It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

54% not 24% -- congress(wo)men caught lying on % of income tax going to military

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
war resistor’s league-- www.warresisters.org...

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY:---------54% -- $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY:---46% -- $1,210 billion


THE CORPORATE MEDIA’S “COST OF MILITARY”





war resistor’s league-- www.warresisters.org...
The Government Deception –This pie chart (above) is the government view of the budget.

This is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), & the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending.


THE REAL “COST OF MILITARY”





This (above) is a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the [1st] large chart.

HOW THESE FIGURES WERE DETERMINED -- Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), & an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading & vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.”

“Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*


figures from analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009-www.whitehouse.gov....

The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised & spent separately from income taxes.

What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget.

The government practice of combining trust & federal funds ['cooking the books'] began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger & the military portion smaller.


*Analysts differ on how much of the debt stems from the military; other groups estimate 50% to 60%. We use 80% because we believe if there had been no military spending most (if not all) of the national debt would have been eliminated. For further explanation, please see bottom of page.



According to scripture, God made Abraham very wealthy, giving him LAND, CATTLE, silver & gold. (Genesis 24:35) Four thousand years later, wealth continues to be LAND, CATTLE, silver & gold. I don’t know where the world deposits of gold are stored, but I’m sure the bankers have them in their control. That only leaves LAND & CATTLE. Genesis 47 describers Joseph had storehouses full of grain to feed the people but no welfare program. During the famine, Joseph took “ALL THE MONEY” the people had for only one year’s supply of grain. The second year he took all their cattle for another year’s supply of grain. The next year they said, “We have nothing left but our bodies & our land. Buy us & our land in exchange for food & we & our land will be servants to Pharaoh.” Genesis 47:21 states, “And as for the people, he removed them to the cities & made slaves of them.” --


war resistor’s league-- www.warresisters.org...

Federal Funds vs. Unified Budget. WRL uses "federal funds" rather than the "unified budget" figures that the government prefers. Federal funds exclude trust fund money (e.g., social security), which is raised separately (e.g., the FICA & Medicare deductions in paychecks) & is specifically ear-marked for particular programs.

By combining trust funds with federal funds, the percentage of spending on the military appears smaller, a deceptive practice first used by the government in the late 1960s as the Vietnam War became more & more unpopular.



Why Do the Percentages Vary from Group to Group?

The U.S. Government says that military spending amounts to 20% of the budget, the Center for Defense Information (CDI) reports 51%, the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) reports 43%, & the War Resisters League claims 54%. Why the variation?

Different groups have different purposes in how they present the budget figures. WRL’s goal has been to show the percentage of money that goes to the military (current & past) so that people paying — or not paying — their federal taxes would know what portion of their payments are military-oriented. Also, some of the numbers are for different fiscal years.

There are at least five different factors to consider when analyzing the U.S. budget:

discretionary spending vs. total spending
budget authority vs. outlays
function vs. agency/department
federal funds vs. unified budget
time period
Discretionary Spending. The Center for Defense Information (CDI) has used "discretionary" spending — budget items that Congress is allowed to tinker with — which excludes so-called "mandatory" spending items (such as interest on the national debt & retirement pay). WRL does not make such distinctions & lumps them together.

Past Military Spending. If the government does not have enough money to finance a war (or spending for its hefty military budgets), they borrow through loans, savings bonds, & so forth.

This borrowing (done heavily during World War II & the Vietnam War) comes back in later years as "hidden" military spending through interest payments on the national debt.


How much of the debt is considered “military” varies from group. As mentioned above, WRL uses 80% whereas FCNL uses 48%. Consequently, FCNL reports that 43% of the FY2007 budget is military (29% current military & 14% past military). WRL's figures are 54% of the FY2009 budget (36% current — which includes 7% for Iraq & Afghanistan wars — & 18% past).

Outlays vs. Budget Authority. WRL uses "outlays" rather than "budget authority," which is often preferred by the government, news media, & groups such as CDI. Outlays refer to spending done in a particular fiscal year, whereas budget authority refers to new spending authorized over a period of several future years. Consequently, CDI reported $421 billion in FY2005 budget authority for the military & $2,200 billion "over the next five years."

While WRL reports outlays of $803 billion, plus an anticipated $162 billion in supplemental spending requests for Iraq & Afghanistan wars, plus $484 billion in past military spending — totaling $1,449 billion — just for FY2009.

