any sources for this aside from a few leftist professors?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death
Coming soon to a city near you?
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
One of the local news reporters said that it was a "joint exercise".
If they're not training for military operations on U.S. soil, does it mean that the Miami PD is going with them into the next foreign combat zone?
This is about desensitizing the citizens to military operations on U.S. soil. Otherwise, there's NO excuse for failing to inform the public well in advance. They wanted it to be a surprise so that when it happens for real, the public won't know if it's a drill or not.
After all, the U.S. is STILL fighting them.
You'd think it'd be all over except for the victory parade.
The U.S. has never done well against a distributed, disorganized, guerilla enemy: all they manage to do is play whack-a-mole with them.
So long as individual "terrists" are willing to die for their "cause", they will keep comping, and killing individuals will just spur them on, until the U.S. gives up and declares victory, or is bankrupted.
If "terrorististan" is such a dire threat, just nuke the damn place: at least the "terrists" there will be gone (as will everything else), and it might send a clear message to other nations to watch their extemists, lest their civillians get vaporised (note that this does suggest rebel support as possibly more productive than traditional war, since at least *they* are the ones dying, on both sides, and not *us*, but that too can bite one in the ass: once allies with little to lose can become enemies).
Now, the punch line: it is precisely *because* the U.S. can not fight an effective guerilla war, that true patriots CAN overcome the corrupt rot that is the present government IF enough believe it is truely worth dying on one's feet rather than living one one's knees: I truely believe the evolution of modern warfare will involve distributed, disorganized, rebellion, coordinated by ideology than centralized control. It will be bloody, and barbaric, and anything but sanitized, but once "die on your feet" seems better than "live on your knees", it will happen. It always has.
In Liberty, Rene
And regardless of your political opinion, we don't have enough money to keep this up. It's going to stop, eventually, and the only question is how smooth it will be.
The Democrats won't cut benefits and the Republicans won't cut taxes. Impasse. We're going to march off a real fiscal cliff at some point unless the world economy magically recovers and puts us back in the 90s situation, where tax revenue grew so fast Congress couldn't spend it first.
That's why I'm concerned by these "training exercises." I don't think there are any unique skills they could be learning. They are just trying to get the soldiers comfortable with shooting at civilians.
First, you're comparing median income, to mean debt. The mean debt per person is 20257.23, while the mean income is 48520.90, So government spending is roughly 40% of our money, not 105% of our money.
You need to re-read the post you responded to.
Total government spending in the United States has grown to $6.2 trillion (2012), and with ~115 million households thats ~$54000 per household.
The median income for those 115 million households was $53000.
It's a comparison between gov't spending and household income, not gov't debt and income.
There is a comparison between mean and median, but that can still be used to make a valid point about the fairness or desirability of our current state of affairs.
Riots are handled by police, not by the military. Check out the Posse Comitatus Act
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
One is where you feel your life is directly threatened and had no recourse but to kill before being killed. The second is what is called "mayhem" where, for example, someone has opened fire on the public targeting at random. Given their violent display someone might return fire seeing this as an act of terrorism. It isn't reasonable to assume that a military class helicopter, machine gun blazing out the side, randomly targeting civilians as being a legitimate military action. As a juror I would be unable to hold someone to account for returning fire, and I strongly feel that whoever was responsible for authorizing this "training exercise" should be charged in a criminal court for charges ranging from disturbing the peace all the way to an overt act of terrorism. The discharge of weapons in public is completely unacceptable under any situation where they are not responding to a invading hostile force. Our military has always made mock ups of training scenarios in the past kept in remote areas in effort. What madness... what extreme incompetence in decision making led to this idiocy? We pay taxes to maintain a standing military to keep our nation from being a war zone. Why would anyone ever think this was OK?
Generally the "don't spend my money"ers are actually "don't spend my money except on things that cause violent death"ers.
Generally people making claims on forums about what other people think dont actually know what other people think, but sure do have a fun time setting up strawmen.
No, there's more to it than that.
War is driven by political and judicial will. War is expensive.
