Cheney signed legal paperwork before the war took place that stated any money he made from that point on from his shares in Haliburton would be given to charity. He didn't receive a penny from the war. Boy, you folks don't do your research at all do you? What else you got?
Private companies, DUH. Sure the gov't wrote the checks(with taxpayer money) but companies cashed them. Do you really not know how this works or are you playing coy?
But what about Hillary's collusion with the Russians? Just another typical lefty thread ignoring how Hillary has orchestrated the entire deep state effort to destroy Trump using the Steele Dossier, and plant her own minions throughout the FBI, Justice Dept and the Mueller team. No lets talk about budget deficits instead!
Why in the world does Bush want to go to war to give some private companies money? Actually you could say every war was based on this then since in every single war there have been private companies that made tons of cash. Are you saying that's why FDR went to war...for the private companies that profited?
Maybe he didn't. It still doesn't change the fact that Halliburton got hooked up with fat govt contracts.
Our government doesn't run our industry so when we go to war we have to hire people to build what we need so of course people are going to get fat contracts. You can't really be this stupid.
Profit has and does drive wars/conflicts. You can't possibly be this naïve. And FDR was reacting to Pearl Harbor and a global threat in Germany and Japan. That analogy sucked bro.
It drives some but not all. You aren't showing any profit we made in this war however. Sure some companies profited but they always do in wartime because we need to buy more stuff from them. In the end this war cost us far more than we profited from it. This war was a security war....everyone was on edge from 9/11 and our intelligence services were saying Iraq was building a nuke to hit us with so put 2 and 2 together here. It was the timing of everything that led to it. Still, I think it was a good thing.....how we followed up was horrendous and we blew a great opportunity but I have no issue with the disposing of Saddam.
LOL. Blame blame blame. RWers that's all they do. RW had 2 yrs of R control. And they ballooned the debt/deficit to highest records. Yep, the D's with no power did it. LOL. It's why Rs never accomplish anything but putting the country into recessions. Lemme guess, if you car runs out of gas, it's the D's fault because they didn't fill it for you.
What's coming in through the southern border now are the diseased from all over the globe that according to medical doctors will cost a fortune to cure. What's happening now Should scare every American shitless. Now they're invading from the congo and have been seen with a roll of hundred dollar bills. They're making demands that they be immediately taken care of and thanks to the democrats we're going to be doing just that. Obviously someone is bankrolling them to invade our country but guess you don't care about that either, right? This makes me believe you so called liberals can't possibly be Americans so let me guess...Russian?
Iraq was not building a nuke that is ridiculous. They may have had goals to do so but they weren't anywhere close nor would they ever succeed. Let's just agree to disagree this is going nowhere. I look forward to our next exchange.
OMG, you mean people that produce goods for the military make money when we go to war? That's never ****ing happened ever in any war we've ever been in. lol.....
Its a no win situation If reoubs in the senate dont raise social spending liberals will attact them for heartlessness But if the repubs agree to raise spending you attack them over the deficit Just for the record I dont like the overspending either but I ‘ve never found a majority of liberals willing to accept a balanced butnet
Every time the Republicans try to slow the growth of the bureaucracy (not even make cuts), the Dems run TV ads showing a Republican pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff.
Spending more then you bring in.. As i have linked an is in right at the start of the OP.. Do you have any intention of a honest discussion of the topic?
A 10% cut in spending would by no measure be a small cut. Now will you elect Republicans to the Congress so we at least have a chance to do it?
ABSOLUTELY NOT. Republicans are the worst managers possible. They will never have the political courage to cancel the tax cuts they voted for, which literally bleeds the country. Ironically, the spending cuts in the next budget will have an impact on economic growth...which is already below the threshold where debt would be under control. And to think that unemployment is at its lowest level in 45 years.... When Trump leaves, he will leave behind a country in very bad shape. The situation could be corrected if he is fired in 2020, but if he is re-elected, it will be W. Bush #2.....
They are the only ones so have produced balanced and surplus budgets or at least manageable deficits and cut spending. It's not a revenue problem we have $50B more in revenue at this point than last year. Bush43 was just fine until the Democrats took back the Congress. He and the Republicans handed them a paltry $161B deficit. Which Democrats are proposing budget cuts and spending restraint?
Revenues are linked to economic growth. If the taxes had not been reduced, the surplus would have been much greater. The tax cuts had to pay for themselves by boosting growth beyond 4%..... And we made 2.9% in 2018. It's therefore a disaster for the debt that will be left to future generations. We have known for 70 years that taxes should not be cut during periods of growth, because the government will no longer have the flexibility to stimulate the economy when there is a slowdown. And thanks to Trump's extraordinary management, there will be a recession by 2021 at the latest. It's already too late to reduce expenses. A cut of more than 10% would push the country into recession in less than a year. The Republicans should have done so at the same time as the tax cuts in 2017.