It’s just my opinion, but to me, it appears odd to argue whether The Nation can afford such and such governmental spending in areas of education, health and human services (approx. summing up to 120b $/year) without looking at the bigger picture; where defence spending is almost outside the chart if total governmental spending is presented in a normal graph. I guess I’m wondering why a debate regarding education and social reforms so often takes a heated ideological tone (although usually just demagogic slugging), while military budgeting grows rampant at the same time. My point is that of priority, not supression of opinion (quite the contrary).
In that case then, this is what I think is up. The US will have to have high military spending. Without it, the US would lose its superpower status in the world. It would also risk getting attacked from another country (the US isn’t very popular). With China rising in power, military strength will be needed to prevent a problem going on there. The high spending is also going on because we are currently at war in at least two places (Afganistan and Iraq).
As far as education is concerned, there is more needed than just throwing money at that problem. I think a total reorganization of the public school system is needed. Such as putting it under control of the national gov’t instead of the state (which has shown they cant handle the responsibility). This would allow even chance for all students in the country with national standards and equal chance for education.
Damn Comanch, I have not reseached like this since college…here are the links to backup the statements. And my point was that neither Clinton nor Bush had a bloody hand in the 911 plot although the planning and execution existed during both of their tenures. AND ou are wrong that you sensably countered my points, in fact, you now have muddied the debate further.
Unemployment rate:
(http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm) & (ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt)
Poverty rate of Americans:
(http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov23.html)
Black home ownership higher that at any point in history (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/ownershipbyrace.html) & (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/006088.html)
5 years of consecutive growth
(http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/dpga.txt)
AND concerning your statements on spending per GDP lorein, please peruse these links and you will see that you are mistaken. Keep in mind that the US has $11+ Trillion economy so 400 billion is a drop in the bucket. But as for a percentage of GDP and education versus military the US is 6.6 in education and 4.3 in military. Links below.
Defense spending as a percentage of GDP
Comparison to other nations:
http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/allied_contrib98/chtIII-3.html
Education spending as a percentage of GDP
Comparison to other nations:
In 2000, the United States and Korea spent the highest percentage of their GDP on total education expenditures (6.6 percent) among the OECD countries. Looking at education expenditures by level, the United States spent 3.9 percent of its GDP on elementary/secondary education, while the average for all OECD countries reporting data was 3.6 percent. At the postsecondary level, 2.7 percent of the U.S. GDP was spent on education expenditures while the corresponding OECD average was 1.3 percent.
(http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2004/section6/indicator36.asp)
From this link, I see no growth in employement. So, if we look at when Bush entered the White House in 2001, we see a steady decline in employement, compared to 2000, Clinton’s last year. Your link has proven nothing, but backed my point.
Here is the data, from your link:
Percent employeed:
2000: 64.4
2001: 63.7
2002: 62.7
2003: 62.3
2004: 62.3
2005: 62.7 (the only rise of Bush’s career)
This shows that he is in the negative from what he started out at.
Poverty rate of Americans:
This link still backs my point. If you look at the years, poverty numbers rose from 2001-2004. Clinton’s numbers, however, show a significant decline in the poverty number.
Black home ownership higher that at any point in history (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hous...shipbyrace.html) & (http://www.census.gov/Press-Release...ons/006088.html)
I refuse to read through all that from the second link. The first link doesn’t prove anything, because it only shows one year, not comparing the other years.
But if you read my previous post, I never argued this point, only stating that I find the whole race thing pointless and people need to get over race and ethnicity.
5 years of consecutive growth
Please point out how this proves your point. All I see is a bunch of numbers, and am not wasting my time to figure out what they all mean.
I understand that charts are difficult for some to decipher or comprehend. I’ll try to explain in “Dick and Jane” terms.
The first 6 years of Clinton’s presidency versus Bush’s first six years shows that Bush has a lower unemployment rate by .2 (5.5 for Clinton compared to Bush’s 5.3). And consider that Bush has had to absorb the dot com bust and the the repercussions of 911.
The poverty number has decreased every year for the past three decades and has never increased…what the hell are you looking at?
As far as the race economic issues, tell that to your democratic leadership which panders and misleads the minority groups. I am addressing some of your party’s major campaign issues.
Since taking office, Bush has acheived positive growth, albeit minimal in 2001 and 2002 but again I relate that back to the topic of discussion being 911 and its impact.
If you are serious in not discounting the dot com bubble as an event that padded Clinton’s stats and hampered Bush’s stats then you are fooling yourself my delusional friend.
Just be honest.