Deploying heavy weapons means deploying heavy supply lines. While the former may be nearly invulnerable, the latter are rather the opposite unless defended; if defended, the weight of firepower available for actual combat is reduced.
Politicians and so-called justices would have to go into hiding. If their side loses, they might have to stay there.
Law enforcement would be trivially overwhelmed anywhere they didn't side with the rebels and military support was not immediately available.
The winning side gets to set conditions: no slavery, taxes on cotton, right to vote, etc.
War can provide significant leverage for change. War can cut through the legal tangle when a government has gone rogue. War can reset a sick society. War can bring down evil leaders (Hitler, etc.) War can end evil policies (slavery, etc.)
War is pretty much always a horror. But not a draw.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Anonymous is about to disclose their warheads and they should be prepared if people finds that information disturbing.
Anonymous has nothing that is even vaguely interesting.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
It's a comparison between gov't spending and household income, not gov't debt and income.
Yes, and as I said, it's an invalid comparison because they switched types of averages halfway through.
Government spending is 54K per household, while mean household income is 127K. Government spending per household is 40% of household income, not 105%.
There is a comparison between mean and median, but that can still be used to make a valid point about the fairness or desirability of our current state of affairs.
Indeed, and what valid point about fairness or desirability do you draw from the fact that median income (the middle class, if you will) is so very, very far below mean income?
Changa hates change.
I know that's just a regurgitated statement, but Florida is strongly in the R camp. We have an R governor, and have for a long time. Miami might be in the D category though. Anyway, thinking placing an R in office would change anything is pretty misguided.
Which is exactly why Obama practices there.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Battle of Blair Mountain.
Yes, and as I said, it's an invalid comparison because they switched types of averages halfway through.
No, you said it was a comparison between income and debt. Spending is not deficit or debt. Incorrect.
Indeed, and what valid point about fairness or desirability do you draw from the fact that median income (the middle class, if you will) is so very, very far below mean income?
Whatever valid point you wish to draw from that, it does not excuse the financial insolvency of the federal gov't - which harms everyone, but especially the poor who are made dependent on welfare payments.
After bringing this to dozens of other countries it comes back to bite you. Back then, when your lovely government did yet another excuse to invade another country (or stage a military coup), you should be marching Washington streets protesting. "What goes around, comes around", they say after all. It is never too late, yet now dealing with your government and its corporate sponsors spinning out of control, it will be much harder. Get up your lazy asses and protest against militarization at home AND abroad !
You are very confused. "Militia" meant every citizen, in every state, of fighting age (18-45.) Not "state organization." See the Militia act(s) of 1792.
Also, while we're talking about the 2nd amendment, "well regulated" meant uniformly supplied and equipped. It didn't mean made orderly by legislation.
The 2nd can only be meaningfully read with these understandings; further, it breaks neatly into two sections, the first being informational: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" and the second consisting of a limit on government action: "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Consequently, if you run into a law that infringes on your right to keep or carry arms in any way, shape or form, you've found an unconstitutional law. Concealed carry laws, license laws, "can't carry a knife or nunchuk" laws, chemical glassware laws, etc., etc. All thoroughly unconstitutional.
The problem we have is, our government has been ignoring the constitution for decades at its convenience. Executive, legislative, and judiciary have all been complicit in this. The citizens have, for the most part, not reacted. So the reality of our current situation is that we're not operating as a constitutional republic: We're a de facto corporate oligarchy. So the fact that the government ignores and otherwise violates the constitution seems to be in line with the public's... apathy and ignorance, if nothing else. But it may be something more profound than that. It may be that this change in governance is actually where we want to go. In which case, all talk of revolution will be by a tiny majority, and it will never come to pass. Just as an aside, that's how I'm betting. Your average American wants cheeseburgers and episodes of "Lost." And that's about the end of it.
