Toopid, let's get back on point


ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" <artyguy04@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1151529966.978934.280400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ScottW wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" <artyguy04@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
news:1151390479.682681.38510@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ScottW wrote:
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:

From an average of 281 billion to over 500 billion.

You sound like a stock broker cherry picking your years
to maximize gains.

Dear Doofus:

Exactly what I wrote was that Reagan and bush II are spending double
for defense what we did during the cold war.

Now Reagan wasn't president during the cold war. Brilliant!

You just keep on demonstrating your incredible grasp of history.

Really? You're kidding, right? Just when was the cold war, then,
genius?

'47 to '91.


I averaged defense spending during the cold war, minus Reagan. I told
you that. In fact, look at the quote below. It's right there, genius.
Pay attention, toopid.

And I gave you a reference that showed you to be full of crap,
you've given nothing.


And thank you for recognizing my superior grasp of history (and your
utter lack thereof).

Averaging what we spent
during the cold war minus what Reagan and bush budget for defense is
the best way to do it. Otherwise, a nimrod like you could point to the
highest non-Reagan or bush year to try to make whatever point your
'mind' wants to.

Compute whatever you want. You didn't adjust for inflation
anyway and haven't yet provided a single reference to support
your blathering.

An unsupported assertion. You accuse me of making them, then follow up
with one.

Accusation noted. The circle is complete.


Loser.

Why don't you reread what you wrote and try to
explain 1989 of 450B to now over 500B and then cry about doubling.
BTW.. you've provided no proof that any of your numbers are adjusted
for
inflation.

While you've provided no proof that they aren't. Go for it, genius.

I already gave you a defense spending chart adjusted to '02 dollars that
went from the 50's through today.

Which supports exactly what I said. That chart did not include
supplementals, BTW...

Prove it.


Reagan and bush II have doubled defense spending over what was spent
during the cold war.

The cold war was '47 to '91. That's 44 years of spending including the
Korean War. Try again or better yet.. give it up.

RCD alert. As I've said, they doubled, on an annual basis, that which
was spent, on an average annual basis during the cold war, minus
Reagan. It's not hard (unless you're too toopid to understand simple
concepts). (Which you are.)

Like I said.. there were plenty of peaks in defense spending
as reflected in the chart I provided.
You've provided nothing.

Not only are you toopid, but you are also confused.

zzzzzzzzzz

Dear Major Stupid Dude:

Yes, there are spending peaks. They get figured into the AVERAGE (minus
Reagan) that we're (or at least that I am) talking about.

You do not find it strange that bushie is spending about double that
which was spent, on AVERAGE, including peaks, during the cold war. You
have noever addressed supplementals, which I have accounted for.

We were facing divisions of soldiers, nuclear missiles, legions of
tanks, armadas of fighters and bombers, submarines, and so on then. A
massive professional military.

Now you can go back and AVERAGE as I did. You have not proven that
number to be incorrect, no matter how loudly you choose to cry and wail
about it.

Even the Brookings graph you provided (and in which they stated that
they had ecluded supplementals) states:

"What is surprising, however, is that the Bush budget would not only
reach but easily exceed the cold war defense budget average."

Add the supplementals in and it's even worse.

Now we are facing perhaps one division's worth of insurgents (DoD
estimates are 15-20,000), no aircraft, naval, or missiles, spending our
fool heads off on the military, and you think that this spending is
normal.

I disagree. So does the Brookings institute, apparently.

You can defend it all you want. That's why I call you toopid.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Toopid, lets get back on point
    ... Now Reagan wasn't president during the cold war. ... I averaged defense spending during the cold war, ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: toopid tries a misdirection play
    ... Exactly what I wrote was that Reagan and bush II are spending double ... Now Reagan wasn't president during the cold war. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: toopid tries a misdirection play
    ... Exactly what I wrote was that Reagan and bush II are spending double ... Now Reagan wasn't president during the cold war. ... I averaged defense spending during the cold war, ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: toopid tries a misdirection play
    ... Exactly what I wrote was that Reagan and bush II are spending double ... Now Reagan wasn't president during the cold war. ... I averaged defense spending during the cold war, ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: toopid tries a misdirection play
    ... Exactly what I wrote was that Reagan and bush II are spending double ... for defense what we did during the cold war. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
Loading