VOTE Libertarian and screw both Dems and Reps
Well, first off I’m not sure how or why this thread has turned into a Bush v. Clinton/Republican v. Democrat argument thread! This is not why I posted the thread nor is it what I wanted this thread to degenerate to. When are people going to stop bickering amongst each other and realize that we’re on the same side! This isn’t a Rep/Dem subject or any other related subject. I don’t know why people can’t realize that all these classifications are used as divisive measures among the American people who all share the same interests yet are too busy arguing Rep v. Dem or some other illusion designed to keep the rich, rich and the poor, poor, to realize that our common interests are not being looked after. This is a social and morality issue. Rich v. poor and right v. wrong. Something that most people do not know is that both George W. Bush and John Kerry are cousins and are part of the same social organization(skull and bones 332, whatever its real name is). So it really doesn’t matter who were voting for we’re getting the same thing but disguised in different packages. For more info on this matter check out Alex Jones’ documentary - Martial Law 9-11: Rise of the Police State and his websites www.infowars.com and www.prisonplanet.com Now I warn you that his theories are extreme but please do not be shut out by this, he has some interesting points and information that he has researched. Take the research and facts he has accumulated and make your own decisions. I urge you to take a look at it, you do not have to agree with his theories but you need to know some of the facts he has accumulated about the power elite to understand that the people of America are being manipulated and used to allow the power elite to become richer and gain more power. Secondly, this video has not covered all the evidence of government involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Did you know that NORAD was forced to stand down for over an hour during the events preceding the attacks because the CIA had told NORAD that drills simulating the hi-jacking of commercial airliners and crashing said airliners into the Pentagon and WTC were scheduled the morning of 9/11 2001. Coincidence? Or the video evidence, that everyone saw but didn’t realize because it happened so fast, of a foreign object attached to the bottom of the planes that crashed into the Towers. It is speculated that the large objects on the bottom of the planes were missiles. Check the videos for yourself, you can clearly see an object on the bottom of the 2nd plane that hit the Towers. Notice that this object hits the Tower in a different spot than the plane hits and also note that it explodes upon impact. Also, did you notice any windows on the 2nd plane that hit the Towers? When was the last time you saw a commercial airliner with no windows? Note that there is only 1 known video of the 1st plane hitting the Towers and it was too far away to accurately see any features of the plane. However a explosion independent of the plane takes place just before the 1st plane hits the Tower indicating an explosive device was equipped, presumably on the bottom of the 1st plane. For more info on this topic, see aforementioned Alex Jones’ info as well as the documentary 9/11:In Plane Sight as well as the website www.letsroll911.org
I am neither Rep or Dem, just will vote for the candidate that stands for the issues I find important. Lets just agree to disagree about this thing, we could argue it until 100 pages from now. Anyways, it is right to stay on topic, as this is what threads do a lot, which is go off topic.
I’m still not certain about any of the theories, but they are intersting.
Barron, like Charlie Francis asked, why did you just begin to post?
First off, I did view the documentries and all I can say is DAMN! The Alex Jones info is incredible. I apologize to you guys for speaking before investigating. Now I am still going to spend the next few days watching and absorbing these materials but what I have seen thusfar is unbelievable and scary.
Economic debate, which was our sidetrack, is simply that and yes Camacho09 it is never ending as they are philsophies. But youv’e got to go check out some of these investigations.
With regard to not posting, I am a hobbist sprinter who is simply learning. I have attended one of Charlie’s Asheville, NC seminars a couple of years ago and believe in his training and have improved dramatically because of it. I consistently log on and value the discussions as a layman, I feel that I have had nothing of value to add by commenting which is apparently what I did with this thread based on its intended topic.
Incredible stories though with these investigations!
So where are the actual planes which have said to crashed and their passengers?
It has been said one or two of the planes landed in Cleveland so what happened to it and its passengers? Do they want us to believe the gov. destroyed the planes and took the passengers to a remote loaction(the NSCA place) and killed them all?!
I dont understand.
There is always value in posting, even if moving the discussion by asking questions.
As for the rest, I heard a great quote tonight by Tolstoy: “History is a wonderful thing- if only it were true.”
You mean Somerset Pennsylvania? The wreckage was found as were remains. Case closed right there. There is a big memorial for it actually.
2 of them never crashed and are in fact still being used today(175 and 93). As far as what happened to 11 and 77, I don’t know. I asked the same question after viewing the video and truth is they don’t know either. But the most important thing is that this a serious question that needs to be answered and who better to get answers from than the government… right :rolleyes: . Unfortunatley it appears that no one is going to get straight answers from the government so ordinary people are going to have to do their own investigating to uncover the truth.
Have you watched the video yet? If not please do and keep it mind you don’t have to accept it but I think it’s necessary that you at least get all the info before deciding for yourself.
Actually, I was not referring to GDP or other nations, I was referring to the FY 2005 Budget Authority (presented in a chart by Prof. Sheila Collins). My point was of negotiated governmental spending (i.e. The Budget), not the economy as a whole – there’s a difference, albeit theoretical; the budget should be negotiable whereas the “economy” (achieved GDP standards) is not. Spending according to GDP is usually a retrospective analythical tool whereas budget priorities are done before spending (in theory, practically they are not). GDP means the whole economy, The Budget means the factual money The Government has to play with.
But, indeed prophet, we are a bit off-track here 
i find this amusing considering that the US has an economy THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF CHINAS. 3% is a huge amount of a 3+ trillion dollar economy. the r&d has a budget bigger than the majority of all world militaries. argue all you want, its just unnecesary.
Well I think this ties back with the very beginning of the doc, I was expecting the film itself to do as much, but…a lot of information, but definitely needs more. It seems like a work in progress.
I did, and quite a few of them backed my points. But, again, lets just agree to disagree. 
I am talking about the 911 conspiracy investigations not my “irrefutable” sourced stats.
Unlike most male politicians who have in my opinion a surplus of estrogen and still cannot find middleground, debate among sprinters is definitley a lost cause in terms of finding middlegound …as sprinters have higher testostrone levels. Thanks god pistol or sword dualing is outlawed huh?
Read T-mag much?
I do, if T-mag stands for Titty-magazine!