«

»

Jul
07

If US Cut Military by 75%, Would Still Have Biggest Military

If the US cut its military by 75%, it would still have the largest military in world. If the cut was 50%, the military would still be larger than the next …
Video Rating: 4 / 5

pub-6343053178602209

25 comments

No ping yet

  1. indalecio21 says:

    China? has the biggest military 🙂

  2. Alex Kruise says:

    You could never possibly ever attribute any productive job creation to higher taxes. Use some common sense, seriously. Reagan and Clinton also deregulated, but don’t forget, higher taxes can create worthless public sector jobs, but those jobs are completely unproductive. Also, the smartest thing the government could do is abolish? the corporate income tax because corporations aren’t people, they don’t pay the taxes; the employees and shareholders do.

  3. stads24 says:

    I have such a crush on? Natan! He’s smart and sexy!!!

  4. brandnutopian says:

    You need better reading comprehension skills, my friend.

    The historical record backs up my claim. Reagan and Clinton both raised taxes which in turn spurred growth and job creation. I’d be on board with a payroll tax holiday if that’s what you’re referring to as double taxation. There are workarounds with this, but without some sort of compromise nothing? will get done in DC and this malaise will just continue.

  5. Alex Kruise says:

    What a bunch of nonsense. Lower taxes makes labor more expensive? Your comment is so completely inaccurate. You forget that corporate income is subject to double taxation. It’s taxed when it is made, and it’s taxed again when it’s paid out to employees or shareholders. Precisely why? so many companies pay low or no dividends. Also, The corporate tax rate is not 100% deductible from worker salaries. You need an accounting degree before you can attempt to have this debate with me.

  6. sethneville says:

    I don’t know what figures he’s citing here, but I want to point out what I feel is a? relevant idea to keep in mind when discussing any “military expenditures”. To whit: do those figures include money that we spend on military hardware or programs which we then give away or sell at a loss to other nations, or just what we spend on ourselves? Israel, South Korea and Pakistan immediately jump to mind. Not espousing a position for or against, just wondering if we included that money.

  7. Mephistahpheles says:

    The US would be a lot safer if it? stopped creating enemies to justify military spending.

  8. brandnutopian says:

    Lower corporate income tax rates increase labor costs. You see, businesses get tax deductions for all their expenses, including worker salaries. (Internal Revenue Code Section 162.) So, the cost of a worker to a corporation is their salary times 100% minus the? corporate tax rate If the cost of a worker abroad is lower than the cost of a worker in the US, then the corporation will hire people in other countries rather than here.

  9. Alex Kruise says:

    There are plenty of? other factors that lead to weaker then expected growth from 01-07. You can’t possibly be inferring that higher taxes on the rich creates jobs. This is common sense; if you take money from a job creator, he will have less money to create jobs. To the point, unemployment will continue to rise, and less and less people will be paying into SS. The whole existence of SS is a stupid idea to begin with. You can make a better return investing in T-bonds. SS isn’t even an investment.

  10. johnsontsc says:

    Douche bag!?

  11. brandnutopian says:

    No rebuttal to what I stated, so you just switch? topics?

  12. whyamimrpink78 says:

    …..To much money means an increase in supply of it meaning it isn’t worth much. Attacking the? rich and giving money away ruins the economy.

  13. whyamimrpink78 says:

    If we get back? money from SS and medicare then why pay to begin with? Taking money from the rich, people who actually invest money and give it value and giving it to people who produce nothing ruins the economy. You lower the value of the dollar. It is all supply and demand. I demand money so I work for someone for it. That dollar now has value. If I demand money and someone just gives it to me that dollar is worthless since the person giving it to me doesn’t demand it……

  14. ccmanize says:

    The military will not be significantly slashed because so many politicians are taking bribes from private defense contractors. Of course the U.S. military doesn’t need to be as big as it is. It would be fine at half it’s size. But it’s? all about backroom bribes, not what’s best for the taxpayer.

  15. AFlyingMexican5 says:

    YAY!?

  16. brandnutopian says:

    Because the Bush Tax Cuts brought us so many jobs?

    In fact, with respect to GDP, consumption, investment, wage and salary, and employment growth, the 2001-2007 expansion was either the weakest or among the weakest since World War II.

    Moreover, the economy’s performance between 2001 and 2007 was weaker, overall, than its performance in the equivalent years of the 1990s,? years following significant tax increases.

  17. Alex Kruise says:

    Most corporations do pay that high tax rate. There is a small percentage of big corporations with lobbyists protecting? them from that rate. Also, social security is a Ponzi Scheme thats insolvency is built into its very nature. Your suggestion is to raise taxes on the rich. Higher taxes on the rich means less jobs, which means less people paying into social security, which in turn means the collapse of the scheme. Bernie Madoff and Charles Ponzi couldn’t pull it off; the government won’t either.

  18. brandnutopian says:

    Most corporations don’t pay half that percentage in taxes. It’s a total misnomer to say we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.
    The other fallacy is that we’re giving anything away to people. We PAY INTO social security and medicare our entire working lives,? that’s why it’s called an ENTITLEMENT, because we’re ENTITLED to OUR MONEY. The solvency of both programs could be easily fixed by upping the individual tax rates slightly on the wealthy, which are not the highest in the world.

  19. whyamimrpink78 says:

    Providing for the general welfare for the country could mean attracting businesses to create jobs in the US so people can? make a living. Just taking money and giving it away on the basis of “general welfare” actually hurts the economy. You give away money which means money has no value anymore, something businesses don’t like. When take away money as a tax then you scare away corporations like Apple. We have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, that is a problem.

  20. Cody Mcgeshick says:

    you are so smart.? Give this guy a medal!

  21. Alanony blitz says:

    We are Anonymous.
    /watch?v=49yqMmijfK4?

  22. therrydicule says:

    Yep.?

  23. AFlyingMexican5 says:

    I? read this fast and I am very sleepy so YAY?

  24. DaBigBouy says:

    USA planning to take over the world with its military!!!!!?

  25. Thezuule1 says:

    “larger than the next three countries combines.” In the description. This should say combined. ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>