Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Typical neocon bullshit. We have to cut spending but it okay to spend more on military. And you have to lol at his logic on why it is ok to spend more on the military-"it(miliitary spending) was 8 or 9 percent of GDP in the past" lmfao
Typical neocon bullshit. We have to cut spending but it okay to spend more on military. And you have to lol at his logic on why it is ok to spend more on the military-"it(miliitary spending) was 8 or 9 percent of GDP in the past" lmfao
We also had a little something called The Cold War going on then. We obviously still have threats, but so much that we couldn't trim some from the Pentagon.
This clip is from 1983 or so. Prof Friedman has been dead for a couple of years but his insight is amazing. Note that in 1983 Democrats were screaming about a $100B budget deficit. So what can say about a deficit that exceeds $1T??
Hulu - The Nobel Prize: Economist Milton Friedman Defends President Ronald Reagan's Economic Plan
Friedman was one of the last great classical liberals which is not to be confused with modern American liberalism that we see in socioeconomic and political circles these days.
He would say now what he said then. The more you raise taxes, the more Congress will spend. They will continue to call reductions in the rate of growth 'budget cuts' while seeing any increase in revenue as license to obligate the people for more and more whether the treasury is empty or not.
It's like increasing our taxes by $10 which they use as justification for obligating us for $20 more in spending while pointing out that without the tax increase, the deficit would be $30 instead of $20. It's absolutely nuts and unjustifiable by any definition of fiscal responsibility.
And Friedman was explicit that waste in the defense department should be addressed and eliminated, but he was also correct that the defense budget in the Reagan years was a little more than half as much of the GDP as it had previously been. And as defense is a Constitutional obligation of government, we can afford to maintain a strong military as a deterrant to aggression. What is not a Constitutional obligation of the federal government, however, should be fair game to reduce or eliminate.
Friedman was one of the last great classical liberals which is not to be confused with modern American liberalism that we see in socioeconomic and political circles these days.
He would say now what he said then. The more you raise taxes, the more Congress will spend. They will continue to call reductions in the rate of growth 'budget cuts' while seeing any increase in revenue as license to obligate the people for more and more whether the treasury is empty or not.
It's like increasing our taxes by $10 which they use as justification for obligating us for $20 more in spending while pointing out that without the tax increase, the deficit would be $30 instead of $20. It's absolutely nuts and unjustifiable by any definition of fiscal responsibility.
And Friedman was explicit that waste in the defense department should be addressed and eliminated, but he was also correct that the defense budget in the Reagan years was a little more than half as much of the GDP as it had previously been. And as defense is a Constitutional obligation of government, we can afford to maintain a strong military as a deterrant to aggression. What is not a Constitutional obligation of the federal government, however, should be fair game to reduce or eliminate.
There is no Constitutional obligation for any set amount that has to be spent on defense.
Cut the bullshit.
