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 : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (2260)	1/24/2002 8:15:05 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15516

W's father, former President Bush, participates in The Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group took a company public recently. The company produces the Crusader, a gun, that was approved in W's defense budget, I believe. See Link D. Here are references: The Bushies and The Carlyle Group a)Bush advisers cashed in on Saudi gravy train Message 16921834 b) Carlyle's Way Message 16921887 c) Ex-president [BUSH] and other Washington elites are behind the Carlyle Group. Message 16921937 d) Bush faces flak over family links with winner of US defence contract Message 16921956 e) Crony Capitalism, U.S.A. (opinion) Message 16921958 f) Misdirected Defense Dollars (opinion) Message 16921982

To: rich4eagle who wrote (2260)	1/25/2002 6:33:04 PM
From: Selectric II	Respond to of 15516

I just sent an email to the contact referred to in your link, as follows: When you compare US expenditures vs. other countries, do you adjust each country's expenditures to reflect costs of land, labor, materials, etc? Wages, rents, material costs, etc. do vary from place to place, so I would think it extremely important to do so in order to compare apples with apples. Thank you. It will be interesting to see the response. What would you suggest? Parity? Is that how we should ensure our defense?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (2260)	1/25/2002 7:18:30 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

Bush seeks $48bn increase in defence spending Biggest rise for 20 years would include $10bn for new wars The decision means a return to federal deficits for the first time since President Clinton's budget proposals of February 1997." Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles Thursday January 24, 2002 The Guardian President Bush is to seek the highest increase in military spending for 20 years. The massive increase will include a $10bn "war reserve" fund that would allow for expansion of military activity outside Afghanistan. Under the president's proposed budget, which is due to be submitted to Congress on February 4, defence spending would increase by $48bn (£33.6bn). Mr Bush is also proposing an increase in spending on domestic security of around $15bn. This will create a federal deficit for the first time for five years. In an address to the Reserve Officers Association yesterday, Mr Bush gave the first details of his $2 trillion budget. His request to Congress for a $48bn increase will bring the Pentagon's total budget up to around $380bn. The additional money will mean higher pay for the armed forces, a popular move, and spending on more precision weapons and for the building of missile defence systems. "Buying these tools may put a strain on the budget, but we will not cut corners when it comes to the defence of our great land," Mr Bush said to applause from the gathering. On the domestic security front, Mr Bush said his budget plans will include the hiring of 30,000 airport security workers, who will become federal employees, and an additional 300 FBI agents. There will also be additional costs for equipment to improve mail safety in the light of the continuing fears of anthrax. "There is a war on and the president's determined to win it," the White House budget chief, William Daniels, said yesterday as he spelled out the administration's thinking. "We have made every effort to do what's required." The heavy spending will mean a return to deficits of $106bn this fiscal year and $80bn the following year. The budget projections suggest a 0.7% economic growth rate this year, followed by 3.8% growth in 2003. Mr Daniels said the spending would mean "an interruption in the reduction of our national debt." He said that it was hoped to resume reducing the debt in 2004, adding "debt reduction is a very important objective". The decision means a return to federal deficits for the first time since President Clinton's budget proposals of February 1997. The president has long been flagging the costs of both running the war and of improving domestic security at public buildings and airports. He is likely to receive bipartisan support in most of his aims on the defence and security side of the budget plans, although there will be criticisms of his handling of other aspects of the economy from the Democrats. Other measures being pursued by the White House include $190bn to be set aside over 10 years to fund Medicare reform. Mr Bush has also already said that he would seek $1bn for the poorest schools. He will also ask for an additional $1bn to help children with special needs. guardian.co.uk