Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Rep. Alan Grayson Introduces the "War Is Making You Poor" Act

edited July 2010 in Buddhism Today
The bill would cut the DoD's budget and use that money to make the first $35,000 each American earns tax-free.

May 23, 2010 |

Last week, as Congress prepared to pass yet another “emergency” spending bill to cover America’s costly operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -- to the tune of $159 billion this time around -- Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Florida, introduced a bill that would force the Pentagon to pick up the tab out of its ample regular budget.
The War Is Making You Poor Act is elegant in its simplicity. Instead of financing these longstanding conflicts outside of the regular budgeting process, where they’re not factored into deficit projections, Grayson’s bill would make the DoD work within its means, and the money would instead be used for an across-the-board tax cut that would make the first $35,000 each American earns tax-free.
“The purpose of this bill,” wrote Grayson last week, “is to connect the dots, and to show people in a real and concrete way the cost of these endless wars.” It’s not just the costs of active shooting wars; with hundreds of bases overseas, as far as the defense budget is concerned Americans have been on a permanent wartime footing, to varying degrees, since Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1941. “War is a permanent feature of our societal landscape,” wrote Grayson, “so much so that no one notices it anymore.”


the rest of the article is here....http://www.alternet.org/story/146973/rep._alan_grayson_introduces_the_%22war_is_making_you_poor%22_act?page=1

Comments

  • NewOneNewOne Explorer
    edited May 2010
    Well I do think that the DoD's budget is important. I'm going to have to agree with Rep. Grayson. This is getting bad and I'm not just talking about the Middle East. Why is it that everytime something bad happens and NATO wants to do something about it AMERICA is doing it and footing the bill? We don't have the money anymore. Live within your means. Time to start cutting back. We don't need all these military bases around the world. We have to giant oceans to block us. (I know pearl harbor but that was alot of blunders on our part) We can't even secure our boarders to the south. If you really look into history AMERICA caused alot of the termoil in the middle east. We helped Bin Laden defeat the Russains by weapons and training. The Iran and Iraq war we helped both sides! We need to stop meddling in other people's affairs. I can see why most of the world hates us. We keep turning our back on them. I wish Ron Paul would have gotten elected, but for his ideas to work the House and Senate would have to change too. All we can do is vote and buckle up for the ride.
  • StaticToyboxStaticToybox Veteran
    edited May 2010
    The amount of money that my Congressional District has paid for Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade could have provided 1.2 million people with health care for one year. Or it could have provided nearly 4 million homes with renewable electricity. Or it could have paid one year's salary for 45,000 school teachers. That's just my Congressional district (of around 650,000 people) alone. People say we don't have the money for such things. We do have the money, we just choose to put it towards foolish endeavors.
  • edited May 2010
    It is high time for the US armed forces to cinch its belt and start being cost-effective and smaller. The US Army hit its manpower projections a couple years ago -- I've sat through several briefings where a battalion commander or someone else said, "Hey, we're over-strength. Mind your Ps and Qs or we'll kick you out!"

    It's time for the US government to start cutting its costs and start keeping money in the pockets of earners.
  • bushinokibushinoki Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Please, restructure the entire US tax structure to be more cost effective first. Start with things that are actually pointless, like the IRS and income tax. A national sales tax, AKA a "Duty" is the way to go. Never go after your defense budget until you've actually trimmed real fat every where else. Also, I have no time for someone who spouts the same tired rhetoric about "endless wars" that was spouted in the '60s. Or, we could start kicking everyone out who wants to cut defense spending before all the other BS out there.
  • StaticToyboxStaticToybox Veteran
    edited May 2010
    bushinoki wrote: »
    Please, restructure the entire US tax structure to be more cost effective first. Start with things that are actually pointless, like the IRS and income tax. A national sales tax, AKA a "Duty" is the way to go. Never go after your defense budget until you've actually trimmed real fat every where else. Also, I have no time for someone who spouts the same tired rhetoric about "endless wars" that was spouted in the '60s. Or, we could start kicking everyone out who wants to cut defense spending before all the other BS out there.

    Please note that the article in question said nothing about cutting the actual defense budget.
  • bushinokibushinoki Veteran
    edited May 2010
    No, the article in question just uses flowery words to side step the issue of paying for the wars.

    Plain and simple, disagree with the war(s) if you must, I fight for that freedom, but don't target the purse strings for the equipment and supplies that soldiers in harms way need. In all honesty, Alan Grayson probably just committed political suicide.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    bushinoki wrote: »
    the same tired rhetoric about "endless wars" that was spouted in the '60s.

    Would that be b.c. or a.d.?

    Palzang
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    If you'd like another view on the war in Afghanistan, what it's really costing us and how it's doomed to failure, watch this.

    Palzang
  • StaticToyboxStaticToybox Veteran
    edited May 2010
    bushinoki wrote: »
    No, the article in question just uses flowery words to side step the issue of paying for the wars.

    Plain and simple, disagree with the war(s) if you must, I fight for that freedom, but don't target the purse strings for the equipment and supplies that soldiers in harms way need. In all honesty, Alan Grayson probably just committed political suicide.

    I doubt the Representative has any notion of the bill actually passing, and I doubt he means for it. Seems to me he's doing this to raise awareness about the issue. Most Americans blindly support military conflict after military conflict without ever pausing to consider the cost.
  • MountainsMountains Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Takeahnase wrote: »
    The amount of money that my Congressional District has paid for Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade could have provided 1.2 million people with health care for one year.

    Sad, but true. And yet, I still find people, even health care providers (!!) who think that there is somehow something bad about universal access to health care, or universal insurance coverage. I have a couple of bumper stickers on the back of my car, one of which says "Got Health Care?" and the other which says "Who would Jesus insure?". The other day a guy pulled up next to me, rolled his window down, and said "Jesus believes in personal responsibility!". I really wanted to ask him what bible verse that comes from :) I just don't get it.

    Mtns
  • MountainsMountains Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Palzang wrote: »
    If you'd like another view on the war in Afghanistan, what it's really costing us and how it's doomed to failure...

    Read "The Great Game" by Peter Hopkirk. Afghanistan has been unwinnable since the time of Alexander, and remains so. Unless and until the people of Afghanistan want to change themselves, nobody, including the almighty United States is going to do it for them. The concept of "winning" in Afghanistan is an oxymoron.

    Mtns
  • bushinokibushinoki Veteran
    edited June 2010
    Mountains, I would say unconquerable, not unwinnable. That is a major distinction. As we're not trying to permanently annex Afghanistan, only establish a stable government, which the nation has not had since 1977, this is uncharted territory.

    Takea, how many Americans actually support these expensive confilcts without expecting results? I don't. My life is on the line. There better be long term positive results from such a conflict. Failure is simply not an option in the Middle East. We've committed too much in the GWOT to turn around and give up.

    Pali, due to time constraints, I"m only about a third of the way through the video. I'm going to try and finish it in the next few days, and I will take some notes and hit some serious talking points about it. I can say this much. What I know about the Afghanistan conflict is the tip of the iceburg. What they put in the video is the cubes in your ice tea.
  • edited July 2010
    Grayson is one of the last good representatives that are more interested in the countries well being then reelection. That said, I do hope he secures his seat in november.
Sign In or Register to comment.