Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
It's easy to be dumb and wind up with over $2 mil these days. Or find yourself with it by accident (unfortunately, that accident hasn't befallen me).

ETA: I'm not saying $2 mil is rich. It's nice, but it isn't rich.

Yeah, I realize you aren't really upset about the estate tax, but it's become a bedrock republican-party issue. And I don't get it--if you have those kind of assets, you can afford to do the planning. If you don't, you're dumb. It's not so much a "death tax" as a stupidity tax.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
But we don't. We waste money on excessive defense and huge pork projects. Maybe if liberals like you would stop praying to the govt and realize the solution is reallocating the money it receives instead of taking more from the middle and upper middle class we'd actually get somewhere.

Current political reality means that the left cannot support cutting defense spending. It also requires ridiculous balancing of spending among the 3 branches and between operating and capital (i.e. new weapon systems) expenditures--which leads to wasteful spending on unneeded new weapons systems and ill-advised allocations to the Navy and Air Force during a war being fought by the Army (leading to the Navy and AF getting huge $$ that could be better spent right now supporting the troops on the ground in Iraq). If you want the defense budget cut, ask a republican congressman.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
We're in agreement, Bob, and you don't even see it . . . It isn't me against you, Bob. It's you and me against the government.

Indeed. Another round of Knob Creek? It's on me this time.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Indeed. Another round of Knob Creek? It's on me this time.

Woodford Reserve. If you haven't tried it, do so. It's gooooooood.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
Yeah, I realize you aren't really upset about the estate tax, but it's become a bedrock republican-party issue. And I don't get it--if you have those kind of assets, you can afford to do the planning. If you don't, you're dumb. It's not so much a "death tax" as a stupidity tax.

Its taken on a moral element and once it does that the whole debate becomes a little irrational. I agree with you. I used to think it was unfair for people with that money to be forced to hire financial planners or tax lawyers, but I've come to believe that's a ludicrous criticism, and probably borne more of my intense dislike for Taxwonk than anything else.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
Current political reality means that the left cannot support cutting defense spending. It also requires ridiculous balancing of spending among the 3 branches and between operating and capital (i.e. new weapon systems) expenditures--which leads to wasteful spending on unneeded new weapons systems and ill-advised allocations to the Navy and Air Force during a war being fought by the Army (leading to the Navy and AF getting huge $$ that could be better spent right now supporting the troops on the ground in Iraq). If you want the defense budget cut, ask a republican congressman.

Those kind of issues are the sorts of things we need to see vetted in the Journal and NYTimes oped pages instead of debates between shrill idiots which gloss over the holes in ther respective positions and push silly polarizing ideologies.

The simple rational consideration that govt should be made more nimble isn't a partisan thing. Move the money where it needs to be, like a business.

Rumsfeld had a good idea in remaking the military along those lines. And then he went nuts. Selah.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Woodford Reserve. If you haven't tried it, do so. It's gooooooood.

I'm going out on a limb here and saying NotBob doesn't need Bourbon (whiskey where he is) advice from the likes of you or me.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Rumsfeld had a good idea in remaking the military along those lines. And then he went nuts. Selah.

Even before hw went nuts he wasn't making any headway on the inter-branch budget parity nonsense. Just breaking the hold of that idea would save ten of billions per year and end the most ridiculous weapons programs. But if Rumsfeld (and this administration) couldn't even get the idea serious consideration, we're a long way away.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
Even before hw went nuts he wasn't making any headway on the inter-branch budget parity nonsense. Just breaking the hold of that idea would save ten of billions per year and end the most ridiculous weapons programs. But if Rumsfeld (and this administration) couldn't even get the idea serious consideration, we're a long way away.

"Why We Fight" is a great movie. It'll scare you.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
"Why We Fight" is a great movie. It'll scare you.

"It's A Wonderful Life" was his better work.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
"It's A Wonderful Life" was his better work.

Ahem, the Jarecki version.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
"Why We Fight" is a great movie. It'll scare you.

The whole M-I complex is the business lobby to kill all others. What's irrational even within the corrupt system is the steady allocation among the Army, Navy, Air Force, regardless of the actual and genuine potential threats (35 percent to the Air Force, 35 percent to the Navy, and 30 percent to the Army, per Fred Kaplan (e.g. http://www.slate.com/id/2133059 ), going back at least 25 years). While I wouldn't advocate allowing our air and naval superiority to erode significantly, there isn't any foreseeable need for a brand new fighter/interceptor as we already have total, global air superiority.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Grover Norquist shows that he can learn from the mistakes of other nefarious super-villains:

• I am intrigued by your assertion that "like a James Bond villain" I have an irrepressible penchant for spelling out [my] master plans in their full, nefarious detail." The challenge for Blofeld, Dr. No, Goldfinger and company is that they explain things in the penultimate scene to the disarmed Bond, who, when freed, is able to use that information to interrupt those plans.
  
  This has tended to be unwise.

link

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
The whole M-I complex is the business lobby to kill all others. What's irrational even within the corrupt system is the steady allocation among the Army, Navy, Air Force, regardless of the actual and genuine potential threats (35 percent to the Air Force, 35 percent to the Navy, and 30 percent to the Army, per Fred Kaplan (e.g. http://www.slate.com/id/2133059 ), going back at least 25 years). While I wouldn't advocate allowing our air and naval superiority to erode significantly, there isn't any foreseeable need for a brand new fighter/interceptor as we already have total, global air superiority.

Dude, we totally need a new fighter or whatever thingy that flies. Because things that fly are cool. Nifty, even.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
While I wouldn't advocate allowing our air and naval superiority to erode significantly, there isn't any foreseeable need for a brand new fighter/interceptor as we already have total, global air superiority.

We defray the costs of product development by selling export versions, presenting a justification for investing in the next generation of aircraft. See, e.g., the F-14s we sold to the Shah.