12-22-2024, 09:46 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-22-2024, 09:53 AM by NotJoeBiden.)
(12-22-2024, 04:25 AM)Ares Wrote:(12-21-2024, 09:52 PM)NotJoeBiden Wrote:(12-21-2024, 06:11 PM)Ares Wrote: With the size of China's navy now exceeding ours, we need the submarines.
Ya, cause they have hundreds more patrol vessels, not because they have actual war ships.
Where is the fiscal conservatism? I thought we were trying to stop unnecessary spending?
Drones can do a lot of damage too and we still have more VLS missiles but China is rapidly closing that gap.
What I want to cut is massive but it does not include weakening the U.S. militarily. With that being said I am all for reducing waste with military spending but canceling strategic assets is not one of them.
But this wouldnt be a cut to the military, it would just be not expanding the budget for unnecessary subs. Just another shiny new toy. We have dozens more aircraft carriers than China, and a plane is more than capable of sinking a patrol vessel if, and a big if, it ever came to it.
Quote:If Taiwan falls to China, everything is going to get a lot more expensive, real fast, estimates show a 10% loss of global GDP.
Interesting you are worried about costs when supporting a president who is going to implement blanket tariffs for no reason.
(12-22-2024, 04:25 AM)Ares Wrote:(12-21-2024, 09:52 PM)NotJoeBiden Wrote: It is just cope. All Musk managed to do was stir up confusion and cut the aforementioned as well as things like children’s cancer research. It did practically nothing to reduce the budget.
Musk won in everyway imaginable. Just 118 pages down from a 1,547 pages is a huge win all night long.
Page number is such an odd metric to use for this when it equated to very little change over the larger bill. His whole goal was to drastically cut spending and all he really did was cut the bill page number with minor cuts.