Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?
Date: 31 May 2025 06:29:48 GMT
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <m9vlusFs443U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <pan$54963$b3f3d4e6$ae35ff46$71fe05c9@linux.rocks>
	<gXCdnTD2YLRBaHX6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<m4tf1dFmvh3U1@mid.individual.net> <vsd0ui$365s0$1@dont-email.me>
	<vsds7u$2u8h$1@dont-email.me> <101bmca$cc5u$2@dont-email.me>
	<20250530105929.00000a4e@gmail.com>
	<231k3kdedo3ehicbstcluh3lb4440tro86@4ax.com>
	<wNqdnWk_NvaHmKf1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<101df7s$nrpr$2@dont-email.me> <n4uk3kl2vgv8gagu9f4ilkggii9kbamr63@4ax.com>
	<MsqdnerAZ7YY5Kf1nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net mwKh6/we2EhdrbedAnrXzAM5gdj+3sNBoj5XtGZ4lqLmGnV7Pe
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ftkzV8gPwVoWg63cHfXiHMWKZ14= sha256:qrAX9u6yaosZZzmcsmAV6tbvBlKxXa9vcXZRe+/tVek=
User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; )
Bytes: 2898

On Fri, 30 May 2025 20:37:27 -0700, % wrote:

> Joel wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 30/05/2025 20:21, % wrote:
>>>> Joel wrote:
>>>>> John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 30 May 2025 07:22:51 -0000 (UTC) Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>>>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, I guess that’s over, now that Elon Musk has left the
>>>>>>> building. That’s the end of DOGE, without “saving” anywhere near
>>>>>>> the trillion dollars he originally promised.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comes as a *total* shock, lemmetellya.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's say they had cut that much with this DOGE BS (not that it's
>>>>> 100%
>>>>> a stupid idea, of course, but they were not approaching very
>>>>> rationally), wouldn't the proposed tax breaks offset it?  Wouldn't
>>>>> we still be spending a large fortune every year on the damn
>>>>> military?
>>>>>
>>>> no because there would be tariffs that go to trumps pocket
>>>
>>> Military spending is pretty low in reality.
>> 
>> 
>> Laughable.
>> 
>> 
>>> And it is a *pragmatic* program, whereas so much is spent on purely
>>> *moral* initiatives to employ people who think they can therefore tell
>>> how to run your life better than you can yourself.
>> 
>> 
>> Never even heard of such a thing, unless you mean the war on drugs
>> (which is yet another discarding of money).
>> 
> military spending is the usa's biggest bill it's close to 90%

There is mandatory spending including Social Security, Medicare, and other 
expenditures required by law.

Then there is discretionary spending, which is less than a third of the 
mandatory budget. Of that defense spending is a little less than half.