Function vs. Agency/Department. Not all military spending is done by the Department of Defense. For example, the Department of Energy is responsible for nuclear weapons. Consequently, calculations of military spending should consider the function of the budget item regardless of the department or agency in charge of it. However, not everyone agrees what constitutes a military function. For example, WRL includes the 70% of Homeland Security (which includes the Coast Guard), & half of NASA in military spending, while other groups do not.

Federal Funds vs. Unified Budget. WRL uses "federal funds" rather than the "unified budget" figures that the government prefers. Federal funds exclude trust fund money (e.g., social security), which is raised separately (e.g., the FICA & Medicare deductions in paychecks) & is specifically ear-marked for particular programs. By combining trust funds with federal funds, the percentage of spending on the military appears smaller, a deceptive practice first used by the government in the late 1960s as the Vietnam War became more & more unpopular.

What period are we talking about? Finally, there is some variation in figures because different fiscal years are used. WRL’s figures (above) are for FY2009 (Oct. 1, 2008 to Sep. 30, 2009) as are the most recent U.S. government figures. FCNL sometimes does their analysis for the most recent completed year or FY2007 (Oct. 1, 2006 to Sep. 30, 2007).


part 2 -- who owns the debt?
U.S. Gov owns about half, the rest is owned by foreigners.



part 3 -- what is the yearly interest on the national debt?
-about 4.5 billion dollars PER YEAR.

part 4 -- what is the collateral on the national debt
www.newswithviews.com...


the World Bank, the International Monetary fund & how the world bankers plan on collateralizing the world debt with land. Not just the U.S. national debt, but the “WORLD” debt.



Over 1500 people from sixty countries were told that wilderness lands were to protect the reindeer, the spotted owl & other endangered species. Ninety percent of the group consisted of conservationists, ecologists, government & United Nations bureaucrats.

The other ten percent were world banking heavyweights, such as David Rockefeller of Chase Manhattan Bank, London banker Edmund de Rothschild & the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, James Baker, who gave the keynote address. George W. Hunt, an investment councilor, served as official host & sat in on all the meetings. It was George Hunt that wrote the report from which I have gleaned much of my information.



“BRUNDTLAND REPORT” setting stage for unlimited enactments to take over ecology, & environmental & pollution laws throughout the world. The report stated: “We will have a proposal for very harsh, quasi-spiritual ecological laws for MOTHER EARTH. A MOTHER EARTH COMES FIRST mentality will arise throughout the world.”

James Baker made his keynote speech in 1987, “No longer will the World Bank carry this debt unsecured. The only assets we have to collateralize are federal lands & national parks.” Baker’s definition of federal lands includes Heritage sites.


[edit on 19-9-2008 by counterterrorist]




posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Great research! You're very in depth..

But I have to wonder if you're even surprised by this? The percentage of congress who 'lie' is probably closer to the high 90-ish range. 54% would be a bit of fresh air, compared to what most likely really goes on..

- Mea



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Veritas Lux Mea
Great research! You're very in depth.


thanks


But I have to wonder if you're even surprised by this?

more disappointed than surprised.


The percentage of congress who 'lie' is probably closer to the high 90-ish range.


probably more like 110%


54% would be a bit of fresh air, compared to what most likely really goes on. - Mea


you're right. don't you wish you could run the U.S. for one day? I do. I'd immediately use those Halliburton detention centers and fill them up with the interlocking directorates of the central banks.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
So what's so bad about this? They are supposed to be doing more for the national defense than anything else. Of course infrastructure and a few other things are neccessary as well.
Constitution does not say anything about going Socialist.
www.law.cornell.edu...



To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;




posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Fifty-four percent of congresswomen are lying about what percentage of income tax goes to the military? That is more than half of the women in Congress! plucky is outraged!



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by pluckynoonez
Fifty-four percent of congresswomen are lying about what percentage of income tax goes to the military? That is more than half of the women in Congress! plucky is outraged!


(I guess I titled the post awkwardly)--actually, the defense spending budget is 54% not 24% -- of the Federal budget -- 100% of congress(wo)men are lying ... putting out the myth only 24% of the budget is military spending, when it's actually 54%

counterterrorist is outraged, too.

[edit on 19-9-2008 by counterterrorist]




top topics
 
0

log in

join