SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: GraceZ who wrote (21045)1/11/2005 2:28:54 PM
From: JBTFD  Read Replies (1) of 116555
 
<Why why why would you want to keep something that works against your original purpose?>

Don't know specifically what you are talking about here.

<Defense spending as a percentage of the GDP and a percentage of Federal outlays has dropped significantly since the year I was born, 1954. In 1954 the percentage of Federal outlays which went to national defence was 69.5% and 13.1% of the GDP. In 2004 those numbers were 19.6% of outlays and 4% of GDP. You do the math.

OTOH the opposite can be said for Federal outlays which are payments to individuals. In 1954 payments to individuals were a quite manageable 17.8% of Federal outlays and 3.3% of the GDP. In 2004 they were 60.7% of outlays and 12.3% of GDP.>

You are so thoroughly ingrained in the thought process of cutting funding that you answer on that basis. My point is if we are going to judge effectiveness the military and pork barrel spending in general should not be exempt.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News