More on the 2nd here.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Nothing's wrong with professors, be they right or be they left. When you have a problem is when said professor(s) begin to make up their own facts, such as not taking into account the actual meaning of the words "militia" and "well regulated" at the time the document was penned.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
On the other hand, the bread and circuses have never been so plentiful and entertaining, nor surveillance so widespread. Further, we've just observed an almost completely passive reaction to the sundering of almost the entire bill of rights, one amendment at a time. Not sure we're comparing Apples to apples here; there's no sign whatsoever of a revolution that I've been able to see. I mean, there are always complainers, but the public is not riled up at all. In fact, I think they'd be more likely to be riled up if they thought those bread and circuses were going to be interrupted.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
In a civil war, the cause is leadership. A very small number of targets causing a very large proportion of the problem that resulted in the war in the first place.
There's not going to be a US civl war again - bread and circuses see to that - but sure as can be, were there one, it's not the military that would be the target, because it wasn't the military that was the problem in the first place.
In a hypothetical situation where the judiciary had incurred murderous wrath of a large portion of the populace, how difficult do you really think it would be to pick them off? And how likely do you think their successors would be to continue whatever behavior it was that got their predecessors bumped?
Even congress isn't large enough to pose a serious challenge to an enraged country who really wanted to get rid of them.
The thing is, this situation does not exist. Cheeseburgers and episodes of "Lost." That's what the American people really want. And they've got it. Ergo, no civil war. No matter what anyone in power does. Believe it -- that's been the actual situation for decades now.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Name calling aside, GP makes a characterization which is very difficult to refute: those who are most incensed by "wasteful government spending" are more often than not also proponents of increased military spending. To me that seems.... hypocritical.
Your back-of-the-envelope math is interesting but also needs citations. Or maybe you could be more explicit about what "the most important problem we face today" actually is. Apparently our ignorance abounds so please, enlighten us.
Howdy howdy howdy
Seems like a rather reckless way to train. I mean blanks or not, if I saw a helicopter start strafing with it's guns and I was driving I would start start driving however was necessary to defend myself, if at all possible. If someone didn't know a drill was going on or that it was just blanks, that seems like it will cause many many accidents.
"This is what we'll do to you if you don't agree to every tax hike in the coming years."
I have no idea what point you are attempting to push for here, unless this is pedantry for its own sake.
1. I said debt, but I did not say national debt, and I also referred to it as spending in the same sentence. All spending is debt, until you offset it with revenue. If you fail to offset it, it will become deficit spending which contributes to the national debt, but that's really off-topic since we're talking about spending without regard to government revenue, only in comparison to household income.
2. I addressed the financial solvency of the federal government:
A. We could immediately raise taxes to a 40% average (and let's argue whether we should get there by raising Romney's taxes to 45%, or by raising mine to 65%...)
B. We could cut all military spending, which accounts for half our budget.
Implicit in this is the idea that we could actually use some mix of the two, where we raise taxes to repair the roads we've let rot over the last decade, and simultaneously draw-down military spending until we only outspend 4 or 5 of the next-most-powerful militaries, rather than the top 20 as we do now.
3. Your claim that the government is insolvent is belied by reality, where our government can still sell bonds at a lower interest rate than anyone else in existence. Why do they have a better credit rating than you can ever hope to achieve, if they understand math so much worse than you? We are deficit spending currently, but that was also the case the last time we had a Bush run up the bills, and Clinton turned that around. There is every indication that Obama is turning this around, even with Boehner doing his very best to prevent a recovery. Assuming that we can keep the pressure on to get millionaire tax rates matched to my tax rate, we should be able to increase revenue and decrease spending until we are again paying down the national debt rather than building it up.
Changa hates change.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
1. I said debt, but I did not say national debt, and I also referred to it as spending in the same sentence. All spending is debt, until you offset it with revenue. If you fail to offset it, it will become deficit spending which contributes to the national debt, but that's really off-topic since we're talking about spending without regard to government revenue, only in comparison to household income.
I now see what you mean, but the words mean different things. "Debt" is not interchangeable with "spending". Debt is an obligation; there is no obligation to spend money, though there is an obligation to pay back loans. Spending money that you have does not create debt; you just reduce your savings/reserves. Borrowing money is what creates debt.
2. I addressed the financial solvency of the federal government:
If we assume tax rates and revenue are a static problem, and that it won't have any effect to double taxes on certain types of income. (ex: Capital gains)
What're you going to do if that doesn't work as expected?
