Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (139564)	10/4/2001 11:30:18 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580812

I know what a T.F.Smith is What it was, not what one is. It was a specific task force sent to Korea that was rolled by the North Koreans because it wasn't big enough, well armed enough, or ready enough to fight. We had slashed our spending from WWII levels, and it was right to do so, but we went too far. Let me add to that....you are highly critical of any gov't spending that benefits the environment or people's living standards but you seem to be willing to accept carte blanche anything the military says. Most government spending for the environment amounts to more government control over business and people. Most government spending to effect people's living standards decreases the overall living standard, so does military spending but it atleast has another purpose that it does achieve and it also is a core an essential part of the government and spending on the military is fully supported by the constitution. As for accepting carte blanche anything the military says if you believe I do that then you don't really know me. Sen. Proxmire, who was more then willing to point out pork, found some of his best pork [roast] among the doings of military spending. I agree there is plenty of pork in the military and I have no problems cutting that but there is plenty of pork anywhere in government spending. I have no problem with cutting something that truly is pork from the military budget (like for example unneeded military bases) or pushing hard for better cost controls and more efficiency (while being careful that the cost controls don't cost more then they save. One of the things that needs to be reduced is the amount of required paperwork, but laws have to change to effect that and any savings would only be at the margin. Even if all these savings are rolled back in to the military we will still have readiness problems. We have enough planes and bombs and missiles and whatever to blow this planet up 3 times over...... This is literally not true, and even if it is meant to be taken not quite literally it isn't a very useful statement. Maybe you could rephrase it to something that is literally true and makes your point accurately. Tim, you can buy into but I will not. My reaction is the same as when welfare spending and welfare rolls continued to go up and up.....get a clue..... The difference is that military spending has continued to go down and down. If it had been going up and up these last 10 or 15 years I might be on your side on this issue. Tim