TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

PotatoesRock Since: Oct, 2012
#103176: Oct 13th 2015 at 5:30:37 AM

It isn't that Sanders is necessarily anti Military, it's that he's very much pro welfare state. And in order to fund his programs he must ether cut the budget from somewhere else, or raise taxes. You have one guess for which will be easier to pass Congress.
Do realize:

The Pentagon WANTS budget cuts, they basically get a ton of money that goes to waste or has to be funneled into some of DARPA's more bizarre pet projects (or probably bullshit contracts).

And Sanders has said he wants to massively increase taxes on the wealthy.

And he thinks balanced budgets and government surpluses are dangerous.

LeGarcon Blowout soon fellow Stalker from Skadovsk Since: Aug, 2013 Relationship Status: Gay for Big Boss
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
#103177: Oct 13th 2015 at 5:33:00 AM

Balanced budgets are an idea invented by the wealthy as an excuse to kill off welfare and social nets.

And right now our military is practically begging us to cut budgets, the only reason they're so high is because companies like Lockheed are intent on bleeding our nation dry.

Oh really when?
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#103178: Oct 13th 2015 at 6:19:07 AM

[up] They were begging to be cut. Right now they are complaining that they don't have enough to fulfill their mission requirements. The army is cutting troop strength, and the navy is considering reducing the carrier fleet. I think people are severally underestimating the damage sequestration did to the military. The new procurement reforms could do some good, but they are going to be vetoed by the President.

Edit: And considering a balanced budget was considered the ideal long before the concept of a welfare state, let alone the massive ones they have in Europe existed, I doubt it was made up by the wealthy in order to have an excuse not to give out welfare.

edited 13th Oct '15 6:20:04 AM by JackOLantern1337

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#103179: Oct 13th 2015 at 6:26:20 AM

[up] On that latter, you'd be surprised. The supposed need for fiscal restraint in government has been used as a sledgehammer to beat down the poor since forever. It was only justified, even in theory, before the adoption of fiat currencies, when a country could be bankrupted by insufficient cash flow. That no longer pertains. It's time for those folks to update their textbooks and move into the current century.

I have yet to see a justification for the continued massive expenditure of resources on our military that doesn't come down to "dey gon' come git us!" without any reasoning more complex than that. But fine, keep our military budget. If we can afford to spend borrowed money on something that adds no direct value to our nation or to our economy, we can afford to spend borrowed money on things that do. It's that weird logic thing.

edited 13th Oct '15 6:28:29 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#103180: Oct 13th 2015 at 6:29:12 AM

[up] I wasn't claiming it hasn't been, but that it wasn't invented to be such.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#103181: Oct 13th 2015 at 6:41:55 AM

Look, economic systems have always operated for the benefit of the wealthy. You could say that the 1930s marks the first time in the history of the world that a systematic, government-driven attempt to reform those systems has succeeded. Naturally those whose privilege is challenged by such reforms will resent it and try to seize their privilege back.

Saying, "Well, it wasn't considered wrong back then," is a pretty flimsy justification, especially when you consider the point of view of all the people who were shit on. Literally. Jailed for being poor, executed for demanding economic parity, sent off to die in wars when they got too numerous to feed, you name it.

edited 13th Oct '15 6:59:38 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#103182: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:15:18 AM

The problem with military cuts is that the military isn't actually funded as a giant blob, certain bits of the military needs more money, but you bits need a hell of a lot less. Thing is the cuts are always being put on the areas that need more money (pay for soilders) and not the areas that need less (boondoggle pork bullshit).

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#103183: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:19:19 AM

[up][up] I was not saying it was correct. For god's sake I was just pointing out a historical error. The belief that debt was bad for a nation to have existed before the concept of a welfare state even existed. The intent of it's creation, and it's current use are irrelevant to each other, I was just pointing out a fact. I find it difficult to believe that some feudal lord was worried about his peasants demanding social security or free pre k education.

Edit: And what proof do you have that wars were started just to kill poor people. This is a problem with a lot of history these days. We try to compare actions to the past with reasoning form today. We try to find broad narratives and secret social plots,when in reality no such things existed. History is just a bunch of people bumbling around and making decisions and living their lives due to the circumstances of their time. Trying to impose an overarching narrative over it is frankly stupid.