3. Your claim that the government is insolvent is belied by reality, where our government can still sell bonds at a lower interest rate than anyone else in existence. Why do they have a better credit rating than you can ever hope to achieve, if they understand math so much worse than you?
They don't have a credit rating better than me. I've repaid all my debts. The US, has not. The US credit rating is eroding as creditors realize the US gov't is not serious about paying back the debt.
Yes, they can get away with it because they own printing presses and can "create" money out of thin air. What actually happens is that they're using inflation as a wealth tax (that hurts the middle class the most) to bankroll the deficit spending. If you earn $100k/year, but it doesn't have the buying power of $50k/year 10 years ago, that is not prosperity.
Appealing to an entity that hasn't planned a budget in 4 years as a "math smart" is also pretty hilarious. Go back and stick your head in the sand. Obama's prosperity is juuuuust around the corner. Ignore the unemployment rates or the lack of growth - that's all Bush's fault, and Obama just needs 4 more years...
PS: Funny how Bush II's economy wasn't Clinton's fault, or that Clinton's economy can't be credited to Bush I.
Constitutionally speaking, yes, nukes are fine. The correct path for the government to have followed at the time would have been to amend the 2nd to the general tune of "except for nuclear arms, biological arms, and chemical arms" (or some such verbiage) -- which I think very few US citizens would have an objection to, and therefore would have been a (relatively) easy amendment to pass. Then they could have made laws to follow, and those laws would have been legitimate in the context of the constitutional republic that the constitution authorizes them to have.
Instead, they have elected to bypass the constitution, most likely for two reasons. First, to admit they they don't have such power would be to also put into doubt many other unconstitutional actions they have engaged in (ex post facto laws, the inversion of the commerce clause, the usurpation of powers not enumerated to them, the assumption of article V powers by the judiciary, various deep transgressions against the bill of rights, etc.) Second, there is probably no more scary boogyman than the spectre of nuclear weapons; it's an excellent pretext to rush to do something because "it needs to be done." Although if we consider the dawn of the nuclear age with any kind of dispassionate eye, it is easy to realize that they would have had a great deal of time available to them before anyone would have had the wherewithal to actually create or obtain a nuclear weapon. Biological and chemical weapons are unfortunately quite easy to manufacture, so the "plenty of time" feature doesn't apply there, but again, that's not to say that the correct path was impossible to follow.
The point of the constitution was to make some things very inconvenient for the government to pursue. They have so altered the stage such that this is no longer even remotely the case. My contention is that we have definitively passed out of that time where we could legitimately call ourselves a constitutional republic.
Yes, that's certainly one way the milita could be used at the time.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The fed buys most of the US government bonds these days. There is no market rate for US debt because their is no functioning market.
The jig is almost up. The dollar's only hope is the Euro dies first. Then capital flight will give us another 10 years.
The Euro's only hope is the dollar dies first.
China is fucked in any case. They are about to lose the best parts of their bank reserves. As fucked as the dollar and euro are, they are better then the loans the Chinese banks were required to make to politicians sons and daughters.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
None of Iran's major cities are on the coast and both South Florida and East Texas are flat as a pancake. You'd be hard pressed to pick two American cities that are less similar to Iranian cities geographically.
They could just be training for the mass murder of civilian foreigners.
What? I think it's a lot more likely to be a crowd of American citizens on those streets, brown as they may be. I think they're training against the possibility of a democracy movement coming to this country.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
"I will not comply" - Bama-Shooter (police officer/site staff)
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1429118_I_will_not_comply_.htmlhttp://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1429118_I_will_not_comply_.html
I know a few. None of them own casinos. If I hit the lotto (slim odds as I don't play) I will really clear the title on our land by the Skeena. As it is, all decisions regarding land use consider the interests of the salamander, salmon, and the Kitselas Band primary to those of my own family.
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
Yeah you're right, they should have done the training in Maine during a blizzard.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
He's just trying to ratchet up the tension in the hopes that this will precipitate a Turner Diaries style mass uprising against Obama's communist government.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
There is no excuse for these "drills" other than to terrorize and intimidate citizens. And combined with promotion exams requiring officers to commit to firing on US citizens, West Point "white papers" discussing how to perform counter insurgency against US citizens, and the fact the the Dept. of Homeland Security as stockpiled billions of rounds of ammunition, the only possible explanation is that US government is preparing to go to war with the US civilian population. There are so few actual "terrorists" in the world that nothing else justifies this level of para-military build up.
