The average American's understanding of how much we spend on foreign aid is famously out of whack. So yes, many of them are misinformed on the facts. Doesn't mean they can't vote. Your point on the politics is 100% correct.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Hard Power and Soft Power
- Thread starter taxi1
- Start date
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
I am not being obtuse. We mirror image ourselves time and again in our foreign policy decisions.
We're talking ITT about Joey Bagguhdonuts who can't distinguish that $40 billion is 1% of the budget, but we want someone who can't read and write their own name to distinguish the difference between white people handing out free food and support for a corrupt militant government that chopped their cousins arms off while their brother can't sell whatever small amount of vegetables he's able to grow?
Despite popular belief, the entire world doesn't unanimously view the US as saviors.
Article 1 Section 9 has nothing to do with this conversation and, in any case, your interpretation is way off. Clause 7 simply states that Congress must make an appropriation for money to be withdrawn from the Treasury. SCOTUS said long ago that once funds are distributed they can’t be encumbered by Congressional action. In other words…Executive asks for money, Congress says yes, and Executive spends it within the appropriate department as the department (executive) seems fit.Article 1 Section 9 of the Constitution makes it pretty clear, no? If Congress -- in its infinite wisdom-- were to pass a law that says we must spend $10B of taxpayer dollars on rubber duckies then the President does not have the legal right to say "Wait a minute, that's stupid, let's not do that" even if it is a stupid idea.
I didn't mock the average citizen as being less intelligent than I did; I said he is misinformed when it comes to foreign aid spending.
Your second point is a distinction without a difference. Moreover, you need to at least acknowledge the point I a trying to make. The percentage doesn’t matter one bit….the dollar value does - at least to the voter.
No doubt and to a point I agree, but,
Joe Bag O’Donuts kept us out of WWI even though Wilson wanted us in until an emotional event (Lusitania) got the US involved
Joe Bag O’Donuts kept us out of WWII even though FDR wanted us in until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
Joe Bag O’Donuts got us out of Vietnam even though no one in power wanted us out.
Same for Afghanistan.
In fact the only place Joe Bag O’ Donuts has failed is in the broader context of the Middle East.
As for the China stuff…hard no. To say that China knows how to play the long game is a historical joke. China, as we know it, is only 74 years old and in that time has had two major resets (Mao and Nixon) and (Tiananmen) giving us Xi’s CHYCAP China that is only 37 years old. China has “cheated” at the global economy for all of those years but that game is over and the Chinese economy is will crap out long before ours. Of course, that makes China a very dangerous enemy - but that’s not what we’re talking about.
If he could don’t you think one of the Heritage foundation lawyers would have already drafted the EO and put it on his desk?
Elon is not taking a salary.
DJT is not taking a salary (45 or 47).
Anyone that is against trying to expose where ALL of taxpayer dollars is going is wrong.
For lots of folks, the wheels are coming off the bus . . . . . good.
Let's do a ZBB for everyone, put all the cards on the table.
Anyone against that is the reason our country will continue to fall . . . .
DJT is not taking a salary (45 or 47).
Anyone that is against trying to expose where ALL of taxpayer dollars is going is wrong.
For lots of folks, the wheels are coming off the bus . . . . . good.
Let's do a ZBB for everyone, put all the cards on the table.
Anyone against that is the reason our country will continue to fall . . . .
Please. DJT is nakedly monetizing the presidency through real estate, meme coin, and his shell social media company. Who’s reviewing the taxpayer dollars going to Elon’s companies?
The optimal amount of fraud is nonzero:
The optimal amount of fraud is non-zero
Counterintuitively, businesses, customers, and society prefer having fraud to what they'd need to do to not have it.
www.bitsaboutmoney.com
Pretending otherwise is just breaking shit to be a troll.
I’m really happy we are still calling the Chinese CHYCAPs. Still waiting to see that Temu Hummer behind the boat.
You can already find where most government spending is. You just have to look for it. It just seems like the light is being cast into the darkest corners of the government when someone Tweets a screenshot. And no I don't think Joe Schmoe needs a breakdown of spending that is compartmented or classified.
Please . . . . . Let’s compare all politicians, including ALL members of Congress and the Senate and the Presidency for the last 40 years and compare their net increase/decrease of overall net worth. Please tell me how Samantha Power achieved her current net worth by doing what is “best” for the nation and the world. Please is right . . . .Please. DJT is nakedly monetizing the presidency through real estate, meme coin, and his shell social media company. Who’s reviewing the taxpayer dollars going to Elon’s companies?
The optimal amount of fraud is nonzero:
Merchants and credit card companies know this well. We already are performatively allergic to lax public spending in counterproductive ways.The optimal amount of fraud is non-zero
Counterintuitively, businesses, customers, and society prefer having fraud to what they'd need to do to not have it.
Pretending otherwise is just breaking shit to be a troll.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Nixon refused to spend appropriated funds and was told by the Supreme Court that he couldn't do that.
Pretty sure this is sitting in the Oval Office right now...
True, but you are talking about not spending obligated funds…different than what we are discussing.
Apparently through Vanguard mutual funds and honorariums from speeches.
Flash, this reminded me of a convo I had with my brother the other day. He's a Fed LEO living in a typical suburban subdivision. He says that he goes to pick up his daughter from a bday party. The dad works in the FAA, so someone makes a comment to his wife something along the lines 'I'm sure the hubby is getting a lot of Q's right now about the DC mishap"
Bro says dude's wife very calmly relayed to everyone that "It was intentional."
He says that he was a little stunned, and was like OK time to go.
These people are among us