Edit 2: And what is the situation with paying our soldiers anyway? I have heard tales of them being driven into poverty and despair frequently, and not being paid much. But I have also heard that Military benefits are considered to be "lavish." And that the majority of our money is being spent on personnel costs, which is why China and India can field nearly as many, or more men than us for much less money, as they don't pay their soldiers much.

edited 13th Oct '15 7:25:01 AM by JackOLantern1337

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#103184: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:25:31 AM

Yep, they need to shift around a lot of the money spent with the military.

They need to scale back on some of the pretty useless projects and you know actually fund soldiers body armor and such, there are a hell of a lot of stories how families were having to buy the stuff and send it to their loved one soldier.

Then there is the VA... A soldier defends our country but when he comes back the VA is just a big fuck you for doing that. Seriously a guy at my work went to the VA because he was having chest pains and breathing problems, they send him home with some pain meds a day and a half later he was dead via heart attack.

JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#103185: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:26:06 AM

[up] Yeah the VA's a fucking mess.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
SomeSortOfTroper Since: Jan, 2001
#103186: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:33:11 AM

[up]X alot, The impression I've gotten is that historically debt were mostly raised during warriors and then afterwards desires for balanced budgets were focused on not paying welfare for returning. The USA has faced violent protests or revolts from veterans after every major war pre- New Deal - The American revolution , the civil war and WW 1 were all followed by protests or violent action from veterans who weren't getting paid, the French-Indian wars led to tax rises that helped caused the revolution in the first place, a revolution that was desired not so much by the masses but by a key elite and WW 2 was followed by a big push for welfare programs for veterans across the world.

So yeah actually balanced budgets being an argument for cutting costs from the poor and the invalid for the benefit of avoiding taxes on the wealthy seems to be the norm. I think the difference in modern times has been the development of Institutions that help the government distribute debt like strong central banks and the adoption of a fiat currency. This has helped avoid having to make the choice but it seems like when the choice was between a guy who owned 50 slaves and a war veteran, the former won.

edited 13th Oct '15 7:34:14 AM by SomeSortOfTroper

Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#103187: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:35:42 AM

[up][up] And no one is doing a thing about it in the areas that matter. It's all political dick waving at the highest levels that hasn't done a single thing at the patient level.

edited 13th Oct '15 7:35:59 AM by Memers

BlueNinja0 The Mod with the Migraine from Taking a left at Albuquerque Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
The Mod with the Migraine
#103188: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:37:30 AM

in order to fund his programs he must ether cut the budget from somewhere else, or raise taxes. You have one guess for which will be easier to pass Congress.
I think you mean, "easier to pass the Tea Party." In which case, yes that might be more accurate. But if the next year through the election continues the way it has in the last six months, Congress may very well end up being TP vs Everyone. In which case, unless the TP pick up more seats, I'd put my money on the tax hikes.
Right now they are complaining that they don't have enough to fulfill their mission requirements.
The military is complaining about how Congress is forcing us to spend money on shit we don't neednote , instead of in places where we do need it - like health care, basic pay, and standard supplies.
I think people are severally underestimating the damage sequestration did to the military.
The largest damage sequestration did to the Navy was the sudden lack of experienced contractors on military service contracts. Second to that is the amount of material we have that is literally sitting around waiting for the parts to fix it, because the funding for maintenance and repair was gutted for Congress' pet projects.
a balanced budget was considered the ideal long before the concept of a welfare state
When the US was still on a gold standard, I can see how the inability to manufacture gold from wishes and hot air would have caused the government to have difficulty maintaining itself. As can be seen through the regularly scheduled depressions and recessions that happened.
Republican incompetence article
So, essentially the Tea Partynote  do not believe in the essence of democracy as a functioning process.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#103189: Oct 13th 2015 at 7:37:44 AM

[up][up][up] In modern times definitly, but not when it was first created as a concept, probably as an extension of the belief that a person should not be in debt. Which makes sense when you consider that nations were the personal property of their rulers. And taxes were raised on the colonies,without their consent or representation, not to pay for veterans of the French and Indian war, but for the maintenance of a permanent army in British North America.

edited 13th Oct '15 7:38:51 AM by JackOLantern1337

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Mopman43 Since: Nov, 2013
#103190: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:08:59 AM

[up]Said army being for our protection against the natives who were, quite understandably, not fond of us.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#103191: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:41:09 AM

@Blue Ninja 0: Let's be fair, now. Democracy isn't getting them what they want, so of course it's not a functioning process.