Its not far fetched. Its happened quite often in the last 113 years. They will either use resistance to gun confiscation or an engineered dollar collapse to start hostilities and implement an authoritarian/free market system like China or Singapore.
I know I'm late to the party, but just saw this posted by a friend on Facebook:
"I get up this morning & on the news I hear about a code red drill at ______ _______ High School today, a school that my husband attended & my daughter _____ briefly, so it hit home is why I'm posting this. So they will lock teachers & students in classrooms today & fire blanks into the school while police sweep the school to "familiarize" students & staff with the sounds of gun fire in the school. So too far or good idea?"
I'm choosing "too far". Why in the hell would people need to be familiar with the sounds of gunfire in a school?
Do you have ESP?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Sure, the Republicans took control of Congress soon after, but they didn't make any drastic changes through the remainder of Clinton's terms.
Welfare reform? Blocked Hillarycare?
Whereas for Bush II, he is credited with his tax cuts, and the war in Iraq. Both which started under a Republican majority.
Followed by a Democrat controlled congress who got elected due to Republican fiscal irresponsibility, but increased deficit spending after coming into power. After which, a Democrat-driven fiscal policy exploded and triggered a recession. (idea was to subsidize mortgages to people who weren't good credit risks; this encouraged all sorts of risky and stupid loaning)
Followed by trillion dollar gov't deficits when Democrats controlled the legislature and the presidency. (And Senator Obama voted for that level of spending, so he's not off the hook).
At this point in time, we've gone 4 years without a budget (entire Obama 1st term), with Democrats blocking any attempts to define one.
Our Great Recession (or Depression 2.0) can be easily laid at the feet of Democratic politicians, but Blame Bush (TM).
I'm assuming that taxes will have the same effect on rich people the always have: very little. Your assumption that returning to the tax rates of the previous century will break something (when dropping those taxes did nothing at all) is the one that requires further proof.
And yes, the republicans have filibustered most attempts at defining our spending over the last 4 years, but there's an act of congress that addresses spending and has budget in the name:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_Control_Act_of_2011
I personally don't care for Obama much, but partisan hacks like yourself are exactly the reason this country is in trouble in the first place. You spend your time worshiping Bush rather than addressing real issues, which forces me to defend Obama rather than deal with his very real flaws. Attack him for something bad (drone strikes, wiretapping...) and we've can try to make progress. But continue to attack him for the mess Bush left and you're just wasting everyone's time.
Changa hates change.
"conducting training exercises over Miami and elsewhere in the county."
And this is training for what, exactly?? Attacking the residents, maybe?
BTW, just to quibble, it's the Arsht Center. This was shot in Downtown Miami, and just north of it. Apparently, there were other places in Miami-Dade County invaded, too. I'm just wondering: Did anyone fire back?
Can you give a source for that $6.2 trillion? The figures I can find say $3.8 trillion, which is considerably lower. The only reference to $6.2 trillion dollars with the US budget that I find is Paul Ryan calling for a $6.2 trillion dollar reduction in spending... but that was in spending over the next ten years, or a cut of $0.62 trillion in the average annual budget over that time.
Second, don't forget that households are not the only source of government income - corporations are another source. Profit that is not disbursed to stockholders isn't in those household income figures. As of 2009 (most recent year I can quickly find figures for), US corporations were believed to be holding about $5 trillion in liquid assets. While that's a lump sum rather than an annual increase, it looks like US corporations have been salting away liquid assets quite quickly the last few years.
Third, you don't address his point - that most of those crying out for less government spending are in favor of more government spending on the military. Most of the discretionary budget is spent on the military. The US doesn't just spend more on its military than any other nation - its spends more than numbers 2-8 on the list of highest military expenditures combined. Current estimates of naval strength indicate that the US Navy is stronger than all other navies in the world combined.
When you're spending too much - and especially if you're spending more than you make, as your figures indicate - it isn't the time to be increasing any expenditure. And looking at the biggest expense area that you have that you can easily cut is only common sense. In the case of the US, that's the military.
So the key point I'm taking away here is that we shouldn't blame Democrats for failed policies. It's the Republican's fault for not blocking them, or failing to repeal them afterwards.
That's an ... interesting type of responsibility.
Your assumption that returning to the tax rates of the previous century will break something (when dropping those taxes did nothing at all) is the one that requires further proof.
Errr, no.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Maximum_Federal_Tax_Rate_on_Long_Term_Capital_Gains_%281972_-_2012%29.jpg
1980 is associated with the Reagan recovery, and 1996 is roughly when the Internet boom occurred.
But that said, America's voted for high spending, let them have the high taxes and the crappy economy that goes with it.
It's not a good idea, but it's what the people want.
And yes, the republicans have filibustered most attempts at defining our spending over the last 4 years, but there's an act of congress that addresses spending and has budget in the name:
A law with "budget" in the name is not necessarily a budget.
I personally don't care for Obama much, but partisan hacks like yourself are exactly the reason this country is in trouble in the first place. You spend your time worshiping Bush rather than addressing real issues, which forces me to defend Obama rather than deal with his very real flaws. Attack him for something bad (drone strikes, wiretapping...) and we've can try to make progress. But continue to attack him for the mess Bush left and you're just wasting everyone's time.
Worshipping Bush? Where? Partisan hack, speak for yourself.
There's a double standard deployed here, where Bush left a mess for Obama, but Clinton apparently left no mess for Bush (9/11 is completely Bush's fault, huh?). Blaming Bush for the state of everything when we've reached Obama's 2nd term is hilarious when no such standard was applied for Bush.
Asking for objective standards to be applied to both parties is not worship or partisan.
Pointing out the fiscal irresponsibility of the party in power is not partisan. They're in power, they're supposed to be using it in the public interest, which does not include racking up deficits and debt.
Sounds like a major exercise to quell Civil unrest. Cities like Miami, Houston, Oakland, NYC are generally used because they are densely populated and good training for the military.Luckily we still have the 2nd amendement to protect ourselves in a worst case scenario.
Mod the parent post up. That's the point of a whole lot of training and live fire exercises and with manning submarine posts and missile launch posts: getting trained to follow orders and to jump as high as possible without even asking "how high?" when asked to jump. Do you think they want people who are going to wuss out and not turn the keys when they're asked to go through a launch sequence? The majority of soldiers are all good guys, but they expect the guys above them to be good guys, and they are selected and trained on the point of and ability of being able to take orders and execute them. Even though you're supposed to fall on your sword and not carry out illegal orders, there's no time or ability to check on commands in high pressure rapdily changing situations.
.
So, agree that the US is spending way too much money.
However, the guy does have a point, you can't compare mean spending with median income. That only works if the distribution of income is fairly balanced, and in the US that is ANYTHING but true. If you took all the income of all the people making under median income and added it up that would probably only add up to a few percent of the total US income. On the other hand if you took the income of just the top 5% of wage earners that would probably be something like half the US income.
Compare means to means.
Now, you are right that debt and spending aren't the same thing either. That is splitting hairs a bit though - and the debt is larger than the deficit so if anything that error tends to make the problem look worse than it is. US debt isn't anywhere near 100% of GDP.
Oh, and the one thing that nobody has mentioned is that something like a third of the GDP in the US is from the financial industry. That is funny money if you ask me, and here is why it matters. The debt ratio only matters in a world where you're concerned the US can't pay its debts. If everybody just happily assumes the US can never default then the US can borrow however many quintillions of dollars it needs at low interest no matter how much debt it is in and how low the GDP is. It can just borrow more when it need to service the interest. The ratio only matters when people lose confidence in the US government. When that happens how much confidence do you think they'll have in the US financial system? Suddenly 1/3rd of that GDP that everybody is counting on to help keep the government running just vanishes. Factories don't vanish. A mortgage is only worth whatever the house and person it is issued against is worth, and if nobody can afford to buy that house when the owner defaults then it is worthless. That is how huge sums of "money" can just vanish on Wall Street.