...I'm not even being entirely sarcastic there.

Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#103192: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:50:20 AM

What's up party people (snicker)

Did I miss anything so far these three days where I have been busy sick?!

By which I mean, has Trump done anything outrageously crazyfunny to garner my amusement?

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#103193: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:55:56 AM

Trump has been fairly subdued in the news — the big story has been the collapse of the Republican caucus in the House of Representatives.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#103194: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:58:32 AM

And Paul Ryan is now Rorschach.

The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll look down and whisper "No."

Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#103195: Oct 13th 2015 at 8:59:38 AM

[up][up][up]The race has been quiet. Republican Congress is falling apart, and who ever comes out on top will be a serious nutjob.

We were currently talking about how joining the military is the worst thing you can do to yourself and your family and how military budgets are stupidly top heavy for black projects that need to be cut while basic needs for a soldier need to be increased.

edited 13th Oct '15 9:00:13 AM by Memers

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#103196: Oct 13th 2015 at 9:02:34 AM

I have yet to see a justification for the continued massive expenditure of resources on our military that doesn't come down to "dey gon' come git us!" without any reasoning more complex than that.
There are legitimate reasons for the size and expense of our military. Like it or not, we currently play World Police in a lot of regions, and if we wanted to, say, retire some of our carrier fleets, then that would require a major shift in our foreign policy. You can argue that we should make that policy change, but "we're doing something that I don't think we should be doing" is different from "we're spending money on things that don't need to be done" or "we're spending money to defend ourselves from nonexistent threats dreamt up by paranoid xenophobes".

Granted, that's not to say that there aren't problems with military R&D or procurement spending. Money gets wasted for bad reasons all the time. Some of that's inevitable in a bureaucracy the size of the DOD, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't tighten it up as much as we can. Unfortunately, a lot of the spending — particularly of the sort that the military is saying they don't want anyway — isn't really meant for the military, it's just good old fashioned pork.

The military is complaining about how Congress is forcing us to spend money on shit we don't need like the fucking F-35
The F-35, expensive as it's been, is at least filling a need. Our current generation of fighter planes are 40+ years old, based on 50+ year old designs. They need to be updated, both in terms of physical hardware (ie, we need to build new planes) and in terms of design (ie, we need to update the types of planes we're building). I'm not going to argue that the F-35 program hasn't been a mess, but "this necessary system is costing us more than it should" really isn't the same thing as "we don't even need this in the first place".

edited 13th Oct '15 9:07:43 AM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#103197: Oct 13th 2015 at 9:02:34 AM

[up][up][up]So who wants to tell him that we're not supposed to agree with Rorschach?

edited 13th Oct '15 9:02:48 AM by Kostya

Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#103198: Oct 13th 2015 at 9:06:42 AM

Oh hoh hoh. Republicans are silly.

My prediction remains the same, however. What is likely going to happen is that the Republican party will not die, but remain as a fringe element and the U.S will see a surge of a third party, and people will likely care less than ever about politics.

It happened here.

[up] R...r...rude...

edited 13th Oct '15 9:07:03 AM by Aszur

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#103199: Oct 13th 2015 at 9:12:26 AM

They need to scale back on some of the pretty useless projects and you know actually fund soldiers body armor and such, there are a hell of a lot of stories how families were having to buy the stuff and send it to their loved one soldier.

Nothing new about that...

The F-35, expensive as it's been, is at least filling a need. Our current generation of fighter planes are 40+ years old, based on 50+ year old designs. They need to be updated, both in terms of physical hardware (ie, we need to build new planes) and in terms of design (ie, we need to update the types of planes we're building). I'm not going to argue that the F-35 program hasn't been a mess, but "this necessary system is costing us more than it should" really isn't the same thing as "we don't even need this in the first place".

And the same applies — probably even more so — for the other nations that are buying the F-35. Some of the aircraft the F-35 is replacing won't even last the decade.

edited 13th Oct '15 9:13:46 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On
Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#103200: Oct 13th 2015 at 10:30:04 AM

It's easier for Republicans to leave the VA underfunded because then they can use it as a perpetual whipping boy to show how they're fighting for the troops. Meanwhile the poor agency can try to shift around one blanket to cover five sleepers, but the blanket just isn't big enough.


Total posts: 417,856
Top