Now, you are right that debt and spending aren't the same thing either. That is splitting hairs a bit though - and the debt is larger than the deficit so if anything that error tends to make the problem look worse than it is. US debt isn't anywhere near 100% of GDP.
US GDP: 15~ Trillion.
Total US public debt: 16.4 Trillion.
If you meant the US deficit isn't near 100% GDP, that's nice, but we're still borrowing roughly 40% of our spending. That translates to 66% above our means.
This started off about Helicopters & Machine gun practice over Houston & Miami then got on to tanks. I'm simply amazed.... Nerds & Geeks all warriors now. Better y'all forget about Hollywood. If you want to do some good in the US of A, start getting the idiots y'all put in D.C. out! And while you're at it, stop messing with "Gun Control" & start messing with the Loonies,,,,other than Lawyers, there'S THE Looneytooners, put 'em to work & straighten out the folks who think the solution when your pissed off is to grab a gun!
Can you give a source for that $6.2 trillion? The figures I can find say $3.8 trillion, which is considerably lower.
Thats just the Federal government. Notice how I said 'government' spending, not 'Federal government spending.'
It shouldn't have mattered what I said anyways, because you are a thinking and rational person, right? You surely know that Federal spending isnt the entire spending picture and thus any argument or conclusion you might make about how much the government is spending would be nonsense if you only included the Federal numbers. We arent talking about Federal taxes here, so we don't get to only consider the Federal budget.
Third, you don't address his point - that most of those crying out for less government spending are in favor of more government spending on the military.
Quite frankly, bullshit. Thats what some partisan shitheads are saying about the other side, thats all. Saying it doesnt make it true, just like when I say that tea-party members are all racists and democrats are all boozing womanizer tax cheats.. guess what.. doesnt make the statement true. There is no point to 'address' as you so ignorantly demand because its just a loaded partisan bullshit statement.
"His name was James Damore."
Can you give a source for that $6.2 trillion? The figures I can find say $3.8 trillion, which is considerably lower.
Thats just the Federal government. Notice how I said 'government' spending, not 'Federal government spending.'
And there you go again, dodging the question. Can you give a source for that figure? Or are you going to act like a politician and nit-pick the question without trying to answer it? But here, I'll save you the trouble: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year2012_0.html has the $6.2 trillion dollar figure, now that I know what you're talking about. Note, though, that that page also indicates that's against a $15.6 trillion gross domestic product. It took me about thirty seconds of searching to find that, but apparently you'd rather spend time nit-picking questions instead of trying to produce verification of facts.
It shouldn't have mattered what I said anyways, because you are a thinking and rational person, right? You surely know that Federal spending isnt the entire spending picture and thus any argument or conclusion you might make about how much the government is spending would be nonsense if you only included the Federal numbers. We arent talking about Federal taxes here, so we don't get to only consider the Federal budget.
I don't know what taxes you're talking about, since you didn't specify. I'm not psychic. However, I'll note that you know perfectly well that I pointed out that the income being taxed in the US compasses more than just household incomes, but you don't address that point at all. If you want to include all government spending instead of just federal spending, surely you must concede that all of the tax base should be included, not just households?
Third, you don't address his point - that most of those crying out for less government spending are in favor of more government spending on the military.
Quite frankly, bullshit. Thats what some partisan shitheads are saying about the other side, thats all. Saying it doesnt make it true, just like when I say that tea-party members are all racists and democrats are all boozing womanizer tax cheats.. guess what.. doesnt make the statement true. There is no point to 'address' as you so ignorantly demand because its just a loaded partisan bullshit statement.
And I didn't say his point was true. All I'm saying is that you didn't address it. Which was not bullshit. You then fail to address my points about how much we're overspending on the military.
So tell me... do you actually want to have a rational discussion, or not? If you're willing to talk facts and figures, that's one thing. If all you want to do is nit-pick and name-call, then there's no point in even trying to have a discussion with you.
This has got to be one of the dumbest ideas for a training exercise I've ever heard of in my life.